Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gunma Kokusai Academy

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 01:45, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Gunma Kokusai Academy

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable organisation. It is described as a school and we are keen on keeping articles about schools but this one does not, arhh, make the grade. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 01:08, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. --DAJF (talk) 02:25, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The school has received national coverage in the Japanese and English language press, which is not surprising considering its relative uniqueness. I have added a couple of references to the article, which should hopefully demonstrate notability. --DAJF (talk) 02:25, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:OUTCOMES. Schools are inherently notable as long as they are confirmed to exist. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 08:27, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Having visited the site, I can safely tell you that the school has been demolished and no longer exists. Also very little evidence at the site that it ever did. 17:52, 16 January 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.14.175.114 (talk) 17:53, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unsigned personal testimonies don't count here. The website for the school is still active, and major newspapers such as the Yomiuri Shinbun have articles on it as recently as last May. Judging from the talk page, the user who wrote the last comment, User:173.14.175.114, seems to be fooling around with AfDs. Michitaro (talk) 18:54, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Another point is that the fact that something no longer exists is not a reason for deleting an article about it. We have an article on Julius Caesar. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:49, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

<personal attack redacted> but Google Maps gives an aerial image of the school and it seems to be in one piece. JoshuSasori (talk) 08:18, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 11:40, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep for the usual reasons. Verified secondary school. -- Necrothesp (talk) 17:24, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, non-notable school. Not a university or anything to attempt to convey automatic notability. Coverage appears run of the mill. --No unique names 19:15, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, seems to easily pass WP:GNG judging from references. JoshuSasori (talk) 08:18, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, first, because of WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES, and second, because of sufficient independent coverage in major media (WP:GNG). Michitaro (talk) 04:07, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per precedent chronicled in WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES, as a high school, per proven existence, and compliance with WP:GNG. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:59, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.