Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saklan Valley School

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was ambiguous.

I count 24 "delete" votes (one user voted twice but looking at the date stamps, I'm going to give him/her the benefit of the doubt and assume it was an innocent mistake), 12 "keep" votes (two troll votes and one comment by a very new user discounted) and one comment too ambiguous to call. On 8 April, the article was substantially expanded however voters after the expansion continued to express a split opinion. I do not consider the expansion sufficient to overturn the concerns raised by the prior "delete" voters.

Looking at the specific comments in the voting, I note that the majority of those arguing for deletion took the time to present arguments which were specifically applicable to the facts of this particular article while the majority of those argued to keep replied with formulaic variations of "keep all schools". I must admit that influences my decision slightly. I am going to call this one (barely) as a delete decision. Rossami (talk) 03:50, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Saklan Valley School

I fail to see what makes this school notable. Delete. El_C 12:15, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

  • It is fine. Just keep it
  • I've listed this on today's date, since it apparently was never on the main vfd page. No vote yet. —Korath (Talk) 18:29, Mar 27, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. BEEFSTEW score of -5 (A, elementary). I'm not going to count text plagiarized from the school's website (the text Dpbsmith pasted below) towards B. —Korath (Talk) 18:39, Mar 27, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Wikipedia is not a directory. This is simply a directory entry. Very, very few junior high schools are notable enough to merit an encyclopedic article. No evidence has been been presented that this one is. Note that I snipped two generic, promotional, information-free sentences from the version nominated for VfD. Should you wish to factor these into your assessment, the sentences I excised are shown immediately below. Dpbsmith (talk) 18:46, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
"Saklan offers strong academic opportunities and high educational standards where rigorous academic challenges are harmoniously blended with a culture of support, encouragement, and nurturing for each student. Small classes allow teachers to give personal attention to each student."
  • Delete, the pretty table is all the article has going for it, but that is not a valid reason for keeping it. Thryduulf 19:10, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete nn. Dbiv 19:12, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete per low BEEFSTEW score. Radiant_* 19:44, Mar 27, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete Article of no use to anyone. Chris 20:11, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. School vanity. Not encyclopedic: WP is not a school directory. Jonathunder 03:16, 2005 Mar 28 (UTC)
  • I feel I should record my dissent against this interpretation of "non-notability" on some vote other than the Blake Junior High one. As there, WP gains nothing by deleting this factual, verfiable article about something of substance, and loses a little. I assume those who spend time making sure stuff like this gets deleted have a purpose, but have never been able to ascertain exactly what it is. Pcb21| Pete 23:10, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
The purpose is to build an encyclopedia, within some recognizable meaning of the term. Almost everybody agrees that Wikipedia should be more inclusive than traditional encyclopedias, but there is disagreement on how far it should be extended. I think the essence of the matter is Wikipedia is not a directory. These sorts of short articles that give a few generic facts are better handled by a database of schools, such as www.greatschools.net. Anyone looking for this sort of basic information would be far better served by the comprehensive and up-to-date information on such a site, or by Googling for the school's own website, than going to Wikipedia for stale second-hand low-quality articles.
We are a secondary source, but we add value to our articles by selecting, synthesizing, and using editorial judgement as to what and how facts should be presented. I don't think this happens in the case of articles like this one. Oddly enough, my judgement is similar to yours but in the opposite direction. A "cruft" article doesn't damage Wikipedia very much, because it doesn't affect anyone who isn't looking for the information. But I do think each and every low-quality article does do a little damage to Wikipedia. ::The usual counter to this is that articles grow and improve over time and only remain in the low-quality state for a while. Well, Rolling Meadows High School has been sitting there since January saying nothing more than
"Rolling Meadows High School is a high school in Rolling Meadows, Illinois"
despite sporting an {{attention}} flag. Nobody in the "all-schools-are-notable" crowd has yet taken it under their wing. Dpbsmith (talk) 00:28, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Non-notable elementary school with a low BEEFSTEW score. DaveTheRed 02:34, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Obviously.--Centauri 04:08, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Obviously. Jayjg (talk) 05:10, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete this and all other articles on nonnotable schools. --Angr 08:09, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • By the way, the most recent poll on this subject, which some people consider policy, is that articles on non-notable high schools should be deleted. Radiant_* 08:16, Mar 28, 2005 (UTC)
    • ???? You get that from that poll? Wow. I've always thought the results of that poll were so hopelessly muddled that no intelligent person could make head nor tail of it, to coin a phrase. The one thing that comes through to me crystal clear, on each of several attempts to establish policy, is that there is no consensus. Dpbsmith (talk) 10:47, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
      • I didn't say there was a consensus, as there clearly isn't. And I agree that it's very muddled. But the majority is for keeping of notable school articles, and deleting of non-notable school articles. Radiant_* 13:30, Mar 28, 2005 (UTC)
