Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tredington Community Primary 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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep (no consensus). Sjakkalle (Check!) 09:20, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Tredington Community Primary School

some random Victorian primary school. Useful info: the kids get culture shock when they go to high school! Dunc|☺ 17:21, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

• Keep - it clearly states that it is a school in the title of the page. --Celestianpower ^hab 17:32, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
  • And your point is? Denni☯ 01:40, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
    • Schools are inherrantly notable. And saying that it's a school in the title is a valid assertion of notability. Therefore it should be kept. --Celestianpower ^hab 18:47, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
• Rewrite Objective sounding articles only, lest we run out of exclamation points here in AfD due to culture shock! Karmafist 17:34, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
• Comment. Okay, Dunc, this is starting to get a little out of hand. You're violating either WP:POINT or WP:DICK with your deliberately provocative nominations; I'll leave it up to you to decide which one. Whether we like it or not, schoolcruft seems to have a strong (if baffling) following on Wikipedia. Everything you've nominated will be kept, and I suspect you knew that before you nominated. Please consider reining it in a bit, and only nominating articles that could possibly see consensus to delete. --fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 17:35, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Just because "schoolcruft will be kept" is no reason to attempt to stop the madness. This is a school which is a carbon copy of thousands of others. Merely existing is not sufficient reason for an article. Duncj is right on the money. Denni☯ 01:40, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Nominating Primary schools is out of hand? What has this primary school got that others don't? Which major scientific discoveries were made here? What notable alumni is there? What would his WP:POINT be, that there is so much rampant school inclusionism that now nominating a village primary is considered WP:DICK? - Hahnchen 03:17, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
    • This is not the only school article that Dunc has nominated recently. He's put quite a few of them up for deletion, despite knowing full well that his nominations would not do any good. He's also phrased his nominations in a manner calculated (or so it seems to me) to irritate the pro-schoolcruft faction. If that's not being a dick and disrupting AfD to make a point, well, what is it? --fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 03:32, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. A clearly old and notable school that services a number of communities. Rewrite and expansion helpful, but not required.--Nicodemus75 18:08, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, if you integrate over time, ever school affects thousands of people. Klonimus 23:36, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep Have you nothing better to do than finding articles people have spent their precious time writing and nominating them for deletion?! Wikipedia is not paper and it has more than enough resources for an article on every school in the country. Tredington school has served local communities for well over 100 years, and has even had a book written about it. It's also clearly stated that the article is a stub (so even a suggestion of 'rewrite' is hardly useful, that's the whole point of a stub is it not?). As for (my) reference to culture shock, if you don't like it delete the reference (which somebody has done). That comment has no bearing on the usefulness of an article on Tredington School. Actually I consider that to be useful information anyway, as somebody who went through that process - Tredington had under 60 pupils when I was there, and we left that closed little world for a school of over 1,000 - that's nearly triple the population of my entire village! kingboyk
  • Don't worry, I'm sure the nominator will point out how few edits you have and cook up some condescension for you as well. If you're lucky, he might throw in the word "crap" since he hasn't used it in this AfD yet. That way, you'll know that he does have "something better" to do with his time. ie. count user contributions and think up non-clever condescending remarks.--Nicodemus75 18:26, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
    • Yes indeed. This is the creator of this crap. See vanity page, vanity guidelines, etc. Dunc|☺ 18:29, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
      • That last point is not even worthy of a reply. kingboyk
      • Incidentally Jimbo seems to think it would be ok if he wrote a "vanity" article about his own school [1]. Kappa 00:16, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
• keep and please stop doing this dunc to make a point we get it already you do not like schools fine Yuckfoo 18:24, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep as per kingboyk. This is a good article too. --Vsion 18:57, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep this fine article. Sarcastically labelling something as "crap" is both insulting and non-constructive. Silensor 19:01, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep Another useful article and pointless/rude nomination. --rob 19:07, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
• Comment - is there some assertion of notability that I missed? I see it's a school, but what makes it worthy of an article? Guettarda 19:29, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
  • I'm not making any such assertion, no. It's no more or less notable than any other random school. Wiki, however, is not paper, and AFAIC an institution which has touched the lives of hundreds of children over 100+ years (and which is still active today) deserves a page if someone is willing to write one - yep, any and every school. Why not?! It's not costing anybody anything, and if you don't like it don't read it (the stance I will be taking with pages on railway engines, I can assure you). There's clearly a 'political' motive to all this and it's not really about Tredington School, it's about how wide Wikipedia's coverage should be. My personal opinion is: as wide as possible. Others will disagree, no problem. I do think there's a danger of all this descending into an early 90s style Usenet flamewar however... --kingboyk 19:47, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
    • Danger? You speak as though this is something that might happen in the future???......--Nicodemus75 19:53, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
      • Heh, I'm new in these parts and stand corrected. --kingboyk 19:56, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - it could use some more information but essentially I don't see a problem with this school having an article. -- Francs2000 19:58, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
• Pony Wikipedia:Schools needs revisiting. Hipocrite - «Talk» 20:29, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

