Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/University Hill Elementary 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 keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 19:03, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] University Hill Elementary School

This is an article on an elementary school (the editors'?} in Canada, with no reason given why this subject is noteworthy (other than to the children who go to the school and their parents). There are more elementary schools throughout the world than there are articles in Wikipedia. Unless a grade school is really noteworthy (ie. Columbine High School), it should not be the subject of a Wiki article. Askolnick 14:24, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

• Repaired AfD.--Andeh 14:31, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing. Askolnick 14:36, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

• Keep For reasons explained at Wikipedia:Schools/Arguments#Keep. This article is part of a complete series covering education in Vancouver, British Columbia. -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 16:56, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep The purpose of the WP:EiC project is to create complete entries for all Canadian schools which is an encyclopedic goal in itself. Deletion of indivdual articles harms this effort. Unless a claim can be made about the quality and validity of the article the article should stay. --Wakemp 17:17, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete I question the editorial wisdom of any project that opens up Wikipedia to articles on every grade school within any country. What about the New South Wales school system in Australia? Should we have a Wiki article on every grade school there? Or how about every grade school in China - a country that is increasingly objecting to Western cultural imperialism. I personally would like to create articles on P.S. 115 and P.S. 172 in Queens, New York. I fail to see the logic of creating Wiki articles for every grade school in any one nation. There are probably more than 100 million grade schools throughout the world. If "creating complete entries for all Canadian schools" is an "encylopedic goal in itself," why not create a separate Wiki encyclopedia on "Education in Canada" and head off the problem of nationalistic educators competing for the most Wiki articles? If I'm missing an important reason for creating a separate Wikipedia article on every school in Canada, please let me know.Askolnick 17:39, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Comment

* What about the New South Wales school system in Australia?, I personally would like to create articles on P.S. 115 and P.S. 172 in Queens, New York. - I would support any other project from Australia or New York that wanted to do the same thing.

* I fail to see the logic of creating Wiki articles for every grade school in any one nation. It continues to stun me what harm these types of AfDs are trying to protect Wikipedia from. I could also list reams of other types of articles that I have no interest but I would stop short of saying they shouldn't be allowed (Ball Parks, Xbox Games, Anime characters come to mind). I don't object to them and I would expect the same consideration.

* why not create a separate Wiki encyclopedia on "Education in Canada" and head off the problem of nationalistic educators competing for the most Wiki articles? If necessary I would put up my own wiki but I thought the reason wikipedia was here was to collect information not fragment it. Again the great concern seems to be what if everyone did this - that would be awesome, that would be wonderful. Wikipedia could engage educators and students all over the world that would create a generation of wiki contributors. That is why I do it and I contribute $$ to the wikimedia foundation instead running my own server. If someone is so worried about a few MB of disk space send me the bill would happily pay it. --Wakemp 18:15, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Excuse me, but ball parks, Xbox Games, Anime characters and such are of interest to many people around the world. What I'm asking is who is interested about this elementary school - other than its students, their parents and teachers, and some of the people involved in the school system in Vancouver, Canada? If your goal is to put everything in the world inside of Wikipedia, no matter how unimportant, we already have something a bit like that. It's called the Internet. Askolnick 04:13, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

And I said that was fine, if you want your silly little games in Wikipedia. I don't AfD those, and I was asking for the same consideration. But when you compare a school (real physical structure that thousands of students go through and that serves a community) to a fictional animated character - I don't feel there is any need for me to have to continually justify the existence of a school in Wikipedia. You can continue to assurt that notability is your standard, it juts isn't mine. --Wakemp 15:25, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Being part of a wikiproject does not mean an article is encyclopedic. Like most articles on elementary schools, this seems more like a puffed-up directory listing. Agent 86 21:25, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Buchanan-Hermit; the article is well written, verifiable, and part of a series. Yamaguchi先生 22:38, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, but this argument does not seem to make sense. An article can be well-written and verifiable and yet be about something utterly unnoteworthy. The most well-written and verifiable description of the puddle of rainwater on the street where I live (it's pouring out) would neither be noteworthy or Wikiworthy. As for being part of a series, stringing unnoteworthy articles together into a series will only provide you an unnoteworthy series. Please, will someone explain what is acutally noteworthy about the subject of this article. I'm dying of curiosity. Askolnick 04:13, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

