Talk:Klein Independent School District

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Klein Independent School District article.
Article policies
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

[edit] Krimmel Intermediate

I believe that the Krimmel Intermediate article shouldn't have been deleted. If there aren't any objections by January 28, 2008 I will start the article up again. --Obaidz96 (talk) 19:26, 21 January 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Irrelevant and Possibly Prejudicial

In 2005, KISD enrolled evacuees from the areas affected by Hurricane Katrina who were residing in northwest Harris County. The Spring Tabernacle shelter is within KISD boundaries. Does this line really belong in this article. To me, a KISD graduate, the part about the shelter is totally irrelevant, and the Katrina reference just seems questionable. (MBK004 16:44, 22 July 2007 (UTC))

--If there are no objections, I will delete this line from the article on 25 July 2007. MBK004 22:35, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Since there were no objections, I have deleted the line of text in question.MBK004 15:37, 25 July 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Merge

I propose merging Vistas High School Program into this article. The Vistas High School Program is part of the Klein ISD, and there is redundant information in both articles. The Vistas High School Program is a very short stub and would be better served under this article which describes the entire school district and all the schools involved. This article provides context for the Vistas program, and at the very least a summary style main section should be created in this article. – Dreadstar † 22:16, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

In view of this, I have notified everyone who participated in the AfD to participate in this merge discussion. Dreadstar † 21:09, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Oppose - the article has just survived an AfD and this is, effectively, another deletion move. A summary paragraph in this article is a good idea. it could equally have been closed as keep. This has faculty, students, a campus and even its own mascot so though it is called a program it is little different from a high school. Already the article is long enough for standalone, and looked out of place in the District article, and there is plenty of scope for expansion - the reasons for the program, the inter-relationship with the parent schools, methods of evaluation etc. As the program develops then sourced assessments of its success/failure/effect can be added. This is a valuable educational initiative that could have national implications and merits full coverage. TerriersFan 22:19, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for striking the deletion comment, TerriersFan! I'm very glad my proposal is being viewed for what it is, a good faith attempt to improve and not just delete! Much appreciated!
I still think a summary style entry about Vistas in the KISD article is a good idea - although, with the shortness of the Vistas article...one paragraph is the entirety of the Vistas article.. Dreadstar † 21:12, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose - per TerriersFan. Nice try, though.Neutral - The update made the difference.-MBK004 22:22, 10 August 2007 (UTC) Edited 23:59, 10 August 2007 (UTC); Edited again 20:06, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Thank you MBK004! – Dreadstar † 00:21, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose per above. The Big No. Bearian 22:49, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Neutral, leaning toward oppose - I appreciate your message, but I'm generally in favor of forking school-related articles so that readers can view the most specific material. The Vistas High School Program article could be fit into Klein District, but we would sacrifice a bit of specificity (noting the easy-to-locate references and link) and possibly limit its growth. I don't think the AfD supports a merge, as others pointed out. — xDanielxTalk 22:58, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Support, there is little real information here, and it would fit perfectly well into the article for the district. The AfD was not concluded as keep but as no consensus so a merge is perfectly in order. I said keep at the afd, but I think a merge might be the best solution. A redirect can be made to the section, which will make it as visible as a separate article. I dislike using merge to kill an article, but this kind of merge will be supporting it DGG (talk) 23:05, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Most school district articles do not describe individual schools and their programs. They describe general information about the school district, its administration, and list its component schools. To include this school article in the school district article would not be consistent with other school district articles. Listing it as a "High School Project" ("Program" might be better?) as currently in the school district article is a reasonable way to identify this program while maintaining consistency of the district article. Also, as others have said above, the recent AfD tends to support keeping this as a separate article. Truthanado 23:09, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose There is a strong consensus on high school notability, evidenced by the clear consensus to retain all of the other high schools in this same district proposed for deletion in the same wave of AfDs. There is no reason that the article cannot and should not be expanded as a standalone article. Alansohn 23:14, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Neutral but leaning to oppose. I