Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Williamsville North High 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 of the debate was Keep. Tawker 21:32, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Williamsville North High School

Prodded, prod deleted with no reason other than "sufficient notability" in the edit summary. The school is not notable. It is just another high school. The article has been around for a little while, so I imagine that if there were notability, someone would have written it by now. Jesuschex 20:58, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

  • Keep per Wikipedia:Schools/Arguments#Keep. The bomb-threat info may need to be trimmed out as it doesn't appear to be substantiated by the listed sources. Christopher Parham (talk) 21:35, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
    • That's a list of arguments for and against including schools. Which arguments are you using? Keep in mind also that Wikipedia:Schools is not a guideline, policy, or anything like that. It was in fact rejected. Jesuschex 21:52, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
      • Well, I'm generally invoking all the arguments in the section I linked to (i.e. the keep section). Christopher Parham (talk) 21:58, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
      • It was rejected because there was nothing left in it for deletionists to cling on to. The keep criteria had been reduced to a level which all nonimated school articles are raised to during the process and it therefore served no possible purpose. In other words it was a default "keep all". Can you not show the good grace to accept that, move on and stop wasting time on this issue? CalJW 02:08, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
        • The problem is that the arguments to keep every school article are not unique to schools. They're the same arguments that could be used to keep any article (in other words, there's no such thing as notability). Pretty much, verifiability = notability. I disagree with that. Jesuschex 02:40, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep — High Schools meet my standard of notability. :-P — RJH 21:41, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, schools inherently notable as per many previous discussions. -- Samir (the scope) धर्म 21:41, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Close this and move on. It is impossible to delete an article on a school, however bad, whatever the content, because there are sufficient editors whose religion forbids deleting schools that consensus cannot be achieved to delete. I can't remember the last time I saw a high school AfD debated on the merits of the article. Just zis Guy you know? 22:07, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. I don't see anything about this article or its subject that merits inclusion is this or any encyclopedia. Bucketsofg 22:10, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep per strong precedent to keep all schools. Cant we put this one to bed now please?! Jcuk 22:13, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, and slap deletionists who keep wasting time like this. For great justice. 22:34, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment and here I was going to say we should slap the people who try to stifle any dissent by trying to intimidate wikiusers into not nominating school articles for AfD or try and use unjustified "precedent" as a reason to keep a school article... or even cite non-accepted guidelines like WP:SCH... but that would violate WP:POINT, so of course I won't do that.--Isotope23 20:54, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: Can anyone provide a reason for not deleting other than precedent? Precedent's all fine and good, but not if there's no justification for that precedent. Jesuschex 23:07, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
It's a verifiable school. For great justice. 23:27, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
In other words, it's a school, and it exists? So any school that exists is notable? Jesuschex 00:46, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
In other words, notability is not part of deletion policy. For great justice. 05:22, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Schools should not be nominated. CalJW 02:05, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep proper schools are a centrepoint of their community - everybody has to go there, so they are notable.ßlηguγΣη | Have your say!!! 02:56, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: Actually, most of the information in the article is not verifiable. Of the three links given as "references," only one works. I eventually found the school's website (1) and I can find very little if any of the information that is in the article. The third link, Regents information, gives a lot of information, but surprisingly, none of it was used in the article. In order to make this article verifiable, someone would need to find references for all of that information, so it's in line with WP:V. Jesuschex 03:01, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
    • Please feel free to edit and improve it. For great justice. 05:23, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
      • I'd rather delete all the unverifiable information (which would lead to almost nothing). Also, I just realized that WP:SCH#Structure dictates that the school's own sources cannot be used. So, for this article, I'd have to delete everything that wasn't found on the Regents report. Jesuschex 12:50, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
        • Just to clarify. WP:SCH, which people often cite as voting criteria used to point to Wikipedia:Schools. It was a proposed guideline, which ultimately, was not approved. Recently, it was changed to point to Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools, which was never even proposed as a guideline, but a just a wiki project, inhabited by school editors, and rarely by the rest of the community. Nothing there is any kind obligating rule. In fact, I personally (while logged out) wrote the "References" piece which you refer to. I did that, to encourage higher standards. However, I did it entirely on my own, and had no authority to impose any rule on anybody. That's why the page says "Note that these are only recommendations, and editors are not obligated to follow them.". --Rob 03:20, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
          • I used WP:SCH mostly because someone used it before me. Even if you use the school's own website as a source (which is discouraged even without WP:SCH), the vast majority of the information in the article is not on the school's website. All I'm saying is that if inclusion of an article ought to be based on the article's verifiability, this article should be deleted, due to lack of sources. Jesuschex 04:36, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. This article appears to fulfill the WP:SCH guidelines for inclusion. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 09:20, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep until Proposition 304 passses, and we all hope it does. Fagstein 03:17, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep and allow for organic growth. Its a school. Bahn Mi 17:11, 21 April 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.