• Keep, notable and useful article to local people. Wikipedia is not paper so we can have this kind of information. bbx 22:41, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Query How is it notable? How is it useful? Being a "local people", I fail to understand either point. Agent 86 23:53, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, encylopedic topic and content, valuable part of the 'wiki encyclopedia on "Education in Canada' suggested above. I don't agree with splitting WP into separate General and Specialist volumes, but a proposal like that should be made from the top, not by an individual AFD. Kappa 07:05, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
• Comment This was previously a K12 school, so the nomination's suggestion that it's merely an elementary school is misleading. Kappa 07:06, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
• Comment And this makes it noteworthy how? Askolnick 03:07, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep as the article is part of a WikiProject. Issues regarding the appropriateness of a WikiProject need to be discussed elsewhere, though remember that Wikipedia is not paper. 23skidoo 13:14, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Again, I would like to express my props on the level of structure and forethought demonstrated by the WP:EiC initiative, which has set a very high standard to follow for creating other networks of school articles in an organized fashion. This article already demonstrates thoroughness and verifiability, which makes the promise of expanding the articles for this and other Canadian schools, to make them yet more productive and useful, all the more eminently justifiable. It's about time that a group gave the serious attention, organization and planning to schools that usually only gets applied to Pokémon cards or imaginary Star Wars planets. If there really are "more than 100 million grade schools throughout the world" we've got our work cut out for ourselves, and we're going to need efforts sturctured like WP:EiC to get all the required articles created. Kudos WP:EiC! Alansohn 23:47, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep worthwhile article on signficant topic. Deleting this article, will undermine an attempt to improve the quality (not just quantity) of school articles, in an organized manner. --Rob 00:39, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
• Comment And why is this a "worthwhile article?" How is this a "significant topic?" I keep asking this, but all I am getting are affirmations that the article really is noteworthy. I'm not asking for affirmations. I am asking what possible reason is this article noteworthy. And no, I'm not buying the argument that without an article on this school the collection of every known school in Canada would be incomplete. That's not a credible reason.Askolnick 03:07, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Per Askolnic and other comments. I see no reason to keep it, nothing that is at all notable. The only relevant detail otherwise is the claim that as a former K12 school is should somehow be magically kept which is less than persuasive. If anything WP:EiC is a good demonstration of the absurdity of attempting to keep all these schools. They are non-notable and nearly identical. And also note that being a part of a Wikiproject is in no way a keep argument. JoshuaZ 01:39, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
• Comment Joshua, this mind boggling debate reminds me of Lewis Carroll's story about cartographers who created the most wonderful map ever. It was a gargantuan map of England drawn to the scale of 1 inch = 1 inch. It was truly a work of wonder. The only problem was that people wouldn't let them unfold it - farmers said it would destroy their crops, and others had equally trivial complaints. One of the cartographers finally suggested that they could use the actual land itself, since it was a reasonable facimile of the map. Askolnick 03:07, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per schoolwatch flood above. --ForbiddenWord 19:02, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment This essentially says keep per lots of people shouting for keep already. This is not an argument. JoshuaZ 19:33, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment it demonstrates that there is consensus within the community that schools are notable. --ForbiddenWord 19:41, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
      • Comment It provides a fine example of the logical fallacy, argumentum ad nauseam. Agent 86 21:19, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
        • Comment What we have here is a lot of people who claim the article is "notable," "noteworthy," "worthwhile," on a "significant topic," who are utterly unable to articulate why the article is notable, noteworthy, worthwile, or on a significant topic, other than to tell us that it is "notable," "noteworthy," "worthwhile," and on a "significant topic." I really can't believe this is the kind of debate that can go on in Wikipedia. Wiki editors should be able to provide reasons for their positions that are not circular arguments, which beg the question. Askolnick 23:53, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete nn school; so there's a wikiproject schools so all schools are kept? Geez, there's a wikiproject biography, too. Figure that out. Carlossuarez46 02:07, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, one of the top elemetary schools in Vancouver.-THB 16:23, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment And you base that fact on what? And how many are at the top? Ten, 100? And how far from the top? Should we also have articles on the horses that came in fifth racing against Seabiscuit? Askolnick 16:31, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
    • The citation for that is right in the article, dude. -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 17:10, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Buchanan-Hermit. --Myles Long 21:29, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. This article and others related to it either through WP:EiC, School District 39 Vancouver, and Template:VancouverSchools shows that the editors in question have well-planned out articles that contribute to the knowledge available through Wikipedia. This is a plus to our encyclopedia, not a negative thing! There is no reason here as to why we'd want to delete the article in question. --Stéphane Charette 22:37, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
• Comment: Askolnick adding this text to the middle of the article is not appropriate:

