Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Schoolmaster

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. —⁠ScottyWong⁠— 07:52, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Schoolmaster

[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)

This is, and really always should be, a dictionary definition, not an encyclopedia article. Qwirkle (talk) 07:54, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 08:53, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 08:53, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: As per nom. This is a redundant term, and fails GNG. --Whiteguru (talk) 22:01, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The crunch question is notability, and I do not see any problem with WP:N, as three books are named on the page which are devoted to the topic and there are many more reliable sources to be found. On being *redundant*, the term is not that, as it is both significant in the history of education and also still used in its original sense in hundreds of our schools. Qwirkle has a reasonable point that this just needs a definition, but the same could be said of physician, merchant, barrister, and so on, and they are all useful for linking where some readers would not know the meaning. A Wikipedia article can do more to explain something than a Wiktionary page. If not kept, essential to merge, as there are hundreds of incoming links: a new section in Master of Arts would be a possibility, that is at least where the origin lies, but much better to keep, on the principle of notability, and as there are benefits and no harm. Moonraker (talk) 03:29, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, or merge into Head teacher. This is a term of historical significance. BD2412 T 07:38, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, Interesting history/etymology, plus I'm aware that the term is also used in Indian boarding schools that were founded during the British Raj. I have added a line in the lead, but will be looking at more sources when I get time. An interesting section could be added, if sources are available, about how the usage survives in the subcontinent in 'colonial' schools etc. Don't think this warrants deletion imo AlpinistG (talk) 13:46, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It would be useful if you could add some reasoning why we need to keep this beyond an opinionated judgement. Every word on the dictionary has an etymology, many of them surprising or interesting, many English words have variant meanings and history in “divers places”, to use an example of that. That doesn’t mean they all belong in an encyclopedia. Qwirkle (talk) 16:52, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair, Qwirkle, I do think AlpinistG was giving some reasoning and not being opinionated, adding to my point that a Wikipedia article can do more to explain something than a Wiktionary page. In policy terms, the focus surely needs to be on WP:N, which does not rule out topics that can be defined in dictionaries. Either something is notable or it isn’t. Moonraker (talk) 22:20, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or merge to Teacher (not Head teacher, as a schoolmaster can refer to a male teacher at any level). The information is clearly encyclopaedic even if it doesn't necessarily need a separate article. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:51, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 13:56, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep article is very notable throughout many countries and many students refer to Schoolmaster then Teacher. HelpingWorld (talk) 06:36, 12 December 2021 (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.