Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prince George Secondary 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. Wizardman 19:35, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Prince George Secondary School

Prince George Secondary School (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

A not particularly notable public high school. Delete. Lawrence Cohen 14:53, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

  • Keep High schools are definately notable enough. STORMTRACKER 94 15:04, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per Jimbo's ruling obiter dicta, which I agree with, it is not approreiate to go around upsetting people over such trivial things, since High schools are almost always notable. Lobojo (talk) 16:28, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
I didn't see that ruling--which was it? Lawrence Cohen 16:34, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
He basicly said that people should be able to add their own high schools as it dosent do any harm, are probably notable, and that is just WP:DICKY to make a big fuss about it. Lobojo (talk) 16:52, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Here it is for you [1]. Lobojo (talk) 17:35, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete/Merge It contains a sentence, if thats all we have to say about the school, it really isn't notable nor does it serve any purpose other than a Family Guy-esque shouting of 'Thats our school!'. Narson (talk) 16:38, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Are you suggesting that we delete every stub in wikipedia? Lobojo (talk) 16:52, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
No, but a stub with no sources and no assertion of notability beyond being a school? Yes. Narson (talk) 16:56, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
You implyedly concede that being a high school is itself an assertion of notability with the word "beyond" and I agree with you. Why not just leave it and probably within a few months time other people will find it when they search in google and improve the article, essentially high schools are notable, and always meet the primary natability criterion, since they are often in the local press. And even if it does not improve what harm is it doing? Here it is for you [2]. Lobojo (talk) 17:35, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
No, I am merely accepting that some people seem to believe that being a high school is a claim to notability and that no claim is being made beyond that. Please don't try and shoe horn arguments into my mouth that I didn't make. It isn't my job to tell an article how notable it is, it is the articles job to tell me how notable it is. If the people who so vigorously defend schools from AFDs acctually spent their time doing the supposedly two seconds of work to verify the notability and put the refs in the article, we would all save ourselves this rigamarole. (And while I respect Jimbo, not every word he utters everywhere should be immediatly written down and accepted as strictest law. He is not the messiah, he is a very groovy boy. Even he gets the right to just, you know, talk. Without the awed hush and booming voice.) Narson (talk) 17:46, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
I couldn't diagree with you more. He heals the sickly, feeds the hungry, and gives porn to the horny. He has also often denied being The True Messiah, and only The True Messiah denies His own divinity. Lobojo (talk) 18:22, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. —Camaron1 | Chris (talk) 17:05, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep - let's avoid going around these houses again and move on. Experience has shown that all such high schools can be sourced up to meet WP:N and my research shows that this is no exception. TerriersFan (talk) 17:26, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep - Pretty much all high school articles brought to AFD are kept, as they are eventually established as being notable. Deletion is definitely not necessary, as if a school is not notable the article on it should be re-directed to the appropriate district article. I have done a search and found some sources which while not substantial are a start: [3], [4]. I am sure more can be found offline that would allow the article to pass WP:N. Camaron1 | Chris (talk) 17:33, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per consensus. Must we have this same argument every single day? --SmashvilleBONK! 18:28, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment also note that in 1990 there was a major news story at the school when a bus with kids on was hijacked. Very notable school, there are 3 current mentions in google news and a further 8 in the archive. Lobojo (talk) 18:32, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep - Personally, I think someone who is voting purely based upon writing which has been authored by Jimbo should take a step back and think about what it is they are actually voting, and why they are voting (keep arguement "per Jimbo's ruling" is ridiculous in the sense that we all have autonomy and we all have the capability of making our own educated decision about the future of articles, and this more so applies to high school articles where the notability criteria is most controversial). I do personally agree with the comments made by Narson and I think dismissing his opinion is outright rude. Although the article hasn't asserted notability in its current state, in my own experience of high school articles (I have authored several to a reasonable state which I believe are sufficient to warrant their existance), they all likely do have notability in some form, it just requires someone to put some work in and find the sources; I don't think this article is any exception to the rule, and the rule certainly shouldn't be based and defended by something 1 person, however highly they are regarded (and whom I have much respect for), wrote. I can understand Narson's viewpoint, but unfortunately high school notability is one which I tend to defend in favour for inclusion. Bungle (talk • contribs) 18:36, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
    I am not voting based on what Jimbo said. I was merely pointing out that our most senior contributor takes my position, which is bascily that almost all high schools are notable, and that "www is a high school" is suffiecient to asert notability. You should not mischarachterise it like this, that is rude. You really don't need to call me rude over nothing, I'm not going to start flaming with you though. Lobojo (talk) 18:46, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
