Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kwekwe 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 of the debate was Keep. Cobra 10:41, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Kwekwe High School
Definitely not notable; only 32 Google results. Delete. Scottmso 03:42, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. If only it were three sentences. SorryGuy 04:06, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- Keep, helps fight WP:BIAS such as that caused by applying google tests to schools in developing countries. Kappa 04:32, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- Delete, no content that asserts notability. Presumably whoever started this article knew a little bit more about the high school ... if so, they should've put in some actual information. As it is now, it's not encyclopedic. --Cyde Weys votetalk 04:39, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- It says it's a high school, how is that not an assertion of notability? Kappa 04:45, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- An assertion of notability generally involves more than saying something that's in the article title. Can I create a blank article Olmsted Island High School and say it should be kept because, well, it's a high school, and that's notable? There are tens of thousands, maybe even hundreds of thousands, of high schools on the planet. They don't all get to have a meaningless one sentence stub article merely stating their location. See Montgomery Blair High School for a good example of a high school article that does assert its notability. --Cyde Weys votetalk 05:30, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- A blank article should be deleted for being blank, that's nothing to do with notability. If you attack article when they are new, they will never get a chance to grow, and we will be stuck forever with exactly one article in Category:schools in Zimbabwe. Kappa 05:36, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- This isn't personal. It's about adhering to the guidelines. The article simply does not assert its notability. From WP:SCHOOL:
- A blank article should be deleted for being blank, that's nothing to do with notability. If you attack article when they are new, they will never get a chance to grow, and we will be stuck forever with exactly one article in Category:schools in Zimbabwe. Kappa 05:36, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- An assertion of notability generally involves more than saying something that's in the article title. Can I create a blank article Olmsted Island High School and say it should be kept because, well, it's a high school, and that's notable? There are tens of thousands, maybe even hundreds of thousands, of high schools on the planet. They don't all get to have a meaningless one sentence stub article merely stating their location. See Montgomery Blair High School for a good example of a high school article that does assert its notability. --Cyde Weys votetalk 05:30, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- It says it's a high school, how is that not an assertion of notability? Kappa 04:45, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- If a school article meets one or more of the following criteria, it should be kept:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- It has 3 or more full and complete sentences of verifiable, factual information that is not published solely by the school itself, or already included/better located on a district or city wiki article (ie: phone book information does not count toward the sentence total, that includes city, address, district, or phone number(s)). Such information can be included in the article but will not count toward the sentence total.
- It has one or more interwiki links (e.g. another version already exists in another language)
- It has one or more PD/GFDL/free pictures
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- If it meets none of these criteria, it should be merged into the appropriate district (or other higher-level article such as city or education in that city or region, if private), preserving all relevant content, and be redirected.
- --Cyde Weys votetalk 05:44, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
-
-
-
- Delete per nom. -- King of Hearts | (talk) 05:24, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- So we live in a world where schools in rich countries get articles because they have easy internet access, and schools in poor countries get deleted because they don't. Kappa 05:27, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- No, we live in a world where good articles get to stay and bad articles get deleted. --Cyde Weys votetalk 05:31, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- The nomination and the above vote are based on lack of internet coverage, not article quality. Kappa 05:38, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- Don't think you can speak for me, my vote actually is about article quality. Unless you're seriously trying to argue that the article in question is of "good" quality. --Cyde Weys votetalk 05:45, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- I wasn't talking about your vote, but deletion of perfectly adequate stubs about schools in developing countries also gives us an unpleasant "rich man's wikipedia" which I wouldn't feel comfortable contributing to. Kappa 05:51, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- And some people feel uncomfortable with allowing microstubs that make no attempt to assert notability. --Cyde Weys votetalk 06:02, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- I think I already mentioned that it says it's a high school, thus establishing notability. Kappa 06:17, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- And I think I already mentioned that it takes more to assert notability than merely saying that it is a highschool. --Cyde Weys votetalk 06:18, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- As you probably know, many people think high schools are notable. The article says that this is a high school. Therefore the article asserts the notability of the topic. Kappa 06:24, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- That's a terribly circular argument, and is based on a very bad logical flaw. "Many people think X implies Y. Given X, then Y." Most people once thought the Sun orbited around the Earth, too. It didn't make them right. Just because people think being a school automatically implies notability doesn't actually make it so. --Cyde Weys votetalk 19:16, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
