Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hand Middle School

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. Kurykh 00:39, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hand Middle School

Hand Middle School (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

non-notable, vanity page, violation of all that is good at the 'Pedia Chris 20:58, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

• Delete, please, per nom. Also unsourced. Jakew 21:47, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
• Strong keep - This is a Blue Ribbon school and a very badly researched nomination. It needs cleaning up and sourcing; neither of which are grounds for deletion and which will happen shortly! I have added other sourced evidence of notability to meet WP:N and WP:V. TerriersFan 21:51, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
• Comment not poorly researched-as it was written, it was crap, and made no assertion of notability. My job extends to seeing if, as it is, something belongs on Wikipedia, not if it could be built into something better. Kudos for the cleanup, but that's the second time you've been rude today. Chris 22:23, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

• Comment - Of course it was poorly researched and the above comment was not rude but factual. Before submitting articles for AfD you should carry out some basic research to see if the subject is notable. Simply because an article is presently 'crap' is not a ground for deletion; it is a ground for tagging for sourcing, cleanup etc. We delete what, after research, proves not to be notable and we don't delete on the grounds that clean-up is needed. TerriersFan 22:41, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

• At the time of nomination, it needed more than simple cleanup, as one can see from the history as of 12:34, 26 June 2007. It looks more encyclopedic to me now, but I do not have a strong opinion on whether the salient aspect of notability re Blue Ribbon School could not simply be part of a merged article for the regional system. Weak keep Milkfish 02:01, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
• Also I forgot to mention that the case of notability would be bolstered if the article had more than one link from the Main namespace (the list entry in the Richland County School District One article). Milkfish 02:34, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

• I have added a further incoming link from the locality. TerriersFan 02:50, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

• That's the beauty of Wikipedia, you do what you think needs done, I do what I think needs done. I did and you did. If you want to do the basic research, have at it, but don't make up responsibilities for me. I am one of those who don't believe being a Blue Ribbon school confers automatic notability, so "basic research" and then being snarky about it is your chosen role. Chris 00:27, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

• Comment TerriersFan, can you give any examples of independent sources that serve to describe the subject and establish notability? Jakew 22:45, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

• Comment - done. TerriersFan 23:27, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletions. —TerriersFan 23:19, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
• Weak keep I've seen similar debates involving Blue Ribbon Schools in which several have not opted to delete. Although alternately, the option MERGE also existed and it can be merged somewhat to Richland County School District One's. Also, looks respecting easily the WP:V criteria which forces me to say not to delete but at lease merge.--JForget 01:16, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Keep Excellent work by User:TerriersFan to provide ample reliable and verifiable sources, including details of its recognition by the Blue Ribbon Schools Program, that clearly satisfies the requirements of the Wikipedia:Notability policy. Alansohn 01:59, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep the notability of being in the Blue Ribbon Schools is unsettled--some debates here have ended in the conclusion that it was enough, and some have ended that it was not. Personally I do not consider being in the top 10% of US schools much of a distinction. However, i consider the Time article probably would be sufficient if it were directly cited.DGG (talk) 04:09, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

• Comment - FWIW its the top 5%. I have added the suggested direct cite, and a supporting Time feature article. TerriersFan 04:30, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

• Delete per lack of notaiblity. I do not believe Blue Ribbon/trivial mentions/letters to editor/cheesy awards for middle schools are a free pass to notability. Corpx 06:15, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep - Article contains a variety of sources which verify content and establish notability per WP:V and WP:N. Could do with more detail but I see nothing seriously wrong with the article that makes deletion necessary. Camaron1 | Chris 11:33, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
• Weak keep as a result of superb work by TerriersFan to rewrite the article. I have to say that I find the School of the Year award a mediocre example of notability (surely an enormous number of schools have received some award or other). If the subject was more interesting, and if claim to notability were stronger (spontaneously exploding teachers or alien landings in the playing fields, for example), I would be more in favour. I regret that in spite of TerriersFan's work, I am more likely to remember this AfD than the article itself. Jakew 13:04, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. GreenJoe 21:33, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep view - nice article, well written, stacks of sourced notability - seems clear. Bridgeplayer 23:01, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom: WP:VANITY--WaltCip 14:49, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

• Comment - perhaps you could explain how conceivably WP:VANITY applies to this article? There was some application to an early version but that material has long gone. TerriersFan 15:10, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

• Keep While I'm sure many editors know my general feeling on public school notability, a Blue Ribbon School is a unique and notable characteristic. The editors calling the sources all trivial seem not to realize that being such a school is more rare than one would think, for a national award. Even in rich white suburban districts, more than one blue ribbon school would be a rare occurrence indeed. VanTucky ^(talk) 04:58, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. The article demonstrates notability immediately as one of the top five percent in the nation, and provides a wealth of reliable third party sources thus meeting verifiability standards. Yamaguchi先生 04:27, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep extremely well referenced, blue ribbon school... mentioned in Time Magazine by name... thats notability with a bullet.  ALKIVAR™ ☢ 04:53, 17 August 2007 (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.