Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Altona Green Primary School

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 in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. I am being bold and disregarding simple "votes" that gave no reason to keep the article, and mere existence does not grant notability to something. AfD is not a vote. If the keep "votes" had given legitimate reasons for keeping aside from "all schools are inherently notable", I would close as no consensus. --Coredesat 03:17, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Altona Green Primary School

Primary schools are generally not notable, generally it is only high schools that are listed. I find no reason why this school has any reason to be listed based on its notability. It also fails the proposed guideline WP:SCHOOL TheRanger 01:56, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Huh???Edison 13:07, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. --- RockMFR 03:19, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete There is nothing on the page to assert the school's notability--150.203.177.218 03:21, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete No assertion of notability.--Húsönd 04:30, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom.MightyAtom 04:38, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete fails WP:SCHOOL. Catchpole 06:29, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete Probably a fine school, but no claim of notability. It could just as well be mentioned in an article about the town or the school district. Not all schools (or all high schools ) need their own articles unless they have verified notability.Edison 13:06, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. *drew 14:25, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Verifiable and notable. Merchbow 15:34, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Merch, what makes this school notable? TJ Spyke 19:00, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Please explain how its notable you have left same reply on several AfD's without details.TheRanger 19:51, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep - per Merchbow, all schools are inherently notable -- Librarianofages 21:30, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge with Altona Meadows per WP:SCHOOLS. — RJH (talk) 22:04, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep - it belongs to a district and is therefore notable according to WP:SCHOOLS. Ineffable3000 22:20, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
    • What are you talking about? Being part of a school district is NOT one of the criteria of WP:SCHOOL. TJ Spyke 01:40, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. Fulfills none of the criteria of WP:SCHOOLS. "Belonging to a district" both does not show notability and is not mentioned at WP:SCHOOLS.—Cuiviénen 00:03, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep as per Wikipedia:Schools/Arguments#Keep --Vsion 01:28, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment apparently, the school is the reigning national tennis champion. [1] --Vsion 02:10, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • The source you cite says that a student at the school is a highly ranked player for 12 year olds but not that the school has a highly ranked team.TheRanger 02:16, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • I probably have misread the championship thing. Let me find if there is any school ranking on this. --Vsion 02:42, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete No evidence given that it meets even close to the WP:SCHOOL guideline: it is 15 years old, it does not have an exceptional enrollment or an exceptional program, it has not been the subject of any third-party work. Now the one claim made of notability is that one 12-year old student is a pretty apt tennis player (and no one would suggest that she is notable per WP:BIO). Moreover the article explaining this fact mentions that "Gorgescu trains privately at Westgate indoor sports centre in Altona three times a week under Michael Tucci." so there is essentially no link to the school whatsoever. Also, I'm not sure where Ineffable3000 read that being part of a school district is sufficient with respect to that guideline but, if I may, I would suggest that he re-read this before posting that same absurdity in every school AfD out there. As for the "notable and verifiable" well let me try to say this again: AfD is not a vote and these arguments are meaningless since they don't reflect precedents, current practice or consensus. Pascal.Tesson 03:56, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. An EBBSCO Australia and New Zealand media database came up with one reference on this school: a letter to the editor by a student at the school. Google News Archives comes up with nothing at all. Given that there doesn't seem to be many third party sources available, I favour deletion although it is worth mentioning in the article on Altona and the relevant school district if we have one. Capitalistroadster 04:09, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. -- Capitalistroadster 04:09, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep- pointless nomination. The clear community consensus at schoolwatch is that EVERY schools is notable. --ForbiddenWord 14:18, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Comment Let me just say that what is important is the consensus among all Wikipedians, not among schoolwatch this is a very alarming statement and not at all in the spirt of wikipedia goals. I visted the link to Schoolwatch and found no discussion as to what are notable or what is not. All I found were a list of AfD's current and a past AfD's with results totaled by month list with totals by month. As to its point of view I found this statement right at top of page "the terms 'keep' and 'no consensus' are used interchangeably (as no consensus defaults to keep)." TheRanger 15:50, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Comment consensus at schoolwatch has no real bearing on consensus at wikipedia as a whole. This isn't a reason to keep.--Isotope23 19:30, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete I didn't even know it was theoretically possible to fail WP:SCHOOLS, but this one manages to do it. -- Kicking222 16:43, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep for reasons described at User:Silensor/Schools. Silensor 17:33, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per Kicking. This as about as non-notable and unverifiable as it gets. JoshuaZ 19:09, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, non-notable school. Looks like there's a sentence there that could be useful in National Primary School Tennis Championship. Oh, what do you know? The only thing resembling an attempt at asserting notability here is that they have a student that won a championship for which we don't even have an article. —ptk✰fgs 20:10, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge per WP:SCHOOLS. --Myles Long 20:30, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete non-notable. Montco 01:42, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep and allow for organic growth, no object to merging in the interim. Bahn Mi 02:30, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep all enduring public institutions. --Centauri 14:25, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep all schools.  ALKIVAR™ 20:25, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep or merge to school district (I think merge is per wiki:schools?) Jcuk 16:42, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, just as notable as any other school. bbx 20:53, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete or Merge do not keep. Just as non notable as most schools. Vegaswikian 23:18, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. Rebecca 02:42, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment Keep why? Just saying keep is not adding to this AfD, as this is not a vote. What is needed is reasons based on wokipedia policy as to why it should be keep or deleted.TheRanger 14:52, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep or merge to the appropriate locality according to proposed WP:SCHOOLS guideline. Yamaguchi先生 03:40, 22 October 2006
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.