Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bay Point Schools

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. No arguments for deletion, not even from the nominator (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:02, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bay Point Schools

Completing another red linked afd that nobody cared to fix because they love leaving everything to me. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 17:28, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - this is actually a quite important alternative high school that undertakes controversial (and not always successful) reform programmes. There are plenty of news sources available [1][2] but I am restricted from expanding the page because virtually all are behind paywalls. However, the need to await an editor who has access to the archives doesn't detract from the notability. TerriersFan (talk) 18:34, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. —TerriersFan (talk) 18:51, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete because the four sources include two links to the school's website, a broken link, and a non-RS charity. Coverage just isn't there... Quantumobserver (talk) 18:55, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - sorry this is not a basis for deletion. We delete when a page cannot be reliably sourced not because the sources have yet to be added. Please see my comments, above. TerriersFan (talk) 19:06, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Changing to keep on looking closer at TF's links; saw the horrible writing in the top few previews and dismissed too early. Quantumobserver (talk) 22:35, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per TerriersFan. Rescue. Meets my standards for high schools. Bearian (talk) 19:09, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per TerriersFan's links. There are sources there, we just need someone with access to the older articles to expand the article.--Cube lurker (talk) 19:31, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep subject to improvement in sources. Plastikspork (talk) 20:41, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: It's notable enough. Niteshift36 (talk) 04:51, 1 June 2009 (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.