Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daffodils English School, Sanjaynagar

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 no consensus. No consensus for deletion Ben · Salvidrim!  23:30, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I was asked to expound my thoughts on this closure, so here you go.
On the face of it, a less thoughtful closer might see 7 keeps, 3 deletes, and close as "keep".
However, a number of keeps rely on a apparent sentiment that there exists community consensus that secondary schools are inherently notable (which is demonstrably inaccurate per RFC), thus the !votes by Necrothesp, JMWt, Carrite, Languages of India, AusLondoner, and Jack N. Stock (partly) and Bushranger on the basis of "it verifiably exists" bear very little weight.
However, Atsme's mention of WP:NOTDIRECTORY without specific reasoning or explanation is also not very helpful in evaluating the strenghts of arguments.
What we are left with as the most salient and valid points is TimTempletons's finding of at least some coverage, Bushrangers' and TimTempleton's warnings against our systemic Western bias, Pburka's assessment that the subject lacks evidence of "sigcov in independent reliable sources" (which is just another way to say WP:GNG) along with Cordless Larry's similar "no proven notability" argument, and multiple arguments that "paper sources" may exist and should be sought. However, closing an AfD as delete when there are twice as many !votes for keeping as deleting, regardless of the relative strengths of arguments (and discounting meatpuppets, trolls and SPAs of which there are none in this case) is practically unjustifiable.
Hopefully this sheds light on the "no consensus" close. I doubt that relisting the AfD again would have led to more resolution. Hopefully the "no consensus" result will lead to paper sources being found (or proven non-existant). Ben · Salvidrim!  00:13, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]