Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/W.J. Baird Public 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 Speedy Delete as copyright violation of http://wjbaird.lkdsb.net/history.htm. --JodyB yak, yak, yak 11:23, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] W.J. Baird Public School

W.J. Baird Public School (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Non-notable middle school, unsourced. --Finngall talk 03:39, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete - Article doesn't assert notability, is OR and is obviously a COI (Mistaken, but now I see that the article's a copy vio). Delete... Spawn Man 05:05, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
    • Certainly the author has an interest in the school, but what is the conflict? — xDanielx T/C 05:53, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
      • From COI: "...Adding material that appears to promote the interests or visibility of an article's author, his family members, employer, associates, or his business or personal interests, places the author in a conflict of interest..." - I thought the person was obviously associated with the school in question if they knew that two of the principal's paintings hang in the foyer - However, I looked at the website linked to and noticed that there was the text "In 1916, Mr. Baird became the Blenheim postmaster and remained in this position until his retirement. He was also an artist and two of his paintings are displayed in the front foyer". My apologies, but my concerns were well founded. Now I can add copy vio to the list. ;) Spawn Man 06:06, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
        • WP:COI doesn't really require that editors be unassociated with the topics they work with. I have a personal interest in my high school, but that interest doesn't conflict with Wikipedia's integrity (or so I would hope). — xDanielx T/C 05:29, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak delete - very small school, little significance. — xDanielx T/C 05:53, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment - The article also has copy vios from here. Spawn Man 06:06, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Speedy Delete as copyright violation per Spawn Man--JodyB yak, yak, yak 11:22, 14 September 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.