Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ballam Park Primary School

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
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. Mangojuicetalk 14:49, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ballam Park Primary School

Primary schools are generally not notable, generally it is only high schools that are listed. I find no reason why this school has any reason to be listed based on its notability. It also fails the proposed guideline WP:SCHOOL TheRanger 02:05, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

  • Keep meets notability criteria Valoem talk 03:17, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete There is nothing on the page to assert the school's notability--150.203.177.218 03:21, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. The "50 years old" criteria should not apply in this case. --- RockMFR 03:21, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per above. I don't think solely being 60 years old is enough for inclusion. 107 Google hits doesn't assert notability either. Prolog 03:50, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per above.--Húsönd 04:29, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Neutral Fails to assert notability, but does meet the proposed guidelines. Pursey 04:55, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Deleteper above. Catchpole 06:30, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete Has been around 60 years, but no other claim to notability. It could just as well be mentioned in an article about the town or the school district. Not all schools (or all high schools ) need their own articles unless they have verified notability. Edison 13:10, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Verifiable and notable. Merchbow 15:34, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Please explain how its notable you have left same reply on several AfD's without details.TheRanger 19:48, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
  • I don't see that he needs to reply, what he is saying seems to be self-apparent -- Librarianofages 21:32, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
  • "Self-apparent"?? As in the US Decl. of Independence? ("We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal, and that all schools are notable.") You have to present an actual argument as to why this or any school is notable, other than argument by assertion. Pan Dan 14:37, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Comment I notice you dont argue with people who just put Delete NN. If people who vote keep have to present an actual argument, dont people who vote delete? Jcuk 16:52, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
First, it's funny you should say that, because about an hour before you posted that I posted this. Second, notability has to be shown. Those voting "keep" have to actually come up with some non-trivial sources that have taken note of the school. Those voting "delete" have no such burden, although in a perfect world we would all look for sources before voting. Pan Dan 23:07, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Per Merchbow, all schools are inherently notable -- Librarianofages 21:32, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge with the local community page per WP:SCHOOLS. — RJH (talk) 22:02, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep - It is part of a school district and therefore meets the criteria of WP:SCHOOLS. --Ineffable3000 22:23, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge into an article about the local community or the respective school district per WP:SCHOOLS unless significantly expanded upon. RFerreira 01:00, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep as per Wikipedia:Schools/Arguments#Keep. Btw, WP:SCHOOLS proposal has stalled, isn't it? --Vsion 01:10, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge with the relevant community or school district or both. I can't find any references to this in either the Google News Archive or EBBSCO's Australia New Zealand database. Capitalistroadster 04:12, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge and Redirect with community and district articles, once identified. I don't see that there's enough here to justify retention, or that there is more material to adequately expand it, but Deletion is destruction. Alansohn 12:20, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • KEEP and do not merge or redirect, there is a clear consensus in the community at schoolwatch that all schools are notable and deserve their own article. --ForbiddenWord 14:16, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: Let me just say that what is important is the consensus among all Wikipedians, not among schoolwatch this is a very alarming statement and not at all in the spirt of wikipedia goals. I visted the link to Schoolwatch and found no discussion as to what are notable or what is not. All I found were a list of AfD's current and a past AfD's with results totaled by month list with totals by month. As to its point of view I found this statement right at top of page "the terms 'keep' and 'no consensus' are used interchangeably (as no consensus defaults to keep)." TheRanger 15:52, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge if there's an article for its school district, delete otherwise. As usual, non-notable. -- Kicking222 16:45, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Unlike the US, I don't think Australia has "school districts"... (JROBBO 04:42, 23 October 2006 (UTC))
  • Keep for reasons described at User:Silensor/Schools. Can be merged per Capitalistroadster, but that does not require an AFD discussion. Silensor 17:36, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep per Silensor. --Myles Long 18:01, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete as a non-notable primary school. JoshuaZ 19:07, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, no assertion of notability. Plenty of schools use these colors and occupy structurally sound buildings. —ptk✰fgs 20:12, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete as non-notable school. Montco 01:43, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep and allow for organic growth, notable to the communities served. Bahn Mi 02:27, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep all schools.  ALKIVAR™ 20:26, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. As a Lexis-Nexis search shows only trivial local coverage of the "community events" sort, the school's notability is not established and there is no chance of expanding the article with verifiable material. Pan Dan 22:41, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
  • keep please school is notabel and meets proposed guideline too Yuckfoo 02:27, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep or merge (which may be the preferred option according to wiki:schools)
  • Keep all schools. --Czj 16:54, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep all schools, they are useful content in our encyclopedia. bbx 20:56, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Speedy Delete as empty. Just as non notable as most schools. Vegaswikian 23:20, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. Rebecca 02:42, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment Keep why? Just saying keep is not adding to this AfD, as this is not a vote. What is needed is reasons based on wokipedia policy as to why it should be keep or deleted.TheRanger 14:53, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
I think she is voting based on one of the reasons stated above. Anyway, why does it matter? You don't have to give a reason. (JROBBO 04:42, 23 October 2006 (UTC))
Since Afd isn't a vote, a vote without a reason is pointless. Pan Dan 14:32, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong keep - as per Vsion. (JROBBO 04:42, 23 October 2006 (UTC))
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.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../a/r/t/Wikipedia%7EArticles_for_deletion_Ballam_Park_Primary_School_0ded.html"