- As you probably know, many people think high schools are notable. The article says that this is a high school. Therefore the article asserts the notability of the topic. Kappa 06:24, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- And I think I already mentioned that it takes more to assert notability than merely saying that it is a highschool. --Cyde Weys votetalk 06:18, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- I think I already mentioned that it says it's a high school, thus establishing notability. Kappa 06:17, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- And some people feel uncomfortable with allowing microstubs that make no attempt to assert notability. --Cyde Weys votetalk 06:02, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- I wasn't talking about your vote, but deletion of perfectly adequate stubs about schools in developing countries also gives us an unpleasant "rich man's wikipedia" which I wouldn't feel comfortable contributing to. Kappa 05:51, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- Don't think you can speak for me, my vote actually is about article quality. Unless you're seriously trying to argue that the article in question is of "good" quality. --Cyde Weys votetalk 05:45, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- The nomination and the above vote are based on lack of internet coverage, not article quality. Kappa 05:38, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- No, we live in a world where good articles get to stay and bad articles get deleted. --Cyde Weys votetalk 05:31, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- So we live in a world where schools in rich countries get articles because they have easy internet access, and schools in poor countries get deleted because they don't. Kappa 05:27, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- Keep and expand. Should be more info available on this important high school. -- JJay 06:19, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- "Important" high school? You don't even know anything about it! If you actually have any information on this school, by all means, go ahead and add it to the article. Otherwise, don't make stuff up about it being "important" when you really don't know. --Cyde Weys votetalk 06:20, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- Are you saying it's not important? -- JJay 06:25, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- "Important" high school? You don't even know anything about it! If you actually have any information on this school, by all means, go ahead and add it to the article. Otherwise, don't make stuff up about it being "important" when you really don't know. --Cyde Weys votetalk 06:20, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. School in Zimbabwe? Notable? N* plz. --Timecop 06:30, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- Keep article has only existed for about a week. It does currently have three sentences of seemingly factual information. On that, this AfD should be dropped. Nonetheless, the assertion that an article topic only has x amount of google hits surely should not be the standard for notability. Kappa clearly made a point regarding the role in internet access in relation to articles here. We have tons of articles on a significant amount of schools in the US, and the only thing notable about them is that they are schools in the US. If those schools can have articles for being a school, then clearly this school should be treated on an equal footing. Pepsidrinka 06:32, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- Keep per Kappa and Pepsidrinka. -- DS1953 talk 06:33, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- Keep per Kappa and Pepsidrinka; it may be impractical to apply the Google test to a subject which is located in a developing country, and this does appear to meet the current guidelines established in WP:SCH. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 07:16, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- Keep and expand per above, meets WP:SCH --Quarl 09:10, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- Strong Keep and give systematic bias a bloody punch on the nose. -- Миборовский U|T|C|E|Chugoku Banzai! 10:27, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. Keep high school articles per WP:SCH. -Rebelguys2 10:51, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. The fact that it is in Zimbabwe is not a valid reason for deleting it, and Google has its own systemic bias. Rhion 15:03, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- Keep as with American schools. Choalbaton 15:21, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- Merge with Kwekwe so that information is kept, but not spread out for reasons of posturing. If we spent 1/100th of the effort we spend arguing about schools from a fundamental point of view on expanding African entries on Wikipedia, then Kwekwe might have more than five lines of info on it. Average Earthman 15:54, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- I think merging with Kwekwe is probably the best solution, and the one that is actually supported under WP:SCH: If it meets none of these criteria, it should be merged into the appropriate district (or other higher-level article such as city or education in that city or region, if private), preserving all relevant content, and be redirected. --Cyde Weys votetalk 16:10, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- Since there are no other articles on typical schools in Zimbabwe, this information is useful to people other than just those interested in Kwekwe. Also having it separately in Category:Schools in Zimbabwe will encourage anyone examines that category to create articles on other schools in the country. Kappa 17:49, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- Keep, as per Wikipedia:Schools/Arguments#Keep. Carioca 18:35, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- Comment - There seems to be a cabal of school inclusionists coming here from Wikipedia:Watch/schoolwatch/Schools for deletion archive. I don't see much of a difference between this and a link on an external site trying to get everyone to come to an AfD page and influence the discussion. --Cyde Weys votetalk 19:06, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- Are you suggesting that "school inclusionists" don't contribute to wikipedia and are not aware of its aims and policies? Oh and that reminds me...
