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.
Thank you for providing the sources. Please find my assessment on the sources below per
WP:SIRS.
(added 12 June) In general, most sources fail
WP:ORGDEPTH, with only brief mentions or coverage of the subject. Content is limited to local events, brief announcements and routine coverage, making them
WP:TRIVCOV. As per
WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES, the sources do not establish
WP:ORGSIG.
In summary, I believe the presented sources does not fulfill
WP:SIGCOV, so
WP:GNG has not been met for the article subject.
Are those the wrong links? The first two links in that table are not cited in the article and don't seem to be about this subject. —
Mx. Granger (
talk·contribs) 20:03, 6 June 2023 (UTC)reply
The first two links are from the
diff provided by WhisperToMe.
33ABGirl (
talk) 16:01, 10 June 2023 (UTC)reply
The first two links are from the diff provided by WhisperToMe. That is simply not true. I opened that diff and searched for the two URLs, and I could not find them. —
Mx. Granger (
talk·contribs) 16:53, 10 June 2023 (UTC)reply
I apologize for my error, it seems that I used the wrong links on the table. I have made the corrections to the links. Thank you for letting me know.
33ABGirl (
talk) 17:29, 10 June 2023 (UTC)reply
As for the thesis, the school is discussed on pages 141-155 (the PDF file places page 141 as 161/330). The author cites Silva (2011:114) on page 143 about the neighborhood which contains EOZGY. The author also cited a Macau Education Department text about the school before analyzing signage and "primary source material" generated from the school itself. Nevertheless, it shows the school is of scholarly interest in Portugal.
On the
Macau Business.com source, I agree that there is a holistic profile of the school, based on the awards event mentioned in the first paragraph. I have amended the table to reflect this.
33ABGirl (
talk) 16:14, 10 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Keep per all above and
WP:GNG. Article passes the guideline with the independent, secondary, reliable sources proving both verifiability and notability. Cheers, atque supra!
Fakescientist8000 16:15, 10 June 2023 (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.
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.
Thank you for providing the sources. Please find my assessment on the sources below per
WP:SIRS.
(added 12 June) In general, most sources fail
WP:ORGDEPTH, with only brief mentions or coverage of the subject. Content is limited to local events, brief announcements and routine coverage, making them
WP:TRIVCOV. As per
WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES, the sources do not establish
WP:ORGSIG.
In summary, I believe the presented sources does not fulfill
WP:SIGCOV, so
WP:GNG has not been met for the article subject.
Are those the wrong links? The first two links in that table are not cited in the article and don't seem to be about this subject. —
Mx. Granger (
talk·contribs) 20:03, 6 June 2023 (UTC)reply
The first two links are from the
diff provided by WhisperToMe.
33ABGirl (
talk) 16:01, 10 June 2023 (UTC)reply
The first two links are from the diff provided by WhisperToMe. That is simply not true. I opened that diff and searched for the two URLs, and I could not find them. —
Mx. Granger (
talk·contribs) 16:53, 10 June 2023 (UTC)reply
I apologize for my error, it seems that I used the wrong links on the table. I have made the corrections to the links. Thank you for letting me know.
33ABGirl (
talk) 17:29, 10 June 2023 (UTC)reply
As for the thesis, the school is discussed on pages 141-155 (the PDF file places page 141 as 161/330). The author cites Silva (2011:114) on page 143 about the neighborhood which contains EOZGY. The author also cited a Macau Education Department text about the school before analyzing signage and "primary source material" generated from the school itself. Nevertheless, it shows the school is of scholarly interest in Portugal.
On the
Macau Business.com source, I agree that there is a holistic profile of the school, based on the awards event mentioned in the first paragraph. I have amended the table to reflect this.
33ABGirl (
talk) 16:14, 10 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Keep per all above and
WP:GNG. Article passes the guideline with the independent, secondary, reliable sources proving both verifiability and notability. Cheers, atque supra!
Fakescientist8000 16:15, 10 June 2023 (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.