personally think it makes sense to keep it as a separate article. As TerriersFan notes on the Vistas High School Program talk page , it has its own building, faculty and students (and its own mascot, I might add), which makes it a school in my book. I think keeping the information is the important thing, though. Whether it is a separate article or part of the District article is secondary and is more a question of what makes sense to a person who is using Wikipedia to find the information. I don't strongly object to merging the information into the District article if (1) all of the relevant information is retained, (2) the source citations are maintained, (3) the District article is well organized so that a reader can readily locate the material on Vistas High School, and (4) a redirect from this article exists, preferably to the exact section of the District article, now that the wiki software allows such redirects. I do think Dreadstar did a reasonable job of satisfying my items (1), (2) and (3) in his attempt to merge the articles (unlike many "merge" attempts following a "no consensus" AfD which are often not-even-thinly-veiled attempts to excise massive amounts of the underlying article). -- DS1953 talk 23:16, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Comment: Thank you, DS1953, for the good faith comments!. Today, I actually called Peggy Ekster, the director of the Vistas High School program, and chatted with her about the article. She confirmed that there was no high school named "Vistas High School" and that it was a program. Thanks for allowing the rename. I only suggested merging because there is very little information in either article. It's not an effort to delete the thing. I put way too much effort into it for that...I actually feel proud of it. It's sad to see disparaging comments about those efforts. So thank you DS1953! – Dreadstar † 23:28, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong support - what article? It is a stub and will remain a stub. There is only so much that can be said about a program. I suppose we could list the names of the teachers and what subjects they teach, but then that is called a school home page or maybe a blog. Because it has a bloody mascot makes it notable? LOL, my fellow worker has a hair growing out of his ear, but that hardly makes him more notable and worth an article. That hair does not make him notable; it means he is simply alive. I know I sound harsh, but that is not my intent; when I review the reasons why it should be retained it seems like we are stretching to make the article viable. A merge into this article will make this article better. Our local library, nursery school, elementary school, karate school, church, (just think of a city organization and insert it here), all of them have programs. We can only say so much about a program. It exists; ta dah. The object is not to denigrate the value of the program, but to make each article on Wikipedia (an encyclopedia, not personal cruft site or national yellow pages) better, worthwhile. Again, I know I sound harsh and I apologize in advance, but we really need to pull our proverbial heads out of that deep, dark hole and remember the big picture and the purpose of Wikipedia. Merging will make one article better, rather than have two poor articles. --Storm Rider (talk) 07:14, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Support. As Dreadstar has found out, this is not a school, but a program. It should be merged with its school district. Do not see sufficient notability for its own article. --Fang Aili talk 14:23, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Support. Per Storm Rider, Fang Aili, and my own comments above. I think it is a disservice to both the Vistas Program and the Klein ISD articles to keep them separate; as well as being a disservice to the quality of Wikipedia. "Surviving" the AfD is irrelevant in this case, especially considering the underlying misperception that this was an actual school. A mistake which is still evident by some of the comments above. – Dreadstar † 18:11, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Support the merge I think it is more appropriate to mention the program in the main district per all comments above. The schools that have the program can also have some info about it.--JForget 18:41, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Update I received an email today from Peggy Ekster, she supports a stronger article that combines the two: merging Vistas HS Program into the Klein ISD article. Are any of the 'oppose' editors swayed by the opinion of the Director of the Vistas High School Program? If not, I believe more eyes need to be brought in, and an RfC may do just that. Dreadstar † 19:31, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
  • We do not allow our articles to be influenced by the subject and we should not start now. As I have explained, in my view there are good reason for keeping a separate article. However, we should conclude this matter here. We have now had two lengthy discussions and a third would mean that it is starting to be disproportionately wasteful of time. TerriersFan 01:48, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose view. The article seems fine to me. Why complicate things when we have an article that is expandable? Sure it can be merged but so can most things. What is pivotal is that merging makes it a local issue whereas, if successful, this could become a national approach. Bridgeplayer 22:05, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
  • These articles have been hanging around now for weeks with merge tags on them and no sign of a consensus to a merge, I am removing the tags for the time being. TerriersFan 16:27, 30 September 2007 (UTC)