Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Family Altar Christian 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 of the debate was Delete. --Titoxd(?!?) 04:31, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Family Altar Christian School
Average grade school, not notable --Bitmappity 04:37, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
- Comment. For some reason, nominating schools for deletion is one of the most controvbersial things you can do on Wikipedia. Nonetheless, this article has serious deficienies, first and foremost the article doesn't say where the school is located, although a Google check indicates that it is in Battle Creek, Michigan. Sjakkalle (Check!) 07:33, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete as unverified. I just see some directory listings of the school, and don't see adequate info for an article. The one in Battle Creek seems to be the one mentioned (as said above), but it's not made clear in the article. In any event, the school closed in 2002, so there seems little point or potential in an article. --rob 10:12, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
- Comment: A reminder why sites like "privateschoolreview.com" should not be overly relied on is here. Notice it doesn't bother saying the school is closed. It makes no mention of the new Calhoun Christian School. --rob 12:20, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete, horribly small and incomplete stub, non-verified topic, and private school... comes together to equal a big fat delete.Gateman1997 17:56, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
- Even with rewrite my vote remains delete as the new school this article points to is even less notable then the unverifiable one the article originally was implied as being attached to.Gateman1997 22:45, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete unverifiable, unexpandable, and even defunct. - A Man In Black (conspire | past ops) 18:07, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete, unverifiable and fails to discuss the school the article is named after. Also doesn't say enough about the other one. - Mgm|(talk) 20:12, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. So as I understand it, it's about a little school, that's been closed for 3 years? It could be made into a one sentence addition to the article about the school that replaced it. --inksT 20:48, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
- Comment. The article has been rewritten. Call (269) 965-0488 tomorrow and see if they're actually closed, I am unable to find any references online regarding the closure of this school. Silensor 22:35, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
- There is no way of telling which Family Altar Christian School the author had in mind, since no sources were provided in the original article before it was rewritten. But the fact that the Battle Creek Community Foundation recently set aside $13,800 for the one in Battle Creek, Michigan [1] leads me to believe this one is still alive and well, so I will vote accordingly.
- That's the DEFINITION of original research. Wikipedia is not the place to publish the info you get from contacting the articles subject! - A Man In Black (conspire | past ops) 22:48, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
- You miss my point, completely. What evidence is there that the school is closed? I just provided an external link which demonstrates that a great deal of money was granted to this school during the 2004-2005 school year. There is an obvious discrepancy here if someone else believes the school closed in 2002. Silensor 22:53, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
- If there's no independently verifiable information, it's time to just put this one to rest. What are you going to do when you do call them? How is that at all a verifiable source?
This is another problem with school articles in general. You're forced to rely on contacting the subject to get most of the information. How is someone, person or entity, ever a reliable source when their own interests are involved? - A Man In Black (conspire | past ops) 23:12, 27 October 2005 (UTC)- No one is forced to do anything to get information. If you wish to conveniently ignore the fact that a generous sum of money was donated to this school, according to the link I just cited, then by all means please continue revelling in all your bliss. Save your dime and read the link. Silensor 23:21, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
- You still have the problems of verifiability. How can you substantiate any of the claims even in this nascent article, other than information from the subject itself? For example, they have a very good student-to-teacher ratio; how do you know it's accurate? - A Man In Black (conspire | past ops) 23:33, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
- he told you go read the information on the link regarding verifiability and yet you still haven't done so. The verifiable accuracy of those aspects comes from the Battle Creek Enquirer newspaper, A profile published by a local newspaper is precisely the sort of source called for, (and used as an example) in WP:V. Professional journalistic publications are sufficient for WP purposes. It is also irrelevant if the information provided by the Battle Creek Enquirer is "true". It is clearly stated in WP:V "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth.". --Nicodemus75 01:31, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
- The directory listing at Battle Creek Enquirer is out-of-date. As said, the Calhoun Christian School is known to exist in Battle Creek, but it is not listed under private schools at BattleCreekEnquirer.com. Nobody contests that Family Altar Christian School once existed. There's no verification it exists today, and there's even evidence it doesn't exist. --rob 03:23, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
- he told you go read the information on the link regarding verifiability and yet you still haven't done so. The verifiable accuracy of those aspects comes from the Battle Creek Enquirer newspaper, A profile published by a local newspaper is precisely the sort of source called for, (and used as an example) in WP:V. Professional journalistic publications are sufficient for WP purposes. It is also irrelevant if the information provided by the Battle Creek Enquirer is "true". It is clearly stated in WP:V "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth.". --Nicodemus75 01:31, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
- You still have the problems of verifiability. How can you substantiate any of the claims even in this nascent article, other than information from the subject itself? For example, they have a very good student-to-teacher ratio; how do you know it's accurate? - A Man In Black (conspire | past ops) 23:33, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
- No one is forced to do anything to get information. If you wish to conveniently ignore the fact that a generous sum of money was donated to this school, according to the link I just cited, then by all means please continue revelling in all your bliss. Save your dime and read the link. Silensor 23:21, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
- If there's no independently verifiable information, it's time to just put this one to rest. What are you going to do when you do call them? How is that at all a verifiable source?
