Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bow High School (2nd nomination)

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 Keep per WP:SNOW. Despite one "delete", a clear consensus of keeping is clearly shown, regardless of the fact that this was a possibly disruptive nomination. Any issues regarding the article's sources can be fixed easily. Non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 05:08, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bow High School

Bow High School (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Article's deletion was ended by a non-admin last time NHWrestler103 (talk) 03:29, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

• Strong Keep For the second time, above and beyond the general consensus on the WP:Inherent notability of high schools, this article provides ample, independent reliable and verifiable sources to satisfy the Wikipedia:Notability standard. Alansohn (talk) 03:35, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
• Strong Delete My school, a rival of Bow High School, had its article deleted for notability reasons. Our school is of similar notability to Bow High School, and I feel some consistency is in order. NHWrestler103 (talk) 03:37, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Deleting articles out of spite or revenge is generally not considered within Wikipedia policy. I will be more than happy to recreate the article for your school, but I don't see any such article deleted via AfD. Given the ample reliable and verifiable sources available for high schools it's hard to understand why this or any other such article should be considered for deletion. Alansohn (talk) 03:46, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
• Delete High schools are NOT inherently notable, and no guideline or policy says that. This article is sourced, but nothing about this school says that it is notable. So it may pass WP:V, but it fails WP:N. TJ Spyke 03:39, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

• Comment - actually there is something notable - the out of the ordinary number of state championships. BTW though the figure of 27 is uncited, 25 of them can be sourced - I'm looking for the other 2! TerriersFan (talk) 04:46, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

• Speedy Keep ...again. Notable with sources. Your school's article being deleted is not a reason to delete this one. --Onorem♠Dil 03:39, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

It isn't a reason. It is an example of Wikipedia's precedent for such cases. You may want to familiarize yourself with the situation before hastily casting a vote. NHWrestler103 (talk) 03:41, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

• Speedy Keep as nomination by single purpose account only involved with previous AfD only just closed today and most likely sock puppet of blocked user. Otherwise article survives WP:N as it has plenty of WP:RS.Sting au Buzz Me... 03:42, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I am not a sock puppet and do not accuse me of being a sock puppet. You should remember to assume good faith. NHWrestler103 (talk) 03:43, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

You should also note that the previous AfD was closed by a non-admin. I would have posted my views in that AfD but was unable to because of that non-admin. NHWrestler103 (talk) 03:44, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I have blocked this user as a likely sockpuppet of User:Dimension31 who is currently blocked for the 3RR violations on the article. Metros (talk) 03:47, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

• Keep Although there there may not be a formal policy/guidline for this, there is WP:Articles_for_deletion/Common outcomes#Education which does point to most schools as having WP:N--Pmedema (talk) 03:49, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. —Sting au Buzz Me... 03:50, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
• Strong Keep - I took a quick scan through Google News and found numerous references to the school. Notability would be easy to establish, even if you assume that it hasn't already been established in the article. At best this is a case of a notable topic in need of some development. At worst it looks like a highly questionable nomination. Bilby (talk) 03:53, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
• Keep (neither strongly nor speedily nor snowily). There are certainly sources out there to write this article in an encyclopedic fashion [1]. The ones cited in the article are hardly "ample, independent reliable and verifiable"; #1 is a directory entry, #2-5, #8-9, and #11, are self-published, #6 is from the parent organisation, #7, #11, and #13 are from the local paper in a town of 7000 people, and #12 and #14 are trivial mentions. However, that's an editing issue. cab (talk) 03:58, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
• Delete I go to this school and our school is not especially notable. We're pretty much the same as another other New England public school. Hrseydrssg93 (talk) 04:01, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Account was created six minutes ago [2] and immediately starts messing with User:NHWrestler103's user page [3][4]. cab (talk) 04:06, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
• Speedy close as a WP:POINT violation. I am the user who closed the last AfD 2 hours ago, which was clearly a snowball keep. The nomination here does not provide an adequate reason to delete, the nominator has been blocked as a sockpuppet SPA, the discussion here and last time both established sufficient reason not to delete the article, and the article easily meets the general notability guideline as well as the proposed guideline for schools. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:06, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
• Strong Keep - multiple sources and an exceptional range of state championships so the article easily meets WP:N. TerriersFan (talk) 04:28, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

• Keep, and the nominator will cease wasting our time. If you thought that the last nom was closed improperly you should have brought your case to WP:DRV. But please read non-admin closure first. --Dhartung | Talk 04:59, 18 February 2008 (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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.