Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert T. Hill Middle 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 no consensus. Mangojuicetalk 19:26, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Robert T. Hill Middle School

Robert T. Hill Middle School (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Non notable middle school, no assertion of notability. Vegaswikian (talk) 08:15, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

  • Strong Keep Some schools are in, some are out. What the point of that. Keep them all. scope_creep (talk) 12:04, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
    • I like it is not a strong reason to keep. Yes, some schools are kept and others not. If they are notable, they are kept. If not they are deleted. The only exception is the very rough consensus that high schools are likely to be considered notable and as long as the article has substance it is likely to be kept. All other schools need to clearly assert notability. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:17, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletions. —Camaron1 | Chris 12:25, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep based on disregard all proposals in this "batch". I typed in the name of "Quintanilla Middle School" (a school proposed by this nominator) into Google. Not a lot of hits and this one is included. Obviosly a unique experiment with own web page etc. Surely the page could have been found by this nominator. If we have time to delete them then we need to check their notability. Victuallers (talk) 14:56, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
    • Nominations are based on the content of the article. It is that simple. If the article does not assert notability, then it meets the criteria for deletion. What exists on Google is not in anyway, shape or form, what is in the article. I guess by your logic we could make every article notable by linking to Google instead of writing our own. The articles were and still are not notable. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:09, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete content-free article. Since this batch of schools has essentially no information in each article, a single article for the district might be appropriate, with a list of feeder patterns. Of course I don't think that's the case -- I don't see how feeder patters are encyclopedic in the first place. Removing that and the boilerplate, there's just nothing left. Why are we keeping an essentially empty article for a non-notable school? CRGreathouse (t | c) 15:28, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge into school district. - Mgm|(talk) 15:40, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Redirect/Merge or Delete into district. Arguments for 'keep' fail to provide an argument that pertains to this particular article or an established consensus. No notability. Epthorn (talk) 11:50, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep this has enough hits and is notable to the area but merge is a good idea too yuckfoo (talk) 01:39, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep - plenty of sources from which the article can be expanded here and the school was embroiled in a notable sex scandal here. TerriersFan (talk) 17:25, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment - I have now added the necessary sources to meet WP:N and am adding more as we speak ... TerriersFan (talk) 19:10, 26 November 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.