View text source at Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stearns High 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 delete. Wizardman 13:03, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stearns High School

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Stearns High School (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

This article has been up for almost six months and has not demonstrated notability as outlined by WP:NOTE. Barring a substantial rewrite, I am nominating this for deletion. Trusilver 02:17, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment I know, I considered that. However, seeing that the article has existed for as long as it has, I wanted to give it's author{s) the opportunity to improve it before it's deleted. Trusilver 03:13, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Actually, no it couldn't. A7 speedies are for a quite limited category of subjects, and it is generally agreed that schools are not among them. In part because speedy deletes are supposed to be for uncontroversial deletes, and it has been historically clear that school deletes on the grounds of notability are often enough challanged that they can never be safely assumed to be uncontroversial. DES (talk) 04:12, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Apologies; on a closer reading of WP:CSD you're completely right. I've striked my comment. In my defense, most school articles make at least some claim to notability, however dubious (e.g. listing a few 'notable' alumni); this article lacks even that. -- simxp (talk) 04:49, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Tell me, just out of curiosity... How absolutely horrific does a school article have to be to not be notable by your "much, much better" criteria? Because this one has absolutely no positive qualities whatsoever other than saying "Yes, this school exists." Trusilver 02:46, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say it has to be worse than the worst community article. We keep community articles (articles about the smallest towns and municipalities at least) because we find them inherently important enough for articles. I don't think there's a written rule about it anywhere, but it's been the practice ever since I've been on Wikipedia that we never seem to even propose them for deletion. If a school article keeps getting vandalized and no one fixes it, then I can be persuaded to include it in a school district article or a community article. Otherwise, we have things we call "stubs" in Wikipedia, and I'm content to have school-article stubs. If you find that position unreasonable, I'd like to know why. Noroton 17:44, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Obviously, you must be refering to the line in WP:NOTE that reads, "articles on schools may be merged into articles on the towns or regions where schools are located" that clearly indicates that schools are by default notable???Balloonman 06:32, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As I said in the response just above, if vandalism keeps occuring and doesn't get fixed in a particular article, I think that's a good option. I suppose if stubs remain for a long, long time, I wouldn't object too strongly to a merge (allowing for someone to resurrect the article in better form later). I generally think most stubby middle school or elementary school articles can be folded into larger school district articles, unless there's a lot of good information in them. But high schools are too important to merge without good cause, such as being a vandalism magnet. Do you see anything unreasonable in this position? Noroton 17:44, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I absolutely do. To start with Wikipedia is not a directory. I very rarely nominate schools but I did this one because it is a meaningless article. I mean, let's take a look at the information provided in this article you think is notable: It's location, it's school colors, it's two principle administrators and a teeth-grating look into their school song. By that criteria minus the song, the gas station down the street from my house is notable.
It take a great deal for me to declare a school non-notable. I'm currently harassing the authors of Field High School to get to work on their page and make it acceptable to notability standards becuase I'd rather not get rid of it. I will yell "keep" at the slightest hint of notability but it just isn't here. I think it's a no-compromise "no schools are non-notable, period." approach that makes our jobs that much more difficult because it irritates the people that honestly want to make compromises. Trusilver 21:32, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Notability adheres to subjects, not articles. You're complaining about the article, not the subject. A Google Archives search of "Stearns High" and Millinocket shows more than 300 stories over the years, and I saw several specifically or substantially about the school (all costing money to access). Is WP:N unreasonable? Because your argument is with Wikipedia policy. In practical terms, I see nothing wrong with a stub that at least gives the lyrics of the school song. Not everybody remembers or knows those things. I think your definition of "reasonable" for positions that differ from yours may be a bit narrow. Noroton 23:46, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Here is one useful RS[2]. John Vandenberg 01:12, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
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.