Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tabb 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. Please defer merge related discussion to article talk. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 01:06, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Tabb Middle School
Non-noteworthy middle school. Article is a directory entry, containing nothing but basic location and attendance data, and is unsupported by reliable outside sources. Prod removed without comment. Shimeru 00:07, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Keep or merge per WP:SCHOOLS and/or WP:LOCAL. More than a directory entry. Doesn't actually have any indication of the school's size, unfortunately. Kappa 00:22, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- What criterion of the ludicrously-over-inclusive WP:SCHOOLS does this school meet? It's a middle school less than 50 years old with no implied notability, no listed notable alumni (which, in and of itself, does not confirm a school's notability, anyway)... how can you !vote to keep based on that criteria? And how does WP:LOCAL support the existence of this article? Wouldn't it first support a merge into a school district or town article? -- Kicking222 01:08, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Add parentheses to my vote as appropriate. Kappa 01:13, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- What criterion of the ludicrously-over-inclusive WP:SCHOOLS does this school meet? It's a middle school less than 50 years old with no implied notability, no listed notable alumni (which, in and of itself, does not confirm a school's notability, anyway)... how can you !vote to keep based on that criteria? And how does WP:LOCAL support the existence of this article? Wouldn't it first support a merge into a school district or town article? -- Kicking222 01:08, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- keep. I'm not going over the whole schools arguments again. Nominator, please read WP:POINT and consider the number of times a fight has been started by nominating a school, then connect the two. Unfocused 00:32, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- How in the hell can you claim this is a WP:POINT nomination without any rationale? -- Kicking222 01:10, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- How in the hell? I suggested nominator read WP:POINT to understand why nominating this might be a bad idea. Once aware of the fight that is likely to ensue, perhaps an attempt to either improve the article himself, or a try to bring it to the attention of the Wikiproject Schools is a better first course of action. This argument has been burning steadily for over two years that I've been here, and I see no reason to throw gasoline at the other side's campfire when you know for a fact that there are dozens of good faith contributors willing to address shortcomings in this particular class of articles. Nominating one article is not WP:POINT, but a streak of four, if continued much beyond that, certainly is, and looks like the start of a certain "war of attrition" tactic tried (unsuccessfully) about two years ago that many WP editors still have bitter memories of. I have no desire for anyone else to go through that type of experience here. Unfocused 03:57, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Comment It has been well established that high schools will never be deleted. In my experience, middle schools and lower have been deleted more often than kept. Resolute 04:48, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Do you remember when junior colleges were deleted far more often than kept, and high schools almost always deleted? I do. Do you remember when high schools were deleted far more often than kept, and primary schools always deleted? I do. It's been my observation that currently these are more often merged or kept, and I don't see good reason to think that's a bad thing. However, constantly arguing about it is definitely a bad thing. The simplest solution is laissez-faire wikipedia editing. Don't start wars and we won't be warring.Unfocused 06:02, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- One could just as easily argue that constantly arguing about process is worse. An AFD can be perfunctory and non-combative whatever the result. --Dhartung | Talk 06:44, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Except for the fact that your solution destroys content and alienates good faith editors simply because they have different interests than you, you could be right. Unfocused 01:29, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- Oh please. We all have areas of interest that aren't notable. I happen to enjoy palindromes for example. That doesn't mean I make biographies on palindromists who aren't otherwise notable or anything similar. Similarly, there are number theory topics which I find interesting but would clearly not deserve articles. "I am interested in X" is not an inclusion criterion, and no one should be "alienated" from it. Saying that the removal of unencyclopedic not-notable material "destroys content" misses the point. JoshuaZ 01:34, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- Oh, please, indeed. How about searching Amazon for encyclopedia. You'll find 121,736 books there, some serious, some scholarly, because it's more than just Britannica. Some of us want Wikipedia to be inclusive of "encyclopedia of educational institutions", a perfectly fine and legitimate topic for encyclopedic coverage. Quite frankly, if you can create neutral, verifiable biographies of palindromists, I'd be happy to read them here. They've made a unique contribution to the English language. Unfocused 05:28, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- Oh please. We all have areas of interest that aren't notable. I happen to enjoy palindromes for example. That doesn't mean I make biographies on palindromists who aren't otherwise notable or anything similar. Similarly, there are number theory topics which I find interesting but would clearly not deserve articles. "I am interested in X" is not an inclusion criterion, and no one should be "alienated" from it. Saying that the removal of unencyclopedic not-notable material "destroys content" misses the point. JoshuaZ 01:34, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- Except for the fact that your solution destroys content and alienates good faith editors simply because they have different interests than you, you could be right. Unfocused 01:29, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- One could just as easily argue that constantly arguing about process is