Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Timberview Middle School

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. Merging is ruled out by WP:V due to the lack of reliable sources, particularly as it appears that the text may have been copy-pasted from the article of another school. Sandstein 17:46, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Timberview Middle School

Timberview Middle School (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

the article is a direct, near verbatim copy of Eagleview Middle School, notability Chris 17:25, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

• Delete unless sourced quickly. The school may or may not be notable, and I'm not doubting the creator's good faith, but the fact that this is an unsourced article with most of its content copied from Eagleview Middle School makes it difficult to trust. I've just fixed one reference to the name of the school as "Eagleview Middle School" – if the article gets that wrong, then everything taken unchanged from the template article is dubious. Were both schools established in 1986? Do both offer Spanish "exploratories" and teacher-coached wrestling? Maybe so, but I'm not going to take the article's word for it. Either sources should be added for all content, or the article should be restarted with original content. EALacey 21:05, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
• Comment. These schools appear to be in the same district and, from what I can find on their websites, they do indeed both do pretty much the same things (including the Spanish exploratories and wrestling). The only thing I can't corroborate is the founding date. As for whether it's notable, though - it seems policy has changed about schools since I last read it, so I don't feel qualified to say. -- Mithent 22:03, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
• Merge/Redirect to Academy School District 20. All school districts are notable. Most high schools are notable. Some middle schools are notable. Despite a search using Google and Google News/Archive, little was found that would be sources for notability (though see this search for some glimmers of hope). This school does not seem to have any distinguishing characteristics (e.g., recognition by the Blue Ribbon Schools Program) to establish notability. Merging/redirecting will allow any useful data to be retained, and allow history to be kept in the event that additional material becomes available in the future to establish notability. Alansohn 23:14, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete as NN. Comparing the two articles line by line, this is not exactly a copy. There are several possibilities, depending on what the situation is in the RW. Assuming that their web pages are true representations of reality, what it seems to have happened, is that someone interested in schools in Colorado Springs, decided to have articles for all the schools, and constructed a template to be filled in with the appropriate details. all the schools do have the same opening time, they apparently have the same program, the same clubs, the same classes, the same type of honor rolls, and all are top performing schools in the state assessment. What is different is the enrollment, number of teachers, and names of administrators. And, yes, the school colors.

This is where the idea that all (or most) middle schools are notable has gotten us: directory information disguised as articles, and presented as at length in what is supposed to be an encyclopedia.

