Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/President Kennedy School and Community College
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 Titoxd(?!?) 03:38, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] President Kennedy School and Community College
Non-notable. It has a very nice looking article, but there is nothing notable about the school. The details about the students, departments and curriculum could be about any secondary school in England. --Daniel Lawrence 09:25, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. good article, and per wikipedia:Schools/Arguments#Keep. Kappa 09:44, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. For understanding education in Coventry, England. --Vsion 09:57, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- Keep Piccadilly 11:19, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- Keep as per above.--Cyberjunkie | Talk 13:57, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- Keep, as above. Trollderella 15:50, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- Keep per Kappa. Xoloz 16:14, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- Comment. What about Wikipedia:Schools/Arguments#Delete? I fail to see why this school is any more important than any other secondary school in the country. Also, in my opinion, "good article" does not mean "worthy of an article". If the article was not formatted and presented in a nice way, would people be so keen to keep it? I just find it strange that non-notability is a strong deletion criteria, but because the article is on a school, it's considered to be worth keeping. This is not an argument, and it's not going to harm me if the article stays or not, but I'm just trying to get an understanding of the thinking behind the votes. --Daniel Lawrence 17:42, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- Friend, if you haven't noticed, this debate is very, very, very old. For a very detailed explication of my feelings, see this. Xoloz 17:57, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- Yes, I can imagine it's a debate that has gone on for quite some time now. Your article was interesting, and it's good to read something considering both viewpoints. I didn't know there was such a big thing on Wikipedia about school articles. I've stayed away from creating any of my own in the past, because I thought they would be deleted for non-notability. I know better now. --Daniel Lawrence 18:35, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- Friend, if you haven't noticed, this debate is very, very, very old. For a very detailed explication of my feelings, see this. Xoloz 17:57, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- Keep Disk Cheap time Expensive. Stop nominating schools. You state that "non-notability is a strong deletion criteria." Could you point that out in policies for me? Hipocrite - «Talk» 17:55, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- I don't like your tone. I was friendly, Xoloz was friendly in his/her response, but you were not. There's no need for it. "Stop nominating schools" - this is the only school I have nominated. Non-notability is a strong deletion criteria, as most articles that get deleted are because of non-notability (and/or non-encyclopedic content). --Daniel Lawrence 18:35, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- I don't like your nomination. I was professional but brief. You state again that "Non-notability is a strong deletion criteria," and I repeat "Could you point that out in policies for me?" Look at all this time we're wasting! Hipocrite - «Talk» 18:55, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- Hipocrite, briefly and professionally, my answer to your request for pointing is: Examine deletion log, any day. Note reasons given. See de facto. Note also that the recently adopted CSD A7 (though not directly on point) does suggest in its terms that "notability" is a recognizable, important feature of the deletion process. Note CSD A7 adopted by consensus. Thanks Xoloz 04:46, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
- CSD A7, adopted by consensus, reads, in full "An article about a real person that does not assert that person's importance or significance. If the assertion is disputed or controversial, it should be taken to AFD instead. For details, see Wikipedia:Deletion of vanity articles." This does not apply to schools, which are not real people, nor does it have the word "notable" in it. I dispute that de facto notability is a criteria, given the fact that the comment down one from this, mine, and scores of others dispute such a distinction. Hipocrite - «Talk» 17:33, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
- As I suggested, CSD A7 is not directly on point, but it suggests that "unimportant" or "insignificant" bios are deletable on site -- to claim that this doesn't reach notability (at least for biographies) would be an act of semantic sophistry of the first order. Your dispute is noted. Also note many others accept this de facto use, and so your apparent surprise at Daniel Lawrence's observation was either a fairly strange oversight, or disingenuity on your point. Thanks, Xoloz 21:01, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
- My disgust at Daniel Lawrence's willingness to dissemble regarding "strong deletion criteria" is disgust at dissembling. Even the strongest deletionists do not call the disputed, possibly "de facto" deletion criteria that has not deleted a school in weeks "strong." Hipocrite - «Talk» 13:59, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
- OK, I see the reason for your upset, and I apologize for my own hard-line. :) It has, however, subsequently become apparent that D. Lawrence is a relative newbie to the schools debate, in his defense. Xoloz 14:19, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
- My disgust at Daniel Lawrence's willingness to dissemble regarding "strong deletion criteria" is disgust at dissembling. Even the strongest deletionists do not call the disputed, possibly "de facto" deletion criteria that has not deleted a school in weeks "strong." Hipocrite - «Talk» 13:59, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
- As I suggested, CSD A7 is not directly on point, but it suggests that "unimportant" or "insignificant" bios are deletable on site -- to claim that this doesn't reach notability (at least for biographies) would be an act of semantic sophistry of the first order. Your dispute is noted. Also note many others accept this de facto use, and so your apparent surprise at Daniel Lawrence's observation was either a fairly strange oversight, or disingenuity on your point. Thanks, Xoloz 21:01, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
- CSD A7, adopted by consensus, reads, in full "An article about a real person that does not assert that person's importance or significance. If the assertion is disputed or controversial, it should be taken to AFD instead. For details, see Wikipedia:Deletion of vanity articles." This does not apply to schools, which are not real people, nor does it have the word "notable" in it. I dispute that de facto notability is a criteria, given the fact that the comment down one from this, mine, and scores of others dispute such a distinction. Hipocrite - «Talk» 17:33, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
- Hipocrite, briefly and professionally, my answer to your request for pointing is: Examine deletion log, any day. Note reasons given. See de facto. Note also that the recently adopted CSD A7 (though not directly on point) does suggest in its terms that "notability" is a recognizable, important feature of the deletion process. Note CSD A7 adopted by consensus. Thanks Xoloz 04:46, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