worse. An AFD can be perfunctory and non-combative whatever the result. --Dhartung | Talk 06:44, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Do you remember when junior colleges were deleted far more often than kept, and high schools almost always deleted? I do. Do you remember when high schools were deleted far more often than kept, and primary schools always deleted? I do. It's been my observation that currently these are more often merged or kept, and I don't see good reason to think that's a bad thing. However, constantly arguing about it is definitely a bad thing. The simplest solution is laissez-faire wikipedia editing. Don't start wars and we won't be warring.Unfocused 06:02, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Comment It has been well established that high schools will never be deleted. In my experience, middle schools and lower have been deleted more often than kept. Resolute 04:48, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- How in the hell? I suggested nominator read WP:POINT to understand why nominating this might be a bad idea. Once aware of the fight that is likely to ensue, perhaps an attempt to either improve the article himself, or a try to bring it to the attention of the Wikiproject Schools is a better first course of action. This argument has been burning steadily for over two years that I've been here, and I see no reason to throw gasoline at the other side's campfire when you know for a fact that there are dozens of good faith contributors willing to address shortcomings in this particular class of articles. Nominating one article is not WP:POINT, but a streak of four, if continued much beyond that, certainly is, and looks like the start of a certain "war of attrition" tactic tried (unsuccessfully) about two years ago that many WP editors still have bitter memories of. I have no desire for anyone else to go through that type of experience here. Unfocused 03:57, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- How in the hell can you claim this is a WP:POINT nomination without any rationale? -- Kicking222 01:10, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delete No claim of notability. Schools do not all need Wikipedia articles. They may be mentioned in an article about the city.Edison 00:40, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per Edison and per everything I said above. -- Kicking222 01:08, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Keep. Please take a look at the current version of the article. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 01:19, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delete I looked. Claims some extremely minor distinctions. Not notable. JChap2007 02:15, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Weak keep seems to assert notability now. Kavadi carrier 02:19, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Keep per TruthbringerToronto, this is now a valid stub. I also have the impression that schools are generally granted a lower "threshhold of notability" --Doc Tropics Message in a bottle 02:24, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Comment Only in so far as schools have a lot of editors who insist they should. There is no lgoical basis for this. JoshuaZ 23:41, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delete Even with those minor assertions, its still not notable. TJ Spyke 02:46, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Keep per TruthbringerToronto. The evidence of verifiability with sources in triplicate as well as minor assertions of notability make this a firm keep for me. Yamaguchi先生 04:19, 4 November 2006
- Keep, after rewrite, most schools are notable. --Terence Ong (T | C) 04:47, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delete Claims to notability are not that great, even after recent edits. Resolute 04:48, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delete Very little distinction between this and most other schools of a similar level. Not notable. Valrith 05:21, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Keep - I found this: http://yorkcountyschools.org/students/attendanceZones.html - More verifiable information! More stuff to add to this article! WhisperToMe 05:26, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delete, I'm not ready to give a pass to middle schools. The "honors" listings are not really unique to the school. --Dhartung | Talk 06:44, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Keep after the rewrite. ALKIVAR™ ☢ 07:17, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Speedy close This has the S word in the title so will never get consensus delete. It can go one of two ways: merge, or expand. Neither requires admin powers. Guy 10:58, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delete nn IronDuke 19:36, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
&Delete Per Dhartung and others. Nothing about this school is notable. JoshuaZ 23:41, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Keep - middle schools are notable. --Ineffable3000 23:54, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Comment Do you have some reasoning or basis behind that claim? JoshuaZ 23:59, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Comment One needn't go any further than User:Silensor/Schools or read the actual article to see that. Silensor 01:57, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delete Nothing against school pages, but this one doesn't assert notability at all and it appears that's because it isn't notable. --SandyDancer 00:05, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- Keep per Yamaguchi and others. Nothing about this school is non-notable. Silensor 01:59, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Angus McLellan (Talk) 18:00, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- Merge - add some of this material into the Tabb, Virginia article and change this to a redirect. --JohnDBuell 18:49, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- Keep article will benefit from improvement and makes explicit claims of notability. Alansohn 18:50, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- Keep worthwhile article on notable subject. The precedent for keeping all verifiable K-12 schools was set some time ago, despite the odd exception (usually caused by clusters of non-editors). Removing this article, simply harms the project. If anybody has a policy based reason for deletion (e.g. verifiability), please say so, as that would actually be worth discussion. --Rob 19:40, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
-