• Delete nn school and per Hipocrite - «Talk» it is time to revisit Wikipedia:Schools and at least try to get consensus on where the cutoff is for school notability is, if any.--Isotope23 20:47, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, this one does appear to be noteworthy.Gateman1997 21:13, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
• Comment: Please make note that several Wikipedians have made requests that we keep these discussions civilized. We may not see eye-to-eye on what is important, but that is no reason to insult someone, their beliefs, or their contribution(s) to Wikipedia. This is a community driven project. Bahn Mi 21:59, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
• Deletioncruft madness. This school has existed for over 100 years! Keep.--Centauri 22:59, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep per wikipedia:Schools/Arguments#Keep. This interesting article helps to improve the diversity of schools covered by wikipedia. Kappa 00:07, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep Get over it. CalJW 00:40, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
• Comment: I don't think that schools below the college level are notable enough for an encyclopedia, but a lot of people do, so these nominations are rarely going to reach a consensus of delete. Therefore, I don't think it is a useful way to spend our time. -- Kjkolb 01:33, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete I'm getting tired of the newbie chant "Wikipedia is not paper." True, but Wikipedia is server space, screen real estate, editor time, and search engine fodder. Just because it exists does not render it an automatic in. Schools are not automatically notable. Denni☯ 01:44, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Server space costs virtually nothing, especially for text articles. Schools attract more editors and thus create more editor time. Schools also provide search engine fodder, attracting more users, donors and editors to wikipedia, which is a good thing. Kappa 00:24, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
    • Server space is not just about cost, it is also about accessibility. Every article takes up server space, and the more articles on server space, the longer they take to access. Next time you can't get onto Wiki, you may consider your foolishness in voting to keep everything with four walls and a roof. I question your contention that the mere existence of school articles on Wikipedia is going to encourage the participation of users and editors. Sounds like wishful thinking to me, and is most certainly unverifiable. Denni☯ 02:17, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
      • Actually, the mere extistence of an article about something interesting, obviously does attract readers and editors, through something known as a search engine. It, generally, only returns results for a search, if relevant content already exists. I, like many editors, have edited countless articles *only* because I found something on wikipedia in Google, based on wikipedia happening to have what I was looking for. Many people start as an anon, with just an interest in a specific article (maybe just doing a spelling correction at first), then they progressively turn into regular editors, even admins, and ultimately make lots of contributions in many areas. There's no finite/fixed amount of wiki editors. Editors create interesting content, and interesting content attracts new editors. On the other hand, blind deletion of content, without justification, quite clearly does discourage new editors, and causses existing editors to give up in frustration. The contribution of those editors extends beyond just schools. --rob 14:04, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as a nn school, but please, stop nominating schools for deletion. It almost always goes to no consensus, and it just increases the acrimonious mood on *FD. - A Man In Black (Talk | Contribs) 02:04, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - totally NN school. A village primary, anything about it should be listed in the Tredington article. Why are schools so inherently noteworthy? This one isn't! - Hahnchen 03:14, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete any article that talks about everything but the topic of the article. Vegaswikian 06:07, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, per the usual. Christopher Parham (talk) 23:51, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. For Pete's sake, they have 63 students! Neutrality^talk 01:42, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete *drew 07:52, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete — 'twon't make a difference, but I do agree that this school oughtn't to have its own article, I just disagree with Dunc's methods. --fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 03:32, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
• Consensus so far has been to keep schools (see Wikiproject Schools archive and arguments to keep schools). ··gracefool |☺ 16:54, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
  • I don't see the formation of a consensus in the former, and the entirety of the latter page seems to be evidence that it's a contentious topic, with no consensus yet formed. - A Man In Black (Talk | Contribs) 16:58, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
    • It depends on what type of school you are talking about. If you are referring to a degree granting institution, there appears to be an overwhelmingly strong consensus in favor of including them. There also appears to be a mild or luke-warm consensus to keep high schools. There is no consensus to delete primary or middle schools and when there is no consensus on whether to keep or delete something this results in a keep. So to say that the consensus so far has been to keep schools is somewhat accurate depending on how you want to interpret its meaning. Silensor 17:29, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
• That's not true, gracefool. There has almost always been no consensus to keep schools, either primary/elementary or secondary/high. Very often, there is in fact a bare majority to delete, but no consensus to do so. With no consensus to keep, delete, merge, or do anything else, these articles generally exist in a kind of "legitimacy limbo"; they exist purely because it is the nature of a wiki to be relatively indiscriminating. This is sometimes a great strength of a wiki; it is also its profound weakness.—encephalon 12:02, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Eventually wikipedia will develop some kind of filter for general-interest and specialist-interest topics, so people who want a highly discriminating wikipedia can have it, and users can still find information when they need it. Kappa 22:31, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep per Wikipedia:Schools/Arguments#Keep. We should be encouraging this type of participation rather than wasting our time trying to remove good, encyclopedic information. Unfocused 22:09, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete nonencyclopedic --redstucco 09:11, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete nn School --JAranda | yeah 02:12, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Very poorly written. However, 1. there appears to be at least one good, independent, reliable source which has the school as its focus, and which may be used to write an encyclopedic article in accordance with WP:V, WP:RS, WP:NOR; 2. with a 100 year history there is some chance that the 27-page report is not the only such source; if a reference can be found detailing its history, it will probably satisfy WP:N. Of course, I am sceptical that it will ever be improved: the whole school thing is one of WPs depressing ironies. So much argument, so little to show for it.—encephalon 12:02, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete-Another un-notable school. Dudtz 9/29/05 5:57 PM EST
• Keep. -- DS1953 04:33, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Good UK primary school stub. --Tony Sidaway^Talk 05:59, 2 October 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.