- Anyway there's no consensus to apply non-notability to schools, or metro stations, or hollywood movies, or villages, or pokemons, or warships, so it can't be that strong a criterion. Kappa 21:06, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- Time is expensive - that also applies to users. Since we're talking generically, my opinion is that we should be considering with school articles if there is enough specific information on a school to warrant a separate article, or whether the information would be better served elsewhere (e.g information on the village's elementary school in the village article). If a school article is long, pretty, and 95% a statement of the obvious then one has to wonder if it is the best way to present the information. For example, although this article is better than a number of the virtual stubs we've had recently, a lot of the organisation described is just mirroring the UK's National Curriculum specification, and therefore will be the same as the vast majority of schools in the UK (although a school psychology department is a new one to me). Average Earthman 19:09, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- Merges do not require a deletion - in fact, a vote for "merge" is a vote for keep (and replace with a redirect). Feel free to go ahead and merge things, and if consensus agrees that things should be merged, then they will remain merged. In fact, if this article were not under AFD, you could go ahead and merge it right now. Hipocrite - «Talk» 19:13, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- Time is expensive - that also applies to users. Since we're talking generically, my opinion is that we should be considering with school articles if there is enough specific information on a school to warrant a separate article, or whether the information would be better served elsewhere (e.g information on the village's elementary school in the village article). If a school article is long, pretty, and 95% a statement of the obvious then one has to wonder if it is the best way to present the information. For example, although this article is better than a number of the virtual stubs we've had recently, a lot of the organisation described is just mirroring the UK's National Curriculum specification, and therefore will be the same as the vast majority of schools in the UK (although a school psychology department is a new one to me). Average Earthman 19:09, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- I don't like your nomination. I was professional but brief. You state again that "Non-notability is a strong deletion criteria," and I repeat "Could you point that out in policies for me?" Look at all this time we're wasting! Hipocrite - «Talk» 18:55, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- I don't like your tone. I was friendly, Xoloz was friendly in his/her response, but you were not. There's no need for it. "Stop nominating schools" - this is the only school I have nominated. Non-notability is a strong deletion criteria, as most articles that get deleted are because of non-notability (and/or non-encyclopedic content). --Daniel Lawrence 18:35, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- Keep the school, which sounds different from those I'm familiar with (though I guess much of that is just terminology). It does have too much padding (one assumes an English school has an English department), but that's fixable. --rob 20:18, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. Could someone point out this school's claim to notability, without having to resort to inherent properties? It may be long and nicely written, but that doesn't make it automatically suitable for Wikipedia.--inksT 20:44, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- This article is about an important, distinctive and verifiable topic, and thus automatically suitable for wikipedia. Kappa 21:06, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. Lack of notability is not a valid criteria for deletion of school articles, as per WP Policy.--Nicodemus75 21:11, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- I've never seen a WP Policy page stating that "school articles cannot be judged for inclusion based on notability". Provide a link, if you have one.--inksT 21:28, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- I've never seen a WP Policy page stating that "food article cannot be judged for inclusion based on the number of times the word 'the' is used in the article." Provide a link, if you have one. Neither the "use of the word 'the'" nor "notability" is listed in any Wikipedia policy page as a criteria for deletion. In fact, there is no Wikipedia policy on notability, nor is there a proposal for one.Hipocrite - «Talk» 21:35, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- I've never seen a WP Policy page stating that "school articles cannot be judged for inclusion based on notability". Provide a link, if you have one.--inksT 21:28, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- Keep or Merge I spent a while compiling this article - if users are not happy with perhaps they can suggest a merger with the Coventry page or some other step. It would have been pleasant if someone had contacted me first. I do hope that something of this article is retained - either as the article itself or as part of the Coventry page. I had hoped people might add the history as this is a non-American school named after an American President. Just my thoughts. Davidkinnen 21:34, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- I'm sure any user who searched for that article would be perfectly happy to find it. If it had to be merged somewhere, something like Schools in Coventry would be best, but I don't think it's really appropriate. As rob mentioned, it's not very surprising that the school has an English department, but it would be interesting to know the relative numbers of staff in each department. Kappa 21:42, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- Keep — RJH 16:46, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
- keep because the consensus is that we keep all community colleges so please do not try to erase any more Yuckfoo 22:35, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete not notable Dudtz 10/12/05 8:37 Pm EST
- Keep as per Wikipedia:Schools/Arguments#Keep. This is a fantastic article about a noteworthy educational institution, and is important to the community which it serves. Silensor 07:41, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
- Tell me, what is noteworthy about it? Fire stations, surgeries, police stations, post offices, newsagents are all important to local communities. Does that mean every one of them in the country should get their own article? --Daniel Lawrence 08:47, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
- Now we're talking.--Nicodemus75 21:23, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
- The answers to your initial question can be located in the link I provided. Thank you. Silensor 21:26, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
- Tell me, what is noteworthy about it? Fire stations, surgeries, police stations, post offices, newsagents are all important to local communities. Does that mean every one of them in the country should get their own article? --Daniel Lawrence 08:47, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. -- DS1953 15:12, 14 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.