  I repeat, this is noteworthy why? "Being the only X in Y" in the vast majority of cases is NOT noteworthy. I happen to own the only 1998 Toyota Camry XLE in town with under 35,000 miles on the odometer. Is that noteworthy enough for a Wiki article? What in the world is noteworthy about being the only elementary school in whatever University Endowment Lands are? Why is this school more noteworthy than my Toyota or the other hundred million+ schools in the world? [1]

I understand some people want to delete school articles, and it is bad enough that we continuously have to deal with school AfD, but those of you who make AfD requests should refrain from adding garbage to the articles. --Stéphane Charette 22:47, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. Our nominator is asking me to delete this based on his opinion that only educational institutions once host to mass murder (i.e. Columbine) merit a wikipedia article. I find that far too limiting. As the leading internet encyclopedia, we need to include every town, village, school, landmark, etc. - even the boring ones where, on the surface, nothing much seems to have ever happened. That includes the few that have not yet produced a nobel prize winner, soap opera star or serial killer. Our burden is to go beyond body counts and to provide information on all the mundane subjects that people constantly seek in reference works, such as this informative, encyclopedic treatment of University Hill Elementary School. --JJay 02:59, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
• Merge and redirect. If the primary reason to keep it in order to have a complete compendium of some otherwise-non-notable-thing pages, why not instead just have a single page about the topic itself? Elementary Schools in Vancouver could talk about them generally. It's already been asserted that the various school-specific pages have lots of common material. Then that page could list all the schools. Heck, give each a header section and add a sentence or two about what makes it unique vs the others. DMacks 04:17, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

• Comment: Probably the sanest solution to everything, IMHO. --Storkk 21:45, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete, since being part of a Wikiproject does not make it notable. It is schoolcruft until it becomes notable. --Storkk 15:32, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per User:Silensor/Schools and Buchanan-Hermit, part of a notable series of articles. Silensor 16:20, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

• Keep One of the joys of reading an encyclopedia (online or otherwise) is to stumble upon trivial information about things you never even knew existed. Having this type of article also adds to the encyclopedic (in the literal sense) nature of Wiki. Davkal 17:57, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

• Comment: by "trivial", do you mean "cruft that doesn't meet WP's criteria for inclusion," or am I misreading you? How would you not find your trivia by reading a general article on Canada's School System (where this might be merged, per DMacks above)? How would you even find this trivia, being that it won't ever be linked through anything substantial, owing to the fact that it's not notable in and of itself? I'm just curious on how you think this will benefit anybody, including those interested in trivia (I agree, this is a great attribute of encyclopedias in general), since (being not notable) it won't be linked to except by projects and large lists (pages that trivia seekers don't generally seek out). --Storkk 21:17, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - joy, oh joy, another school AfD that will end as 'no concensus'. For the record the only notable feature, its ranking position, is admitted to being unreliable and there is nothing encyclopaedic that cannot be better placed in a school district article. BlueValour 02:23, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

• Comment: its unreliability is questioned -- the stats from the Fraser Institute is still widely recognized. The questioning of the stats' reliability is inserted to prevent a POV stance. -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 06:27, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

• Keep, encyclopedic topic, notable and useful to anyone interested in education in Vancouver, British Columbia. bbx 07:56, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete NN. Arbusto 02:27, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
• Comment Wow, that's a really cool mid-century modern building that is likely notable because of its architecture as well as its other merits. Could someone please point me towards some more photographs of it? Who was the architect? -THB 22:15, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
  • This is a really neat shot, too: [2]. Love the way the volumes collide at the entrance. Are there any photos of major interior spaces? -THB 22:19, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
• keep' please it is notable to the local area and part of a wiki project series too no need to erase it Yuckfoo 04:21, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment Notable to a local area is not the same as notable and I have seen actually no source or claim that it was at all notable for the area. Part of a wikiseries is not a reason to keep something either. JoshuaZ 04:50, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
    • completeness is a reason to keep something but that is my opinion Yuckfoo 05:00, 25 September 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.