Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Staten Island Academy

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. Mailer Diablo 22:45, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Staten Island Academy

delete - slander Mela23 04:33, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

• Is not a notable school.
• Article is currently blank, but previous versions of the article reveal a pattern of POV statements, ridiculous claims, and general nonsense. I don't think this is salvageable. Delete. --Elkman - ^(talk) 05:10, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep and write a good, serious article to deter future mischief. It's a real school that is notable and merits an article under our school policy. At least leave open for recreation. Daniel Case 05:22, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Daniel Case --TBC^{??? ??? ???} 05:27, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep notable real school.Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 11:27, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
• Strong keep and put it on watchlist. It's a real school, and a proneness to vandalism shouldn't bar it from being documented on wikipedia. I'll keep it on my watchlist and revert all crap edits. Bobby P. Smith Sr. Jr. 12:53, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete it. It's a blank page! Brian G. Crawford 15:02, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep No longer blank. If it is deleted, it is sure to be recreated. Bhoeble 15:25, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
• Perhaps expanding it from a sub-stub would be a good move if anyone believes it's notable. Average Earthman 22:35, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep all verifiable schools as per Wiki:Schools Jcuk 23:10, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep I elaborated a bit on the stub. If getting vandalized repeatedly was a reason for deletion, we'd have a very small encyclopedia. I think it is easily salvagable, the school's information is easily verifyable if a couple serious editors took the time to do it. Though I do question its notability, but standard operating procedure seems to be to add just about every school whether it is really all that notable or not. -Dawson 23:20, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
• keep this school is important to document Yuckfoo 23:57, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep School obviously notable; article, though brief, has been fixed. ProhibitOnions 00:03, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, article looks fine in its current state. WP:SCH is pretty light on notability standards. Kuru ^talk 05:02, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Notable --Masssiveego 08:10, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
• keep Notable school. Roodog2k 15:44, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Notable. ςפקιДИτς ☺ ☻ 01:57, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep and allow for organic growth. Bahn Mi 02:12, 23 March 2006 (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.