I apologise if my comments offended you in any way, but I was commenting from what I was reading above, as the general impression I was getting from a few comments was that they were heavily influenced by that which I mentioned previously, which if that had been the case (which you corrected as not being), then I felt that to have been rude towards someone with their own comment. You don't need to convince me of the notability stance - I agree with it myself, albeit maybe not as strongly and maybe not for all the same reasons; it was difficult for me not to interpret it any other way when you start a vote with "Keep per Jimbo's ruling". Anyhow, the likely outcome will be keep which I would not argue with. Bungle (talk • contribs) 19:00, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per A7: no claim of notability. CRGreathouse (t | c) 19:22, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment - A7 does not apply to schools. TerriersFan (talk) 02:28, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Sure it does, why would you say that? CRGreathouse (t | c) 14:59, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
  • What, you mean the comment added randomly last week? [5] When it emerges from the revert-froth maybe I'll consider it. CRGreathouse (t | c) 20:15, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep since all high schools have enough available sourcing to make them notable. However, I wouldn't mind redirecting this article to its school district until someone decides to make something out of this page. Noroton (talk) 20:03, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep this particularly notable public high school. Coccyx Bloccyx (talk) 20:25, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep - Hopefully this will be a bump for someone to expand it, but it has no business being deleted. matt91486 (talk) 23:10, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge to School District 57 Prince George. No content beyond what is appropriate in the target. No references, secondary or otherwise. Does not deserve its own article. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:38, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
    • As a redirect, it will remain a bump waiting for the discovery of sourced content. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:02, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
    • Keep, based on improvements (added content and references), and improve and expand. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:16, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep ~NeonFire372~ (talk) 23:57, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. —Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:18, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. Improvements to the article now demonstrate notability. • Gene93k (talk) 03:11, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. GJ (talk) 21:00, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per (oh my gosh, I thought we already hashed this out) the overwhelming concensus that it is convenient to assume that all high schools are notable, (if the article is more than a sub-stub, and it can be verified to actually exist) to avoid the drama of a drawn-out AfD in every case. This article is like most other high school articles that we have already kept, each with the nearly-identical arguments. There is nothing new here as far as deletion rationale to make this article stand-out from the de facto standard. JERRY talk contribs 15:45, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
If this is policy, shouldn't it be recorded at Wikipedia:Notability (schools)? Lawrence Cohen 17:43, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
It was in the original draft of the guidelines and was carried forward to the then Option 1 before Option 1 was arbitrarily removed by an editor. A watered down version is still there. If you want to beef it up again feel free :-) TerriersFan (talk) 21:53, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
OK, well just a point of clarification; I did not say it was policy. I said it was a de facto standard. That means that my observation is that all prods on high schools get removed, all speedy's get denied, and all high schools with extremely small number of exceptions get kept after sometimes long, drawn out AfD's. NOw as to your question; "Should this be listed at WP:SCHOOL?" My answer, which is my opinion, is YES. Now, a proposal has been made to end this silliness and make a guideline to stop wasting everyone's time, but this proposal has not become a guideline yet, because of minor disagreements in wording an extended policy to other classes of schools that are in the same proposal. So it stands as a de facto standard, because policy/ guideline or not, this is what actually happens. Since we know it happens, we should avoid the drama and just acknowledge that all high schools can be assumed to be notable if they actually exist, and their articles should be kept if they are more than just a non-informational listing-type sub-stub. This article and school meet that de facto standard with no problems.JERRY talk contribs 05:16, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
It contains more than the sub-stub like listing now because of the AFD and the attention it brought, I suspect. Look at its pre-AFD form and its current, while it is still, IMO, lacking anything to justify its own article rather than an entry in the school district or town article. Perhaps AfDs can be a boon to the articles as well as a bane? Narson (talk) 17:33, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
You are absolutely correct. I have seen it many times over that articles get improved because they get attention while at AfD. JERRY talk contribs 04:33, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete as there is nothing notable about this school. Perhaps the consensus is not as overwhelming as assumed? Springnuts (talk) 17:42, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. Verifiable and NPOV. DoubleBlue (Talk) 22:47, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep still this tired old debate, virtually all high schools are notable imo. RMHED (talk) 16:57, 1 January 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.