It doesn't have to be this way. Looking at their web pages, the web pages and the schools are very different. The pages were clearly designed and implemented by different people, at different times, with different amounts of sophistication. By human beings, doing creative work the way the web encourages. But for us, they figure they don't need all that. copy and paste will do for the standards they think we have. I'm glad Chris was clever enough to catch them. And I hope we learn from it. DGG 03:42, 30 April 2007 (UTC) DGG 04:56, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletions. -- Butseriouslyfolks 04:15, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:N and WP:V. I am opposed to merging as none of the facts are supported by reliable sources. --Butseriouslyfolks 04:18, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete -per DGG's comments.. He put it nicely. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TREYWiki (talk • contribs)
• Delete per above, fails WP:V and WP:N. I likewise oppose a merge per Butseriouslyfolks, and I've gotten really leery about how many of these schools seem to sport "top performing" assessments or awards. Sounds like a classic case of grade inflation to me.  RGTraynor  17:34, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Reply The smarmy sarcasm aside, an alternative explanation is that articles are being created for notable schools which have "top performing" assessments or awards. While notability has not been established here, as I indicated above, each and every article must be addressed on its own merits. Alansohn 17:44, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
    • That would wash if the articles were created with the citations in place, but that hasn't been the case, has it? Nor have the original creators seemed aware of the citations. The citations have only appeared in the wake of AfDs, upon which point a startling number of the articles sprout "Blue Ribbon" awards (added by the same few knowledgeable editors who are not, in the main, the creators of the articles in question) that purportedly only are achieved by 5% of schools, the notability thereof which has been waved around without the least degree of critical inquiry. So ... if we're talking about addressing the merits, let's source the merits of these awards, shall we?  RGTraynor  17:56, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
      • There is no rule or policy whatsoever that requires information about awards being added before an AfD starts, and your implication that these awards and citations have been suspiciously manufactured (using such phrases as "startling number", "sprout", "purportedly" and "waved around") is a staggering violation of assume good faith. Deletionsists have an easy job at AfD time; just type the word delete and put three quotes on either side. Those who have an interest in seeing worthy articles retained can say that the article is fine as is, or must do the often difficult work of digging through to see if there are any additional items of merit that might distinguish the school as notable. One of the first places that I check is the listings of schools recognized by the Blue Ribbon Schools Program, and if the school has been recognized I will be certain to add the source to the article, together with sources that demonstrate the notability of the award. I also read the article and check the school's web site to see if there are any unsupported claims of notability, for which reliable and verifiable sources can be identified, and those sources will then be added. I will then do searches on Google, Google News, Google News Archive, News Library and LexisNexis (when available) as part of an effort to identify other characteristics that might demonstrate notability. It's hard work trying to improve articles, especially when the gun of an AfD is pointed at your head and there are far too many people who will vote to delete an article simply because an AfD has been created. All that needs to be done by even the most rabid deletionist who doubts the integrity of the added claims of notability when an article has been improved, is to check the sources. I wish I had the time to verify every single school article to add sources and confirm notability before AfDs are created and I do so for a those schools articles in my area. Unfortunately, the AfD process can be a rather effective trigger to improve articles that have sat unimproved for extended periods of time. As such your snide insinuations are completely and entirely unjustified. Alansohn 18:20, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
        • Smarmy? Rabid? Snide? Please ease up on the namecalling. By the way, an AfD is hardly a gun (unless of course you're keeping score and taking it personally). If an article is deleted for lack of notability, but it can later be shown that the subject is notable, the article can be created anew. --Butseriouslyfolks 03:22, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
          • No kidding. When this Blue Ribbon Award is cited as prima facie proof of notability, backed with the repeated claim that it is given only to 5% of all schools, but this award has been cited in nearly ten times that many recent secondary school AfDs, then a good hard look at the bonafides is not merely proper, but is our responsibility. Why there is such passionate resistance to doing so I can only speculate. In any event, the "worst" result that can happen even from the perspective of the most virulent inclusionist is that some middle school doesn't (perhaps only temporarily) have a Wikipedia article. Somehow I am sure it will manage to educate kids nonetheless.  RGTraynor  14:28, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
            • In an AfD in which the only point of discussion has been how to best eliminate the article, you felt the need to insert the unnecessary statement that "I've gotten really leery about how many of these schools seem to sport "top performing" assessments or awards", using scare quotes to imply that false claims of notability have been made here or elsewhere. You have repeatedly made unsupported accusations about additional sources and claims of notability added to articles after an AfD has started, implying that the claims of notability are false or manufactured, yet have offered nothing other than your conspiratorial suppositions to back up the multiple claims. You have carefully chosen such phrases as "startling number", "sprout", "purportedly" and "waved around" to imply that the claims of notability have been pulled out of thin air. In every single case in which I have added a claim of notability, it has been backed up with rather clear sources to support and demonstrate such notability. If you truly believe that the citations added for the Blue Ribbon Schools Program (or other claims of notability) are false, I strongly suggest you get some proof about this rampant falsification scheme. Not only is there no "passionate resistance" to investigating these claims, I have pleaded with you to have the decency to follow through with an appropriate investigation of the bona fides of the claims made. By your logic, we should just allow nominators to delete articles on demand, after all what's the big deal of one less article. As an alternative, we can evaluate each article on its merits, including accepting the staggeringly unbelievable possibility that an article created by a sixth grader could be improved after an AfD has started. If you see claims of notability, I strongly encourage you to check the sources and make informed judgments as to the merit of any claim made. If you truly believe that there has been any deliberate misstatements made in improving these articles, I suggest that you gather your proof and that an appropriate incident be opened to ensure that the perpetrators are appropriately dealt with. If you cannot back up your accusations, I suggest that you demonstrate the good faith of backing off. Alansohn 15:47, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I think the point that RGTraynor is making is that, if more claims for the Blue Ribbon status are made than are actually issued, which he sees to be so, then perhaps it is not a good barometer of notability. What exactly are the requirements for the award? Does the award alone make the school notable? Let me provide an analogy. Fewer than 2% of Boy Scouts in the United States ever make Eagle Scout. Half of one percent of the people in the world qualify for membership in Mensa. I am both. But the fact that I am does not by itself make me notable. Likewise, an annual award that may later be revoked if a school does not meet certain criteria is probably not a sound standard for notability. Inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places, on the other hand, would be a sensible, and permanent gauge for keeping an article. I hope this clarifies where RGTraynor is going with his point. Chris 21:51, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

• You have interpreted RGTraynor's claims exactly as I did: That schools that did not receive the award are being credited in their Wikipedia articles as being recipients, which can only be the result of deliberate fraud. Coming from a Mensa member, I appreciate your concurrence on the reading of his repeated claims. I encourage you -- and all others who have an interest in teh topic of school notability -- to read the Blue Ribbon Schools Program article, and follow the sources through to make your own informed judgment on the merit of the claim of notability for award recipients. Once granted in a particular year the award cannot be revoked, not unlike an actor who wins an Academy Award and then makes a string of box office bombs and critical failures. Once the award is received it can't be taken back.

