Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Montclaire Elementary School (2nd nomination)

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 delete. Wizardman 16:44, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Montclaire Elementary School

Montclaire Elementary School (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Deletion nomination This is the second time this article has been nominated for deletion. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Montclaire Elementary School. This version was prodded, but that prod was removed WITHOUT fixing any of the problems noted. The article is about an entity that lacks any references to extensive, reliable, third-party sources. Should be deleted again for that reason. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jayron32 (talk • contribs) 19:39, 23 December 2007

• Comment Is this version the same as the previously deleted version? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 20:24, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
  • I have no idea, as I have no access to the previously deleted version. However, we can safely assume it is not BETTER than the previous version. Really... --Jayron32|talk|contribs 02:10, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
• Delete article that fails to demonstrate any notability per WP:N. Mh29255 (talk) 07:50, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletions. —Camaron1 | Chris (talk) 13:44, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. CRGreathouse (t | c) 17:58, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Seems to be a lot of schools linking around here, all of some reason with claims to be really special. Someones been busy. Greswik (talk) 17:14, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
• Comment: This is not a re-creation of the formerly deleted content, but a poorer version. However, this version does have a minor statement of notability (unverified) that the original lacked: "ranked 1st of 25 schools in the Cupertino Union School District". --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 20:02, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
• Note: WikiProject San Francisco Bay Area has been informed of this ongoing discussion. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 20:02, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, non-notable. AnteaterZot (talk) 08:04, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
• Keep This nomination does not seem to comply with Wikipedia:Deletion policy. First, there is no Policy that requires "references to extensive, reliable, third-party sources" [emphasis added], which is the only rationale offered by the nominator. WP:V and WP:RS can not reasonably be expanded to that language as a justification, and lack of consensus about the number and stature of independent sources required to establich the "notability" of a school is one of the issues that keeps a notability guideline for schools from being established. Second, the Prod previously posted by the nominator stated "Non notable elementary school. If it IS notable, than reliable secondary sources would exist. Please provide those sources before removing this notice. See WP:N for more information." There are always a multitude of sources for American public schools that meet the standards of WP:V and WP:RS, which is all that is required to meet WP:N—there is no higher standard of notability for schools. In the San Francisco Bay Area many such sources are available online and can be easily discovered, including State and Federal reports on every public school. Third, in response to the Prod, the creator of the article, who has joined only the day before, appears to have attempted to comply by adding a link to the Cupertino Union School District's webpage for this school; although that is less than perfect, the website of an independent local government is a perfectly reasonable source of objective information about itself and its operations, as long as the fluff and puffery is avoided. Fourth, in posting this AfD, the nominator has shown no signs of considering the alternatives provided at WP:DP—he did not edit it except to add the Prod and AfD templates; he did not propose a merger or move any of the useful information to the District article, which currently provides no information about individual schools except their names; and he did not intitiate any discussion on the article talk page after the creator had edited the page and removed the Prod (discussion with the creator is also advised in WP:N, as is merger); Fifth, he did not notify the creator, User:Amzo, of the AfD, as suggested in WP:AFD; for whatever reason, Amzo has not made any contributions since 12/22, so such courtesy might have been pointless.--Hjal (talk) 09:02, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
• redirect to district per the de-facto guideline that seems to be gaining momentum at WP:SCHOOL. JERRY ^talk _contribs 15:19, 29 December 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.