Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bryant 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 of the debate was keep - all schools are notable and vote where only reasoning was a link to schools debate discounted Jtkiefer^{T | C | @} ---- 20:33, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Bryant high school

Wikipedia is not a listings directory. The JPS 21:39, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I know, every damn school in the USA is notable, nevertheless, Delete. Avalon 22:23, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per Wikipedia:Schools/Arguments#Keep. Wikipedia is not paper, either. Silensor 00:58, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Vote discounted by closing admin (all schools are notable vote) Jtkiefer^{T | C | @} ---- 20:33, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with school district or other appropriate article, as per the actual proposed guideline at WP:SCH. Both deletionists and inclusionists would be well advised to grit their teeth and accept this proposal (which boils down to "delete only the unverifiable, merge very short stubs, keep everything else"), because it's the best way forward to stop these endless futile AfDs. — Haeleth Talk 02:16, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

keep please this school is important to the community Yuckfoo 02:41, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Absolutely no assertion of notability. -- Dalbury^(Talk) 15:52, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per Haeleth --Aranda ⁵⁶) 18:40, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Delete not in any way notable Velela 20:38, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
You left out "in my opinion" from that sentence. Former chairman and CEO of Bertelsmann, one of the world's largest media companies, is a notable graduate of this school. Silensor 20:58, 3 December 2005

(UTC)

.....and might I cordialy suggest that this comment too, is "in your opinion". The judgement of notability, when this is disputed, is almost always a matter of opinion, yours and mine, equally valuable but all opinions. I think we can all accept that this is the case and perhaps not have to assert that this is indeed an opinion on each occasion. I trust that, in your opinion, you may concur. Velela 20:16, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. -- DS1953 20:45, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, notability established. Christopher Parham (talk) 01:43, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Keep — Valid high schools are notable. — RJH 00:13, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Vote discounted by closing admin (all schools are notable vote) Jtkiefer^{T | C | @} ---- 20:33, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

keep Sethie 00:20, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Delete nn even if some bigwig once attended Catchpole 13:48, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or Merge into school district or town if article is both below three sentances and lacks any sort of illustration, boxed info-template or picture when AFD is closed. This school, like all others, is an important public institution and should be written about somewhere, even if it cannot sustain an article on it's own. Presently people do create school articles containing neutral, verifiable information and it is impossible to delete them, even though many have a desire to do so. Rather than striving for an impossible consensus to delete any given school article, I feel it is always preferable and takes much less energy to merge the text of the article into an article about a suitable habitation or administrative unit: a city, county or state, or a school district of local education authority of other school system, while taking care not to delete the information contained in the article. If the article is merged, the current location should be replaced by a redirect, and the edit history maintained for future use. This is the baseline consensus that I feel was reached at WP:SCH. Hipocrite - «Talk» 14:25, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Yuckfoo and others. Kappa 04:12, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Factually accurate. --Oldak Quill 22:11, 8 December 2005 (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.