Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ready to Learn

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. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 06:23, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ready to Learn

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

I apologise in advance to participants, as this is going to be a tricky one to research, as "ready to learn" is going to find many unrelated pages. The page subject, however, is a zero-tolerance behaviour policy for schools including a one page template document describing it. It was invented at Henbury school, Bristol (now Blaise High School) which page does not mention it. It was used by a few other schools, but not researched or written about in secondary sources, with the one exception of a BBC 2 documentary [1] which is a good source, although the programme was generally about schools (part of a series) and this just happened to be used in one of them. It raised some local controversy in schools that used the system, so there are a couple of news reports, but the reporting would fall foul of WP:PRIMARYNEWS. The article itself is full of WP:OR, but the question is not whether the article will do, but rather whether these (or other sources I have been unable to find) would give us multiple secondary sources from which we could write an encyclopaedic article about the system. Many schools have such systems, and personally I doubt there is anything notable about this one. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 20:39, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, United Kingdom, and England. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 20:39, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment -- the topic seems like it has a decent shot at notability. This looks like another potential source. As do this and this from another publication. And here's one more. -- Avocado (talk) 15:51, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep. I think this is borderline notable as it seems like a behavioral policy standard. It has a few documentaries on it and some news coverage as controversial. Cannot think of a redirect as an alternative. Ramos1990 (talk) 00:12, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Notability demonstrated by sources posted above by Avocado. ~Kvng (talk) 13:11, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 03:07, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

weak Keep there are multiple independent news articles covering the policy (found by Avocado) as well as the BBC programme. While the article itself is not in good shape, I think there is enough there to demonstrate notability. --hroest 16:24, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: In my own options this article is suitable to be included on Wikipedia, few issues shouldn’t be the reason it should be deleted, article seams to be of importance to researchers and I believe it slightly meets notability, more sources can be added and possibly the article should be developed. Chippla ✍️ - Best Regards 11:07, 27 May 2025 (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.