Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hopkinsville High 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 was keep. John254 01:39, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hopkinsville High School

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

No assertion of notability. Been tagged as unreferenced since November 2006 (!) Closedmouth (talk) 04:04, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

  • Delete no evidence of notability in the article or via a Google search [1]. While some editors argue that there is a consensus that all high schools are automatically notable, this is disputed and the relevant proposed guideline (WP:SCHOOLS) has not been adopted and has been rejected on several occasions. As such, WP:N needs to be met, and I don't think that that's the case here. --Nick Dowling (talk) 04:24, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete for reasons noted above by ClosedMouth.—Preceding unsigned comment added by TheBigFish (talk • contribs) 04:27, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. —Eastmain (talk) 04:33, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Kentucky-related deletion discussions. —Eastmain (talk) 04:33, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep. Most schools have been written about enough to establish notability, but the evidence is not always available online, particularly for schools in smaller and poorer communities. Previous versions of the article might have been eligible for deletion as attack pages, but the current version of the article is an inoffensive stub. --Eastmain (talk) 04:33, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep high schools are notable, Merkinsmum 04:45, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep as edits done since nomination make this high school article a valid stub. Sting au Buzz Me... 07:09, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment 'Kay, I'll withdraw this nomination. Seemed like a good idea at the time. --Closedmouth (talk) 07:20, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
  • I still don't see any references which come close to meeting WP:N so the nomination still seems appropriate. All that's there is the school's website, its entry in a database and a trivial story about its basketball team winning a state competition over 22 years ago. Those hardly constitute "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". --Nick Dowling (talk) 08:03, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep Gary King (talk) 09:24, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep - notable alumnus, state title, multple sources. TerriersFan (talk) 17:28, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep - has several reliable sources. Clearly a notable high school. EJF (talk) 22:41, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep - Well, let's see... this is a high school, of course, and there are multiple reliable sources supporting the content of the article, which does assert notability in the usual sense; notable alumnus, state title. Everytime a high school article comes up, the deletes are the first ones to bring up WP:SCHOOL.... this seems a little strange to me. I bet if a high school ever does get deleted there will be champagne corks popping somewhere. Well, folks this one ain't it. JERRY talk contribs 01:48, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete as clearly unnotable. Eusebeus (talk) 02:34, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Please have a read over WP:JNN, as you have just made one of those classic arguments to avoid in deletion discussions. JERRY talk contribs 12:19, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, I should have said utterly nn school. Eusebeus (talk) 14:52, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
I don't mean to be a pest, but now you have wikilinked a proposed guideline that in-effect states that it is convenient to assume that all high schools are notable. So your rationale behind the !vote of delete is still quite unclear. Why are you suggesting this article should be deleted? JERRY talkcontribs 16:24, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Jerry, you are not the pest. We haven't heard much from him lately, but Eusebeus occasionally tries to push the position that schools are inherently not notable, regardless of their achievements and sources provided, and that Wikipedia:Notability standards are not even relevant to the discussion at hand. This screed of his that he links to insists that A school is notable only if it has attained some distinction for something other than its normal operation as a school. Somehow, while politicians are notable for being elected and enacting legislation, athletes for scoring goals and astronauts for flying into space, a school's achievements as a school, per Eusebeus, should be discarded, since generally they accrue to the school as a normal part of its function. This nonsense has been rejected repeatedly by the community and a broad consensus has been established that the qualities that Eusebeus demands be ignored are exactly the characteristics that make a school notable, as this AfD amply represents. Jerry (and all others here) would benefit from seeing exactly what it is that Eusebeus purports to justify as an excuse for deletion of this article and all other school articles. Alansohn (talk) 16:50, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Exactly, except I wouldn't call it a screed, but instead a well-reasoned and balanced exposition of my views. I know Alan, deep-down, agrees! Eusebeus (talk) 16:55, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
My delete finger never itched so bad as when I read that flawed, inaccurate, garbagy essay. Complete and utter BS. Pure, unadulterated, concentrated ka-ka. JERRY talk contribs 01:37, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Hey, hey, hey, WP:CIVIL, please, Jerry. It's not as if you're gonna lose this one. It should be the easiest time in the world to sit back and let him have his say, right? Noroton (talk) 04:37, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Yes, but... I don't like it. JERRY talk contribs 05:26, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
No need to call him on it: the worthless screed is total shit if you don't agree, for sure. What nonsense! Eusebeus (talk) 05:57, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
I'm beginning to like this guy. JERRY talk contribs 11:56, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Jerry, take it from the horse's mouth: "the worthless screed is total shit". Eusebeus' modus operandi is to try to push positions like this one that he feels strongly about regardless of their lack of merit and to try stir up the pot. The best way to deal with this particular branch of his disruptive behavior is to keep on improving articles and ensure that the articles meet the broad consensus on school notability. Each AfD that ends as a keep, as this one will, adds to the body of evidence of inherent notability of such schools and adds another nail to the coffin of irrelevance for his demands of school non-notability. There's no need to get angry and get dragged into his chronic incivility when Eusebeus is doing such a wonderful job digging his own grave. Let him dig on his own. Alansohn (talk) 12:51, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
I really regret making this AfD. --Closedmouth (talk) 13:04, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Another Wikidrama I see. Who needs to buy cheap novels. Just log on here and have a laugh :-) Sting au Buzz Me... 23:18, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep. Expanded and sourced nicely by Gene93k and TerriersFan. Meets inclusion criteria of WP:V and WP:NPOV. DoubleBlue (Talk) 02:50, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep Above and beyond the fact that there is a clear consensus of WP:Inherent notability for all high schools, the multiple independent reliable and verifiable sources establishing multiple sports championships and distinguished alumni satisfies the Wikipedia:Notability standard. Alansohn (talk) 04:09, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Comment Inherent notability regarding high schools has not yet reached consensus, so that is a moot point. As for sports championships and distinguished alumni, if that information is added to the article, I will gladly change my vote.TheBigFish (talk) 01:45, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
      • When AfDs for high schools lead to retention some 99% of the time, the consensus on inherent notability seems rather clear. This AfD will only add further to the body of evidence. You may want to review the article for details regarding sports championships and distinguished alumni. Alansohn (talk) 01:50, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep (UpdatedAs quite a bit of information has been added to the article since I entered this AfD, I will change my vote as stated above to Keep. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheBigFish (talk • contribs) 14:12, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep meets WP:N/WP:ORG. Noroton (talk) 04:39, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep per the above. I also did a bit of easy math, and found that it has over 1,000 students. So I added that information to the summary. Big high schools are per se notable. The good references, controversy, sports titles, etc. clinch the deal. Bearian (talk) 20:32, 20 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.