Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Madison Middle School

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] James Madison Middle School

James Madison Middle School (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Previously listed as part of an AFD for Beth Shields Middle School, but added late by User:RGTraynor. I have to agree that this school doesn't meet notability requirements (and is in fact little more than a directory entry for two schools at the time of my submittal), but I am of the opinion that, given the lateness of the add and that it had been added after some delete !votes had been cast, it warrants its own AfD. That said, I'm doing this with the latter problem in mind (late add to existing AfD), and therefore I am submitting this AfD with No Opinion. Dennisthe2 18:56, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

• Keep as special type of disambiguation page per Wp:disambiguation#Summary_or_multi-stub_pages. When each article expands enough to have its own article it is branched off. Nardman1 20:16, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete as failing WP:ATT and WP:NN. Non-notable middle school, one of over a hundred middle and elementary school stubs put up by the editor over 14 months ago, zero substantive edits to this article since. There seems to be no real prospect of the article ever being sourced or improved, and all that's been done to it has been shuffling around of the basic information given over a year ago. This was originally filed as a prod, removed without any explanation, then or subsequently. (I admit I am also curious as from what parent article Nardman1 feels this was forked.)  RGTraynor  20:23, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

• Erm, what I was implying was /this/ is the parent article. Re-read WP:Disambiguation to get a bigger clue. Nardman1 20:34, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Ah, fair enough. In which case this is a non-notable disambiguation page containing a pair of stubs that are unlikely ever to be improved. Any "special" status the page has because of the disambiguation doesn't exempt it from attribution or notability standards.  RGTraynor  20:48, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

• Keep - this is certainly a weird type of page. I have added some more and more to come :-) The degree of notability varies but one or two seem very notable. However, there is no point in putting a lot of time in if the page is going to be deleted. In principle, to have a place to plant stubs and allow them to grow so that they can be split off into their own article if they flourish seems fine by me. TerriersFan 01:26, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Thing is, though, in order to change our minds, generally you'll have to improve the article. There's plenty of times I've changed mine on those grounds, that's for sure. Remember, just because it's here doesn't mean it's automatically going to be nuked, it just means it's up for discussion. --Dennisthe2 01:41, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment: Since with a single exception the long list of similarly named middle schools TerriersFan appended were presented with no more information than a street address, I've reverted the edit per WP:NOT#DIRECTORY.  RGTraynor  13:10, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete This is not a rational article. it is not about a particular school, it is not about schools in a particular district, nor about those with a particular program. it is about schools that only share a common name. We have not solved the middle school problem yet, where some of us use different standards of notability than others and there is nothing resembling consensus. But of all the possible ways of handling it, this is the very worst. There is no point in having a disam page when the items don't have articles. This is a peculiar indiscriminate list, but that's what it is. . DGG 05:07, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

• I've cited an editorial guideline that contradicts your view. Nardman1 00:13, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

• Comment - I think it is clear from the sourcing I have given on the Roanoke, Virginia school, plus the fact that it is a magnet school that attracts (as it were :-)) a certain degree of notability, that there is enough to be said about it to justify its own article. I am prepared to split it out and develop it into a fully fledged article but first I need some sort of view that it would be supported because there is no point in doing further work if we are just going to jump through these hoops again. TerriersFan 01:16, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • If it's notable, yeah, we'll work with it. But, as you're showing a willingness to improve the article, I'll change my mind and go with a Keep as to hopefully grant you some time. Just in case, I'd suggest copying the article into your userspace and, should it delete, work on it there. --Dennisthe2 04:54, 7 April 2007 (UTC)