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletions. -- Kappa 19:16, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
-
- Contributions are not necessarily positive. Spreading information out in a thousand articles padded with ephemera is not useful if someone isn't after the ephemera. If that's your aim, well we've got that already, it's called the internet. We shouldn't be judging things on what theoretical position we have previously decided to hold, we should be judging things on what is most useful to a user of Wikipedia right now - not in some theoretical utopian future when a million other articles have been added. Of course, since I'm asking for a judgement call, judgement will differ. But I'm asking people to judge, not just say "It Has Been Written". Average Earthman 22:22, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- Firstly please remember that the people of Zimbabwe, who overwhelmingly do not have the internet, are the most likely to want to read about this school. In a theoretical future when a million other articles have been added, and if a decent proportion of them are about schools in Zimbabwe, it would be less harmful to bury this info in the town article. Right now users need to be able to find it, and they need to know that more information like this is welcome. Kappa 00:20, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
- No, firstly you should consider that the population of Kwekwe are the most likely to want to read about the school, and such people are likely to have the intelligence to notice that Kwekwe High School is in Kwekwe. If you really think people would be unable to grasp such a concept, you could put in a redirect, which I believe is the standard move when information is merged. Average Earthman 12:23, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
- When there are only two articles about schools in Zimbabwe, the most likely people to want to read either of them is people interested in schools in Zimbabwe in general, not those schools in particular. Kappa 23:49, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
- No, firstly you should consider that the population of Kwekwe are the most likely to want to read about the school, and such people are likely to have the intelligence to notice that Kwekwe High School is in Kwekwe. If you really think people would be unable to grasp such a concept, you could put in a redirect, which I believe is the standard move when information is merged. Average Earthman 12:23, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
- Firstly please remember that the people of Zimbabwe, who overwhelmingly do not have the internet, are the most likely to want to read about this school. In a theoretical future when a million other articles have been added, and if a decent proportion of them are about schools in Zimbabwe, it would be less harmful to bury this info in the town article. Right now users need to be able to find it, and they need to know that more information like this is welcome. Kappa 00:20, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
- Contributions are not necessarily positive. Spreading information out in a thousand articles padded with ephemera is not useful if someone isn't after the ephemera. If that's your aim, well we've got that already, it's called the internet. We shouldn't be judging things on what theoretical position we have previously decided to hold, we should be judging things on what is most useful to a user of Wikipedia right now - not in some theoretical utopian future when a million other articles have been added. Of course, since I'm asking for a judgement call, judgement will differ. But I'm asking people to judge, not just say "It Has Been Written". Average Earthman 22:22, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
-
- Merge with Kwekwe to retain information. colin99 19:58, 26 December 2005 (BST)
- Keep per Kappa and Pepsidrinka. This is an article about the main high school in Zimbabwe's seventh biggest city. The article is only a week old: everything has to start somewhere. Humansdorpie 21:35, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- Strong Keep as per above. Jcuk 21:59, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- Keep, google is not suitable to determine notability of a school in a developing country. Give the article time to try and develop. Evil Eye 23:39, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- Keep, notable. Christopher Parham (talk) 00:35, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
- Keep per WP:SCH as it has been sufficiently expanded to have it stand alone article. --Rob 01:36, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
- Keep, per reasons given above. — TheKMantalk 10:15, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. Clear past precedent on high schools. Also I think Zimbabwean high schools are much rarer than European and American ones. Sjakkalle (Check!) 10:33, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
- Comment "It says it's a high school, how is that not an assertion of notability?" Will we ever see the end of nonsense like this? There are indeed a few notable schools on the planet; to state that schools are notable merely for being schools ignores the fact that things are notable relative to other things. Denni ☯ 20:43, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
- Like the way that village are relative to other villages? Kappa 20:46, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
- It is hardly nonsense, it is a completely sound and reasonable statement to make, in light of the fact that not one single verifiable high school article has been deleted as a result of the 350+ schools nominated for deletion during the past year. Learn to live in harmony. Silensor 20:52, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
