Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clockhouse Junior School

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 keep or merge. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 04:58, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Clockhouse Junior School

See also: Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Clockhouse Primary school

Yet another article on a unnotable primary school. Dunc|☺ 20:27, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• keep this too it is a fair stub Yuckfoo 20:32, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Comment: Yeah, Dunc. Until this gets solved in the Schools policy, it makes no sense to keep adding them on here. jglc | t | c 20:32, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, good stub. Don't see any reason not to hang on to this part of the sum of human knowledge. Kappa 20:48, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • So's my phonebook but that's going into Wikipedia, no is it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Calton (talk • contribs) 03:26, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • Unverifiable. copvio Kappa 21:21, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Another article stating how average the a school is. --Carnildo 21:46, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Weak delete. Mild schoolcruft. Stub that gives minimal information. Hermione1980 22:13, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, schoolcruft. School vanity is an unnecessary part of the sum of human knowledge (not that trying to create such is a goal of Wikipedia, despite contentions to the contrary). RickK 23:35, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)
  • Are you saying that wikipedia is not trying to compile and distribute the sum of human knowledge? 01:17, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC) Kappa 01:17, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • If you really believed that it were, Kappa, you would never have voted delete on a single solitary article. RickK 04:37, Jun 11, 2005 (UTC)
      • Why would you ever say such a thing— are you conveniently dismissing votes on articles which are blatant nonsense or acts of vandalism? Your comment is unreasonable. —RaD Man (talk) 22:21, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
        • If you were consistant, you would think that even nonsense and acts of vandalism are all parts of the sum of human knowledge. RickK 21:26, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
          • LOL, I wouldn't want it to be kept in the article space, possibly it could be transwikied to "wikivandilism" or somewhere. User:Iasson would be the expert. Kappa 21:48, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep We should have articles on all schools. CalJW 00:25, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete: Is there anything that sets this school apart from others, except its name? The authors don't tell us, if there is. Geogre 02:28, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. This school is simply average, and thus simply unencyclopedic. NatusRoma 03:21, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Yet another school. Merge into London Borough of Havering or Delete. --Calton | Talk 03:26, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Merge as above. Vegaswikian 06:41, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Merge with London Borough of Havering. If this school is notable it is only at a very local level. Sjakkalle (Check!) 09:28, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep or Merge with London Borough of Havering. Good stub. I like to see attention paid to OFSTED reports. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 12:14, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep verifiable and NPOV schools. DoubleBlue (Talk) 14:22, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Non-notability not established by nominator. —RaD Man (talk) 17:29, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Christopher Parham (talk) 04:03, 2005 Jun 12 (UTC)
• Keep Schools belong on Wikipedia. Stubs take time to grow. --Unfocused 04:41, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. We know all the arguments now, and WP:SCH seems to have failed. --Carnildo 05:20, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment. The success of WP:SCH can be judged by the sheer number of merge or keep votes for school articles. Overwhelming, I've never seen anything like this on VfD. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 02:01, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. -Da 'Sco Mon 08:55, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep SchmuckyTheCat 15:35, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Agree with what Unfocused said. -CunningLinguist 16:27, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep — RJH 16:22, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Also, I don't think WP:SCH can be judged as a success just because it managed to rally the pro-school hordes. It should have resolved the issue, not simply given carte blanche to any vanity page writer to put in an article consisting of "Non-Notable High is a highschool in Nebraska". As it is now, any school article, regardless of content or quality, will be vociferiously defended by inclusionists. --Scimitar 19:32, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment. VfD isn't a place for discussing article quality or for getting rid of poorly written articles. If an article is bad, work on improving it. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 20:14, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Another worse than useless page on another unremarkable educational institution. It is a shame that there are a large number of users that appear to provide knee-jerk votes to keep all articles with the word school in them regardless of their encyclopedic value. Indrian 04:18, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Quale 18:53, 15 Jun 2005 (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.