Not quite. Alansohn is being disingenuous in attributing to me the statement that false Blue Ribbon citations are being made, something that it shouldn't take all that thorough a reading of my remarks to dispel. While I haven't personally checked each citation, I've checked a few, and they seem valid enough. What I have (repeatedly) said is that this 5% statistic is being waved around with as little critical examination as "one in four women are raped" and "A million children get abducted every year." Since these citations have showed up many more times than in only one out of every twenty middle school AfDs, we can either believe that it's just wild coincidence that we just happen to nominate Blue Ribbon winners for deletion, or that in fact the real total is far higher than 5% ... in which case this Blue Ribbon Award is not nearly as noteworthy as all of that.  RGTraynor  06:51, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

You have stated that Alansohn is being disingenuous in attributing to me the statement that false Blue Ribbon citations are being made. Let's do a recap of the statements that you have made so farand see if your statement holds water.

• "I've gotten really leery about how many of these schools seem to sport "top performing" assessments or awards." 17:34, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
• "That would wash if the articles were created with the citations in place, but that hasn't been the case, has it? Nor have the original creators seemed aware of the citations." 17:56, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
• "The citations have only appeared in the wake of AfDs, upon which point a startling number of the articles sprout "Blue Ribbon" awards (added by the same few knowledgeable editors who are not, in the main, the creators of the articles in question) that purportedly only are achieved by 5% of schools, the notability thereof which has been waved around without the least degree of critical inquiry." 17:56, 1 May 2007
• "When this Blue Ribbon Award is cited as prima facie proof of notability, backed with the repeated claim that it is given only to 5% of all schools, but this award has been cited in nearly ten times that many recent secondary school AfDs, then a good hard look at the bonafides is not merely proper, but is our responsibility." 14:28, 2 May 2007
• "Since these citations have showed up many more times than in only one out of every twenty middle school AfDs, we can either believe that it's just wild coincidence that we just happen to nominate Blue Ribbon winners for deletion, or that in fact the real total is far higher than 5%." 06:51, 3 May 2007

It would therefore seem that you have made multiple bad faith claims that these award citations have been manufactured, something that not too thorough a reading confirmed. As you stated, all of the sources you checked panned out. All you would have to have done to show that there is some sort of fraud going on here is to find one instance where the source provided did not match the claim made in the article; you've found none. Again, the alternative to your conspiracy theory is that articles for notable schools are being created, these articles are being proposed for deletion, but they are in fact notable. In each and every article where I have cited the Blue Ribbon Award as a claim of notability in response to an AfD, sources have been provided to document the claim that the school has indeed won the award AND to document the notability of the award itself. All we have seen so far is your wild conspiracy theories that you persist in believing despite ample evidence to the contrary. Alansohn 16:54, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

No, what I persist in asserting, as I always have, that the evidence is that this award is not nearly as notable as you like to believe it is - as witness how very few school article creators know squat about it - that the "five percent" total seems to be BS, and that if it were it would be a part of the article well before a frantic scramble to prove notability under the gun of AfDs; you present, and persist in presenting, the same old straw man. In no instance have I alleged that a citation was fraudulently made, nor do I have any reason to believe that this has been the case. Is there some reason we ought to know about why you have been so persistent in asking about fraud?  RGTraynor  18:57, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Ignorance and non-existence are not one and the the same. As you well know, many of these middle school articles being subject to AfD had been created by well-intentioned sixth graders who are more familiar with the burritos served by the hair-netted lunch lady, than the Wikipedia rules and policies that constitute notability for the Blue Ribbon Schools Program. I have provided five quotations above that show that you persist in believing that I have made false claims of notability for Blue Ribbon schools. Now, in a staggering violation of WP:CIVIL and WP:AGF, you have now explicitly called me a liar without even a shred of evidence to support your allegation, despite the fact that I have provided you with all of the sources required for you to make an appropriate judgment. My claim of notability for the award is not based on a 5% threshold (the actual percentage is a bit lower); the claim of notability is based on statements that the Blue Ribbon Schools program is "the highest honor the U.S. Education Department can bestow upon a school", a statement contained and sourced in the article for the program and the articles for nearly every single one of the schools were I have cited the award in response to an AfD. Alansohn 19:28, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

• • RGTraynor you've been warned! Cow before your betters. Delete per WP:N and the argument against these kinds of school articles archived at WP:SCHOOLS. Eusebeus 23:01, 1 May 2007
    • Why would the failed WP:SCHOOLS guideline be a valid argument to delete (or keep) an article? P.S. I think you have a vote mixed in there somewhere. Alansohn 01:02, 2 May 2007
• Delete. Fails WP:N and WP:V. --Fang Aili ^talk 18:47, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
• Do NOT delete, Merge and Redirect as per Alansjohn above. Noroton 00:07, 4 May 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.