Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bishop Hoban High School

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The result of the debate was speedy keep, nomination withdrawn. --Coredesat talk 11:55, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bishop Hoban High School

Failed Speedy delete. (This is not an 'All schools are notable versus school cruft' debate!) The problem that this 'article' produces is a common one. Obviously written by a student, it is barely literate. Now it could be kept on the basis that it might be cleaned up and expanded (though it is improbable that it will); OTOH do we want this sort of low grade stuff hanging around in a serious encyclopaedia? There are loads of these being produced so I think we need a proper discussion as to what to do. BlueValour 04:05, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

• Weak delete, without prejudice, unless it is properly rewritten by the time this AfD nomination closes. Agree with nom, the subject is possibly encyclopedic, but the contents is definitely not; since there are likely nearly no real editors with knowledge of this school, there is no point in having this sort of stuff here. ikh (talk) 04:15, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Keep has been cleaned up; appears to be notable. ikh (talk) 18:15, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

• Delete or else put in some real information that someone can actually use. --BennyD 05:00, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete no claims of notability what-so-ever. --Eivind^t@c 07:12, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete I would have suggested "prod"ing it first in case someone actually wanted to fic it up, but oh well. Viridae 08:25, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, no context, no claims of notability. --Coredesat 08:59, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep and clean up, obviously. At least one notable former pupil, and the article is bound to have scope for expansion. Stu ^{’Bout ye!} 11:23, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, claims of all high schools being notable are empty and without logical basis. No claims of notability made, and none found beyond once having a current sportsman as a pupil. - Motor (talk) 13:12, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete for pretty much all the reasons given by the nomionator. These sorts of articles are beginning to become a problem Ydam 13:25, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - per Motor. I've always been against the whole "high schools are all notable" mode of thought. --cholmes75 (chit chat) 13:42, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. If it was badly written, it looks like it has now been cleaned up. I have no objection to articles with interest only to a minority, as long as they don't violate policy. David L Rattigan 13:59, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, and cleanup. Nationalparks 14:38, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
• Comment. I have wikified and updated the article. Stu ^{’Bout ye!} 14:48, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. --Arnzy ^{(whats up?)} 14:58, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep cleaned up and some notable things mentioned. --Arnzy ^{(whats up?)} 00:18, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep article has been cleaned up and is now worth keeping. Gwernol 15:02, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete despite the rewrite. Pascal.Tesson 16:16, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Looks fine now. Honbicot 16:25, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep The first time I visited Wikipedia I looked up my school. Then I clicked on one of the links to an alumnus and amended it (this was long before I had an account). If there had been no article about the school I might never have visited Wikipedia again. Golfcam 16:36, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Some work has been done and it looks fine now. At least a couple of notable things mentioned.--MichaelMaggs 17:05, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Problem solved. Olborne 17:14, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep --TonyM ^{ｷﾀ━( °∀° )━ｯ!!} 17:24, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
• Comment If you come across more of these, best idea is to PROD it and add a {{cleanup-school}} tag so those interesting in maintaing school articles become aware of it and may clean it up.--Isotope23 17:39, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - an excellent outcome. Isotope23's PROD suggestion is one that I will implement. BlueValour 18:19, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep — Per above works for me. — RJH (talk) 18:53, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. In the future some cleanup template variant should do. Silensor 20:51, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Yes, I really am voting to keep a school article. It's better now and seems to be more notable than the other schools I've voted to delete. --Coredesat talk 22:11, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep high school articles should be kept.--Konstable 03:17, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

• I think efforts would be better spent cleaning these articles up than nominating them for deletion.--Konstable 03:19, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

• Agreed, [1]. Nationalparks 13:04, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

• keep please we should be expanding instead not erasing Yuckfoo 18:17, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. The article is better than before. --TruthbringerToronto 01:09, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
• Admin-Speedy Keep - the rubbish that was there before has gone and this article has been cleanedup sufficiently for it to be encyclopaedic. I therefore withdraw the nomination. BlueValour 02:46, 29 June 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.