Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yaaḵoosgé Daakahídi Alternative 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 was keep. cholmes75 (chit chat) 18:20, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Yaaḵoosgé Daakahídi Alternative High School
Non-notable "alternative" school, gets 48 unique Ghits. "In recent years, the school has hosted nearly 100 students." Hmmm. wikipediatrix 15:22, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
- Weak keep. It sounds to me like this school "has a substantial and unique program, structure, or technique that differentiates it from similar schools", especially given its Tlingit language name, which renders it worthy per the proposed WP:SCHOOL. - Smerdis of Tlön 18:27, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delete No reliable sources, claim to notability weak at best. A non-English name does not constitute a "unique program" -- if there is in fact such a program (currently the only potential claim of such is "less mainstream high school experience"), it needs to be dealt with in a little more detail and sourced. Currently fails WP:SCHOOLS3 and WP:V. Shimeru 22:37, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
- Comment WP:SCHOOLS3 has no basis or justification for use as a Wikipedia guideline as it has never been presented for review and approval by Wikipedia users, let alone reached consensus as a basis for any purpose in Wikipedia. The failure to make the most trivial investigation of this program that is derided as a "unique program" solely because of its non-English name seems to be blatant prejudice. Questioning the existence of teh program only proves that this entire vote is baseless. Alansohn 10:12, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- Comment Reading prejudice into a factual statement ("A non-English [school] name does not constitute a unique program") is a personal attack, and shows bad faith. Desist. As for the program, as you are very well aware, there was no evidence within the article that one existed at the time I cast my !vote, and I reject your attempt to obscure the issue through barely-veiled accusations of racism. Furthermore, I do not feel that any reliable sources have yet been provided that show it is in fact a "unique program." Finally, WP:SCHOOLS3 has at least as much justification for use as WP:SCHOOLS. Shimeru 10:30, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- Comment You can try to spin "A non-English name does not constitute a "unique program" -- if there is in fact such a program" as being a good faith disagreement with the qualifications of the article, but to any reasonable person it comes off as a patronizing dismissal of the schools' program. I sincerely hope it's mere ignorance and not prejudice, and I hope that your protests are justified. Unlike the far more thoroughly developed WP:SCHOOL, WP:SCHOOLS3 has received no review or any consideration whatsoever from Wikipedia users as a guideline. As it has made no attempt at all at reaching consensus within the Wikipedia community, it can't possibly be justified for use as a guideline, and the extreme deletionist bias it demonstrates makes it unlikely to ever be a basis for a consensus guideline. Do the facts provided in the current article satisfy your concerns? Alansohn 10:43, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- There is no spin involved, but since you've already shown you're not prepared to assume good faith, I won't waste my time with you further. I simply ask that you refrain from any and all speculation upon my motives in the future, and repeat my request that you cease to use such terms as "ignorant" and "prejudiced" to describe me. On the other topic, as you realize, SCHOOLS3 is newer than SCHOOLS; this does not mean it is not valid, and, unlike SCHOOLS, it has not been rejected. When it is presented, then we will see. Finally, I thought I had made this clear, but no, the current article does not meet my concerns. I do not feel that reliable sources have been provided that show that the program is "unique." Shimeru 11:00, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- Comment You can try to spin "A non-English name does not constitute a "unique program" -- if there is in fact such a program" as being a good faith disagreement with the qualifications of the article, but to any reasonable person it comes off as a patronizing dismissal of the schools' program. I sincerely hope it's mere ignorance and not prejudice, and I hope that your protests are justified. Unlike the far more thoroughly developed WP:SCHOOL, WP:SCHOOLS3 has received no review or any consideration whatsoever from Wikipedia users as a guideline. As it has made no attempt at all at reaching consensus within the Wikipedia community, it can't possibly be justified for use as a guideline, and the extreme deletionist bias it demonstrates makes it unlikely to ever be a basis for a consensus guideline. Do the facts provided in the current article satisfy your concerns? Alansohn 10:43, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- Comment Reading prejudice into a factual statement ("A non-English [school] name does not constitute a unique program") is a personal attack, and shows bad faith. Desist. As for the program, as you are very well aware, there was no evidence within the article that one existed at the time I cast my !vote, and I reject your attempt to obscure the issue through barely-veiled accusations of racism. Furthermore, I do not feel that any reliable sources have yet been provided that show it is in fact a "unique program." Finally, WP:SCHOOLS3 has at least as much justification for use as WP:SCHOOLS. Shimeru 10:30, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- Comment WP:SCHOOLS3 has no basis or justification for use as a Wikipedia guideline as it has never been presented for review and approval by Wikipedia users, let alone reached consensus as a basis for any purpose in Wikipedia. The failure to make the most trivial investigation of this program that is derided as a "unique program" solely because of its non-English name seems to be blatant prejudice. Questioning the existence of teh program only proves that this entire vote is baseless. Alansohn 10:12, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delete Non-existant notability. And I agree, a non-English name does not fulfill the requirements of a "unique program". I would need to see considerably more from this article to reverse my vote. Trusilver 00:48, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