- Worthwhile? Debatable. Notable? Only if you hold as an article of faith that "all schools are notable". I went to at least one school which is not only not notable, it is pretty much unverifiable. Removing it harms the project? Proof by assertion; there is no demonstrable harm from not having somehting which is trivially easy to obtain on the internet from the original source. Precedent? Yes, utter intransigence from the Church of the Inherently Notable School has made it impossible to remove any school article, but that is not a good thing, it's a triumph of sheer blood-mindedness over numerous offered compromises. Clusters of non-editors? Nice ad-hominem, but baseless. Given that the article is going to be kept anyway, Rob, I really can't imagine why you bothered writing the above since it appears calculated solely to add fuel to the flames. Guy 20:21, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
-
- Hmm JzG you are aware that not every human being on the planet has internet access? Kappa 20:27, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- If you want to use the analogy of a body, those who insist on deleting items in face of known and certain opposition are the "blood-minded" cutters. You already have the ability and community support to merge ALL of these articles into their parent school districts and localities until they become large enough to warrant breaking out. Just copy the whole article as written, paste it into the district article, then delete the stuff you don't like. That way the detail remains in the edit history of the district. Finally, go back and change the source article to a redirect. It's really quite simple. Yet you insist that deletion is the only solution you're willing to live with. From my side, it appears you're the one unwilling to compromise. Unfocused 20:57, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- A request for calm please. That said, I take some issue with the claim that the deletions are caused by "clusters of non-editors" since some people (such as myself) who often argue for deletion of schools do so while helping to improve the school articles in question and have helped improve schools that we think should be kept. Furthermore, Rob's comment isn't very relevant in that this isn't a K-12 school but a middle school. As to Unfocused's comments, we don't have a strong consensus for that, and the merging of many school articles would create essentially directories in violation of WP:NOT and would simply duplicate information that can be generally found on the district website. JoshuaZ 21:39, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- FYI, "K-12 schools" is short for "elementary, middle, and/or high schools". It makes clear the reference to "school" doesn't include pre-school, after-school, home-school, grad school, night school or some other "school". It doesn't mean a school necessarily teaches every grade from K to 12, inclusive (it may just teach some). Some people use the term "grade school", but often that's used in a less inclusive manner. If there's a better/clearer term, you wish me to use, let me know. But AFAIK, middle schools are a subset of K-12 schools. And that was what that component of my comments, was referring to. There is the precedent I indicated. --Rob 22:58, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for the clarification. Inquiry, do you mean to say that you think that any kindergarten should be kept per current precedent? JoshuaZ 23:06, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- There's no precedent for K-only inclusion, and I expect such an article to be deleted normally. I'm not aware of a single perfect commonly used term that precisely identify those schools, which we have precedent for keeping. "K-12 school" is close, but not perfect. I suppose "1-12" would be more accurate, but I've never seen anybody use the term "1-12". For any term, there's probably extra qualifications needed. For instance, when I say "school", I normally mean "real, full-time, accredited, and verifiable", even if I don't say so. --Rob 23:45, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for the clarification. Inquiry, do you mean to say that you think that any kindergarten should be kept per current precedent? JoshuaZ 23:06, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- FYI, "K-12 schools" is short for "elementary, middle, and/or high schools". It makes clear the reference to "school" doesn't include pre-school, after-school, home-school, grad school, night school or some other "school". It doesn't mean a school necessarily teaches every grade from K to 12, inclusive (it may just teach some). Some people use the term "grade school", but often that's used in a less inclusive manner. If there's a better/clearer term, you wish me to use, let me know. But AFAIK, middle schools are a subset of K-12 schools. And that was what that component of my comments, was referring to. There is the precedent I indicated. --Rob 22:58, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- A request for calm please. That said, I take some issue with the claim that the deletions are caused by "clusters of non-editors" since some people (such as myself) who often argue for deletion of schools do so while helping to improve the school articles in question and have helped improve schools that we think should be kept. Furthermore, Rob's comment isn't very relevant in that this isn't a K-12 school but a middle school. As to Unfocused's comments, we don't have a strong consensus for that, and the merging of many school articles would create essentially directories in violation of WP:NOT and would simply duplicate information that can be generally found on the district website. JoshuaZ 21:39, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- Keep. Cribcage 05:24, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- Keep due to the rewrite. --Myles Long 17:35, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
-
- Comment if this school wasn't in the USA, it would be deleted. --SandyDancer 19:55, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- I don't think that's accurate. At this point schools outside the US are kept about as often as schools within the US. JoshuaZ 20:28, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- Comment if this school wasn't in the USA, it would be deleted. --SandyDancer 19:55, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- Keep Who would trust an encylopedia that doesn't mention your own school - what else have they censored? --Mike 18:11, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delete nn school. Carlossuarez46 21:57, 7 November 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.
