Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dunlop Public School

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page, if it exists; or after the end of this archived section. The result of the debate was Keep --Allen3 ^talk July 5, 2005 01:37 (UTC)

[edit] Dunlop Public School

I hate to do this, given that I'm a school-inclusionist, but this one is a problem. Technically, it could possibly be speedied - no context at all (where is this school?) - but by listing it here at least there's a chance that someone will be able to do something to stop it being consigned to the viod. Grutness...wha? 09:09, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Changing to a weak keep after the rewrite. But there are enough dissenting votes here to keep the vfd process going, even though the nominator has changed his opinion. Grutness...wha? 01:04, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

...and now to a definite keep. Well done DoubleBlue - feel like tackling a couple o'hundred more school stubs? :) Grutness...wha? 09:46, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

It would be nice if we could spend some time cleaning up and expanding the school stubs in a proper and thoughtful way rather than hurriedly adding what can be found to save an article in VfD. Could we agree to tag poor articles with a {{cleanup-school}} or {{school-stub}} rather than {{vfd}} from here on?, said DoubleBlue (Talk) 18:05, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC) in a hopeful tone.

*Delete unless it can be expanded upon.-- Cyberjunkie ^TALK 09:14, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Change to Keep. Great rewrite Double Blue.-- Cyberjunkie ^TALK 09:34, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Delete, worthless. Proto 09:38, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

A quick on hunt tells me it seems to be in Ottawa, but I stand by my vote. Primary schools are non-notable. Proto 09:41, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Delete as substub unless expanded to have a significant BEEFSTEW score. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:44, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)
  • At the time that this article was listed, it was a stub, not a substub. What's more, it was a very expandable stub, as shown by its current state. Factitious 09:23, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)
• Sppedy delete no context. Dunc|☺ 12:42, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)Delete primary school.Dunc|☺ 19:01, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. I've expanded the article a little bit (including location and external link). Pburka 13:12, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Primary school? That's pushing it. What about kindergartens? Delete. Radiant_>|< 14:08, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, failing that merge somewhere. Thanks Pburka. I can't believe User:Radiant! has never seen a primary school article on wp before. Kappa 14:25, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Of course I have. And I still think they're pushing it. Btw if you suggest merging, you might at least give an idea where to. Radiant_>|< 18:59, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Most schools are not notable. --Xcali 15:28, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Most primary schools aren't notable. --Scimitar 16:20, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, NN school.--Nabla 16:46, 2005 Jun 23 (UTC)
• Keep, certainly has context now. Christopher Parham (talk) 17:32, 2005 Jun 23 (UTC)
• Merge into a school district article. — RJH 17:59, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Merge into Ottawa, or into an article on this school district if established, per WP policy on schools lacking individual notability. (Note: not "merge somewhere".) Good to see improvements in context, but there's still nothing indicating any significance beyond thousands of primary schools. Barno 19:37, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Thanks, I knew I could rely on someone else to figure out the best place. Kappa 23:13, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Good stub. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 20:35, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Merge with the appropriate geographical article, to keep the school inclusionists happy. --Carnildo 21:03, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • I think that moving the information from this article to Ottawa would be a bad idea. There are a lot of things in Ottawa, and having separate articles for them makes it easier to find what you're looking for on Wikipedia. Factitious 09:23, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep verifiable and NPOV schools. DoubleBlue (Talk) 21:27, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Spoon. Gamaliel 21:28, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. --Image:Ottawa flag.png Spinboy 03:28, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete all non-notable schools Columbia 03:31, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. All schools are notable. -- Visviva 03:31, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • All schools are notable? What about that elementary school that I visited in South Dakota? The one that only had four students and one teacher. ‡ Jarlaxle 03:35, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)
    • Sounds interesting. Tell me more. How did such a school come to be? How long has it been there? Was it always so small? Why is located where it is? What kind of students study there? What are the prospects for its survival/expansion? How is a one teacher-school managed? What qualifications does the teacher have? How many years do the students have that same teacher? What school do they graduate to and how different an experience is it? How does the school and teacher raise the funds to survive? What challenges/advantages do they have with so few students? DoubleBlue (Talk) 04:31, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
      • That's a good point. I was hoping for a response like that. ‡ Jarlaxle 07:45, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)
• Comment: I have expanded the article further. DoubleBlue (Talk) 04:31, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Very nice work. Factitious 09:23, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)
• All schools are not notable for me. Likewise I feel you need something more then verifiable and NPOV. This last rewrite, while still needing more cleanup, should be a Keep. Vegaswikian 07:42, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. There's no need to delete it. It's a legitimate article, and there's no waste of paper here. Or room, for that matter. ‡ Jarlaxle 07:47, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. The current version of the article is informative and establishes context. Factitious 09:23, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Thanks again, DoubleBlue! --Unfocused 14:41, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• keep the article has made some major changes and would make jimbo proud. good job double blue! Yuckfoo 18:25, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. All schools are notable enough for a truly great encyclopaedia. —RaD Man (talk) 28 June 2005 07:47 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be placed on a related article talk page, if one exists; in an undeletion request, if it does not; or below this section.