Delete per nom, Shimeru and Trusilver. JoshuaZ 08:35, 19 November 2006 (UTC)Changing to tentative keep One of the articles about the school's program did make it to the AP wire. I'd prefer more but this is getting there. JoshuaZ 21:15, 21 November 2006 (UTC)- Keep/merge, I don't see why you shouldn't allow us to read about high schools, alternative or not. Kappa 08:37, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- Comment Is there a guideline or policy based keep in there. WP:V is non-neogtiable among other issues. Claims that somehow deletion would be akin to some amorphous group not allowing another amorphous group to "read about highschools" is unhelpful and unproductive. JoshuaZ 08:48, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- Comment It's far better than the deletionist elitist "no schools are notable" approach that seems to be infecting recent school AfD's. Alansohn 09:01, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- Comment Is there a guideline or policy based keep in there. WP:V is non-neogtiable among other issues. Claims that somehow deletion would be akin to some amorphous group not allowing another amorphous group to "read about highschools" is unhelpful and unproductive. JoshuaZ 08:48, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- Keep The school offers a substantially unique program aimed at serving students at greatest risk of dropping out of high school. A significant part of the program focuses on the Tlingit culture and language used by the many Native American students who attend the school and are at greatest risk of falling through the cracks, which addresses criterion 4 of WP:SCHOOL. The school and its programs have also been the subject of several reports in major local newspapers, in fulfillment of criterion 1 of WP:SCHOOLS, with sources that are reliable and verifiable, in compliance with WP:RS and WP:V. As such, the article meets and exceeds the WP:SCHOOL criteria for retention. Use of "scare quotes" for "alternative" in the nomination and "unique program" regarding the non-English name are patently offensive and a sign of ignorance for those who are willing to delete anything they are unwilling to attempt to do the most basic research. Alansohn 09:01, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- "Unique program" is a direct quote of WP:SCHOOL. And please avoid veiled personal attacks. Shimeru 09:50, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- I wouldn't even call it veiled, it's pretty direct and obnoxious. wikipediatrix 13:29, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- "Unique program" is a direct quote of WP:SCHOOL. And please avoid veiled personal attacks. Shimeru 09:50, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- Keep. Well-referenced article on alternative high school fully qualifies for inclusion. Nominator has not provided any valid deletion reason (i.e. google hits or student numbers are not grounds for deletion). --JJay 13:14, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
-
- When I say "non-notable", that means non-notable for inclusion. And our guideline for inclusion in this case is, of course, WP:SCHOOL (if we choose to accept it). wikipediatrix 13:29, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- In that event, I assume I could have just typed "Notable school" and that would have been a sufficient argument for inclusion. I would ask that in the future you explain in detail what you mean by "non-notable" because I don't have a clue. In the present case, it would seem that the school's focus on Tlingit culture [1], as well as other independent coverage [2] means that it is fully within the scope of our non-existent school guidelines. --JJay 13:59, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- The "news coverage" is all local papers and it's a given that any school is going to get some sort of mention in their community papers. Also, none of the links to them are accessible, but from the titles, it's clear that the school is not even the primary subject of all these articles. wikipediatrix 14:14, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- The coverage is from both the Alaska state capital's largest newspaper and the state's largest publication. Where is this "no local coverage" criteria you've presented come form? There is no mention of it in the "multiple non-trivial coverage" standard that appears throughout Wikipedia and is very well defined at WP:CORP and WP:BIO. You can sign up, as I did, for online access to the Juneau Empire, but "easy clickability" is not a requirement of WP:RS or WP:V. If you read the articles in question they all directly reference the school and its programs. Alansohn 14:25, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- Wow! You can't read the articles at all, but you can divine they're content from the titles. Read the article first, and then you can question their validity. I will acknowledge that if any of the sources include constitute trivial coverage, then I would be unable to use them to prove notability. See WP:CORP for the definition of trivial coverage as "newspaper articles that simply report extended shopping hours or the publications of telephone numbers and addresses in business directories." I will even add sports scores to the trivial coverage criteria for schools. If any article fails this criteria, please let me know and I will withdraw my claim. Alansohn 14:59, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- The coverage is from both the Alaska state capital's largest newspaper and the state's largest publication. Where is this "no local coverage" criteria you've presented come form? There is no mention of it in the "multiple non-trivial coverage" standard that appears throughout Wikipedia and is very well defined at WP:CORP and WP:BIO. You can sign up, as I did, for online access to the Juneau Empire, but "easy clickability" is not a requirement of WP:RS or WP:V. If you read the articles in question they all directly reference the school and its programs. Alansohn 14:25, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- The "news coverage" is all local papers and it's a given that any school is going to get some sort of mention in their community papers. Also, none of the links to them are accessible, but from the titles, it's clear that the school is not even the primary subject of all these articles. wikipediatrix 14:14, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) First, if you have not read the sources, you should not speculate on their contents. I have read both articles, and the school is either the exclusive or primary focus of both. Second, there is no policy basis for your comment on "local sources". I sugggest you review WP:RS. Third, your characterization of these sources as "local", implying that they are somehow subpar, is inaccurate and highly disrespectful to residents of Alaska. The Anchorage Daily News has the highest circulation of any Alaska newspaper. The Juneau Empire ranks third. --JJay 14:32, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- Weak keep The school serves students at risk of dropping out, about half of whom are from racial and ethnic minorities and the fact that it teaches the culture and language of the Tlingit make it notable in my opinion. However, I have seen no such verification of this from any source but their own website. Per WP:V this needs to be confirmed, and without confirmation the article cannot stand. This is savable, but without saving it should be deleted. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 17:17, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- Comment See the current version of the article, which includes sources such as 1. ^ School district plans to double Yaakoos quarters: The alternative school serves about 100 students and graduates about 40 each year, Juneau Empire, May 17, 2005; 2. ^ Group helps schools infuse Native themes into curriculum, Anchorage Daily News, February 27, 2005; 3. ^ Ceremony honors Native students: Students benefit from more high school options, Juneau Empire, May 21, 2006; 4. ^ Students complete domestic violence education program: Alaska has one of the highest rates of such abuse in the nation, Juneau Empire, October 20, 2006. These sources come from the largest newspaper in the state capital (the Juneau Empire, the third highest circulation in the state) and the largest in the state (the Anchorage Daily News). All your concerns regarding WP:V are more than satisfied. Alansohn 17:50, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- Three of those citations require registering to view. I know it is free, but I don't like making hundreds of accounts all over the internet to look up references. They require an e-mail address and I end up getting more spam. Perhaps this information is available on an open website? HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 17:52, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- In trying to improve the article and provide the verifiable, reliable sources that WP:RS and WP:V require, I was forced to use a source that requires registration. If anyone is concerned that the sources do not exist or do not accurately reflect an in-depth review of the school's unique program, I would be more than happy to cut and paste the articles and send them to you. Alansohn 17:56, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- I changed to weak keep because references do not need to be instantly accessable online to be valid. A book in a library can be a reference, so why not a newpaper article that is not instantly accessable online. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 17:58, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- keep notable school!!! Audiobooks 21:15, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
- Comment Do you have a substantive reason why this school is notable? Note that adding exclamation points doesn't make the assertion any more convincing. JoshuaZ 05:16, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
- Comment. I think he meant notable school!!! as per our notability guideline and the lengthy discussion above. Hmmm. Ok, he didn't actually provide a long, detailed explanation of notable school!!!, but then neither did the nom who wrote "Non Notable alternative school". Neither did you when you wrote: Delete per nom. Shimeru and Trusilver. Instead of hassling other editors over their use of punctuation, which is "unhelpful and unproductive", perhaps you would care to provide a "substantive reason", i.e. policy based, why this school, despite the references, fails WP:V!! --JJay 11:18, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
- Comment It wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that the nom, Shimeru and Trusilver summarized the matter well? WP:V isn't all the matters. If it were we'd have articles on every single common murdered and the victime. WP:N matters and I have yet to see any independent sources discussing this school in a way that demonstrates notability. If sources that actually say that the language and cultural material is notable then I'll change to keep. JoshuaZ 19:49, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
- Comment:Yes, of course, the nom summarized things well with a comment restricted entirely to google hits and student numbers, both of which have no bearing on inclusion. You are certainly entitled to contest that the references "actually say that the language and cultural material is notable". However, if that is your position, I have to assume that you have not perused the sources, which discuss the infusion and public funding of Tlingit language and cultural studies into a school that consists largely of Alaskan minorities. I encourage you to do so, unless you have decided that WP:V and WP:N are not important here, which is certainly your right. However, in that case, I would ask that you not challlenge users such as Audiobooks who have formulated arguments in keeping with wikipedia policy. --JJay 20:45, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
- The references are purely routine local coverage. Now, while you may argue that they are in some sense not local that is more because Alaska is large and sparsely populated than anything else. I have seen no indication that anyone outside the immediate area has considered this to matter at all. JoshuaZ 20:58, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
- I won't address your comment's elitist and vaguely ethnocentric undertones and denigration of large, sparsely populated areas as somehow unworthy of our attention. I will ask that you: (i) point me to the policy, guideline or essay (yes, even including your schools3 essay) that precludes "local" sources; (ii) provide some proof that Alaska's leading newspapers (all available worldwide through the internet) qualify as "local" sources not suitable for wikipedia. --JJay 21:13, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delete another wholly nn school. Eusebeus 01:04, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
- Keep per the commenters above, specifically for offering a substantially unique program aimed at serving students at greatest risk of dropping out of high school. Yamaguchi先生 03:33, 22 November 2006
- Keep, sources 1 and 4 provide enough substantive information for an article. Seraphimblade 14:57, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
- Keep, very useful and interesting article. Unfocused 08:58, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- Conditional keep: if the school is accredited, then keep; if not accredited, then delete. 38.100.34.2 23:10, 24 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.