- You miss my point, completely. What evidence is there that the school is closed? I just provided an external link which demonstrates that a great deal of money was granted to this school during the 2004-2005 school year. There is an obvious discrepancy here if someone else believes the school closed in 2002. Silensor 22:53, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
- Keep rewrite for the reasons expressed at Wikipedia:Schools/Arguments#Keep. Silensor 22:41, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete, not because its a nonnotable school, but because Wikipedia is not a telephone directory. --TantalumTelluride 22:45, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
- Comment - How is this not an advertisement for this school or a phone book entry, both things Wikipedia is not? - A Man In Black (conspire | past ops) 23:33, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete Wikipedia is not a phone directory. --Carnildo 23:43, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
- Keep this perfectly good re-write, despite poorly conceived arguments by "those who routinely nominate and/or vote to delete school articles"--Nicodemus75 23:49, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
- Well, I'm somebody who "routinely nominates and/or votes to delete unverifiable articles". As mentioned above, the original version of this article stated the old school was closed, and kids went to the new Calhoun Christian School. It seems the existence of the new one proves the non-existance of the old one. Also, I don't have to prove this doesn't exist, the article must prove it does exist. This is a matter of policy per WP:V. Also, its seems odd to justify keeping an article on the grounds the original version was entirely wrong regarding the school's status. --rob 00:43, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
- Could be that the original version is this that or something else. It really doesn't matter if the original version of the article said "this is a sex school for crackheads on the dark side of Uranus". My vote, as clearly stated, is about keeping the re-write. It verifiably exists as referenced by the links added to the article and is verifiably a school. Two sources to verify it are provided along with it's address and phone number. Anyone who wishes to verify it can phone it. Phone a school to see if it is real is not "original research". Also, see my comments about re: the sourcing by the Battle Creek Enquirer, which as per WP:V is more than sufficient to meet the criteria of verifiability.--Nicodemus75 01:22, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
- Well, I'm somebody who "routinely nominates and/or votes to delete unverifiable articles". As mentioned above, the original version of this article stated the old school was closed, and kids went to the new Calhoun Christian School. It seems the existence of the new one proves the non-existance of the old one. Also, I don't have to prove this doesn't exist, the article must prove it does exist. This is a matter of policy per WP:V. Also, its seems odd to justify keeping an article on the grounds the original version was entirely wrong regarding the school's status. --rob 00:43, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete NO history, NO special programs, NO important alumni, NO community involvement, NO significant or notable staff, NO reason to live. Denni☯ 23:55, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
- Keep, as written now it seems fine. Christopher Parham (talk) 00:27, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete Not notable and possibly closed.-Dakota 04:03, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
Keep the rewrite, notable topic. Kappa 05:16, 28 October 2005 (UTC)- Abstain since it is claimed to be unverified. Kappa 16:59, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
- Real schools tend to be notable, but non-existant schools generally are not. Look at the article's own "source" at greatschools.net. It says the school is associated with the Association of Christian Schools International (ACSI). However, ACSI does not show a school by this name in Battle Creek (or any similiar named school in the state). They do however list Calhoun Christian School. The original version was unverifiable (warranting deletion), but the new version is verifiably false (needing to be deleted even more). --rob 06:03, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
- Keep as rewritten. Whether or not it is currently open is irrelevant; it is very verifiable that it once existed and is therefore notable. —RaD Man (talk) 05:35, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete It doesn't seem to have been notable when it was open, certainly not now that it is closed. Johntex\talk 08:34, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
- Comment: I substantially revised the article, to put the school in the past tense. Anybody voting from now, should look in history, as there are at least three fundamentally different versions of the article, and it's anybody's guesse which one will be used if this article is kept. --rob 11:51, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
- Keep this NN closed school. Hipocrite - «Talk» 14:08, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
- WHY? Wikipedia is NOT a collection of useless information which this article clearly refers to.Gateman1997 22:22, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
- keep please it has been rewritten already thank you silensor and rob Yuckfoo 18:27, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
- Comment, I've called all numbers associated with this school personally... it is closed and has been totally disbanded.Gateman1997 23:08, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
- Comment I checked the article again after the rewrites. While I appreciate the attempt to improve the writing, it does not change the underlying NNN (non-notable nature) of the topic. Therefore, I am still in favor of deletion, as above. Johntex\talk 23:22, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. Radiant_>|< 12:14, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete nonexistant school. Grue 13:51, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
- I keep a lot of things around, but this has certainly got to go. I'm still not convinced that the school is no longer in existence, but we have a problem with verifiability either way. Hopefully if it does still exist, someone who knows and loves the school will write a new article with the proper proof nexttime. Delete. Jacqui ★ 16:01, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. Unverifiable, it seems; local-interest only, at best; and non-notable: take your pick. --Calton | Talk 00:24, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete non notable.--Kewp (t) 19:44, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
- Delete as per Rob --redstucco 09:50, 1 November 2005 (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.