- That not one single school has not been deleted speaks not at all to sensibility, but rather to the action of a cabal. I will allow you to get off your high horse before I remind you that I have not voted to delete a single school in the time there has been discussion ongoing at WP:SCH. Such comments as yours, however, could cause me to reconsider my position. Denni ☯ 01:42, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
- The fact that "not one single school has been deleted in a year" is not relevent to the discussion. Most normal people have run away from the school AfF's because they are a complete waste of time. The school inclusionists have won by attrition and apathy and more importantly because rationale people, such as Denni, are not fighting the inevitable and trying to find a working solution to schools. Such a solution would prevent schools coming to AFD in the first place. The fact that the some are still on a high horse speaks volumes to the goals of the project. When will the adversarial interactions be replaced by something constructive? Again, the inevitable, "all schools are kept" is NOT a consensus it is a default. David D. (Talk) 17:36, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
- "When will the adversarial interactions be replaced by something constructive?" - good question, I'm disappointed that we are exchanging words like "nonsense" and rehashing the same old arguments for the millionth time, I thought we could have moved on by now. Kappa 23:47, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
- I'm not sure where that feeling of disappointment might come from, Kappa. Your participation in the discussions at WP:SCH was more than a tad underwhelming. Why do you suppose we're rehashing the same old arguments? I propose it is because the group of inclusionists seeking to keep school articles has not (with the notable exception of Hipocrite) made any effort whatsoever to compromise on school articles. Denni ☯ 00:34, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
- I regard merges as a form of compromise, I thought you did too. Kappa 01:17, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
- I do also. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I haven't yet seen you vote to merge. Denni ☯ 19:11, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
- To be fair that is because Kappa actually does clean up the articles that come through Afd and makes them into fairly decent stubs. However, kappa can't do every school article himself. Merge without losing information is a fine compromise and one that would easily stop AFD nominations. David D. (Talk) 19:15, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
- I do also. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I haven't yet seen you vote to merge. Denni ☯ 19:11, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
- I regard merges as a form of compromise, I thought you did too. Kappa 01:17, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
- I'm not sure where that feeling of disappointment might come from, Kappa. Your participation in the discussions at WP:SCH was more than a tad underwhelming. Why do you suppose we're rehashing the same old arguments? I propose it is because the group of inclusionists seeking to keep school articles has not (with the notable exception of Hipocrite) made any effort whatsoever to compromise on school articles. Denni ☯ 00:34, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
- "When will the adversarial interactions be replaced by something constructive?" - good question, I'm disappointed that we are exchanging words like "nonsense" and rehashing the same old arguments for the millionth time, I thought we could have moved on by now. Kappa 23:47, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
- The fact that "not one single school has been deleted in a year" is not relevent to the discussion. Most normal people have run away from the school AfF's because they are a complete waste of time. The school inclusionists have won by attrition and apathy and more importantly because rationale people, such as Denni, are not fighting the inevitable and trying to find a working solution to schools. Such a solution would prevent schools coming to AFD in the first place. The fact that the some are still on a high horse speaks volumes to the goals of the project. When will the adversarial interactions be replaced by something constructive? Again, the inevitable, "all schools are kept" is NOT a consensus it is a default. David D. (Talk) 17:36, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
- That not one single school has not been deleted speaks not at all to sensibility, but rather to the action of a cabal. I will allow you to get off your high horse before I remind you that I have not voted to delete a single school in the time there has been discussion ongoing at WP:SCH. Such comments as yours, however, could cause me to reconsider my position. Denni ☯ 01:42, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
- Keep as per the clear past precedent on high schools (see above). Silensor 20:52, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
- Keep High Schools --Jaranda wat's sup 23:07, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
- Mmmrph I give up. The cabal wins again. --Cyde Weys votetalk 01:34, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
- keep and please help stop systemic biases here Yuckfoo 18:24, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. All schools are notable enough for a truly great encyclopaedia. —RaD Man (talk) 23:35, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
- No they aren't. But this one is and meets WP:SCH so keep.Gateman1997 23:45, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
- Keep Countering systemic bias. Hipocrite - «Talk» 15:47, 31 December 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.