        • Our interpretations of this clearly differ; all public educational institutions are notable, therefore all of them should be kept so long as they are not a copy vio. The assertion that "some people consider [this poll] policy" for deletion is intentionally misleading. --GRider\talk 20:00, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
          • I think the most NPOV way of summarising that would be to say that some people consider it a mandate to delete non-notable school articles, while others consider it validation that all schools are inherently notable. In my book that means there is no consensus, and thus there is no point in either side of a debate trumpeting it as endorsing their cause. Thryduulf 21:41, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
            • The poll I mentioned obviously has no consensus, and it certainly isn't policy by my book. But some people do consider it policy so I pointed that out. GRider's assertion that all schools are notable is his POV, and claiming it to be fact is misleading. Radiant_* 09:34, Mar 29, 2005 (UTC)
          • Comment: When there is no consensus, things should be kept, that's the policy. Any delete results just occur because deletionists hang out in Vfd to stack every vote. Kappa 22:24, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
            • There is no consensus on the general question of whether every high school is intrinsically encyclopedic. On individual school articles, particularly the really bad ones, there sometimes is rough consensus to delete. Dpbsmith (talk) 01:36, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep and allow for organic growth. --GRider\talk 20:00, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Nothing notable here, no evidence that there ever will be. Nobody is interested in working on these articles until they show up on vfd, then its life or death. Gamaliel 22:28, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Not notable. --Carnildo 22:54, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. All schools belong in Wikipedia. --Gene_poole 23:11, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete not notable CDC (talk) 23:26, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, concur w/ Gamaliel. Slac speak up! 23:27, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. I'm getting to think the VfD process for schools uses more hard disk space and bandwidth than leaving them be. Samaritan 03:23, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. See my points at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Any policy regarding school articles?. -- Toytoy 04:39, Mar 29, 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge into Moraga, California and delete - Skysmith 10:26, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Death to non-notable schools. --NormanEinstein 17:03, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • User:Radman1/keepschools —RaD Man (talk) 06:28, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. School vanity, not notable. Jonathunder 22:36, 2005 Mar 31 (UTC)
  • Keep More notable than a pokemon charcter. --Spinboy 23:48, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep aw, we are eventually going to have pages for every last little town in asia minor. let this be. and, so much potential future comes out of high schools. if it's not written now, what can be remembered about it 20 years down the road, when Mr or Mrs President happens to have come from here? shuffdog (talk) 23:59, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC)
  • There are other sources of information on the planet Earth besides Wikipedia. I'm sure plenty of information about this school can be found if by some slim chance some future president happens to be an alumnus. Gamaliel 00:15, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • There are also those who believe that Wikipedia should be the sum of those sources. --GRider\talk 00:47, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • A collection of sad stubs that no one ever improves is hardly the sum of those sources. Gamaliel 03:29, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • If deletionists spent a tiny fraction of the time currently wasted in arguments about the so-called "non-notability" of schools on actually improving the content of the articles they're so insistent on expunging, there would be a lot less "sad little stubs" to worry about.--Gene_poole 05:04, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • If inclusionists spent a tiny fraction of the time currently wasted in the arguements about the so-called "notability" of schools on actually improving the content of the articles to such a degree that even a deletionist could not argue against their inclusion, there would be a lot less "sad little stubs" to worry about.Indrian 07:55, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)
  • And, of course, if mergists spent a tiny fraction of their time and simply merged all school stubs together into a single article, there would be a lot less "sad little stubs" to worry about. Hm, that's not a bad idea actually :) Radiant_* 08:43, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Notability not established. Indrian 07:55, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, needs expansion. -- Lochaber 11:21, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. A junior school??? For God's sake! Sarg 14:28, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. A junior high that's not even regionally notable. --Calton | Talk 00:22, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep All schools are notable, each and every one. This article is much improved over the one orgionally presented for deletion. Klonimus 00:08, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • keep with expansion. Yuckfoo 01:45, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Wikipedia is not paper. As long as Delcatty exists, this should exist. --brian0918™ 02:17, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Non-notable. Noisy | Talk 10:37, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, obviously. Dan100 20:31, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Schools are worth of inclusion, you silly deletionists! --Zantastik 07:02, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, useless. Grue 09:18, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep and continue to expand. Notability should not be a prerequisite for schools. --BaronLarf 00:25, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Notability most bloody well should be a prerequisite for schools, and everything else here. -- Dcfleck 03:29, 2005 Apr 15 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../a/r/t/Wikipedia%7EArticles_for_deletion_Saklan_Valley_School_8c1d.html"