Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul VI 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The result was nomination withdrawn. Non-admin closure. NASCAR Fan24^{(radio me!)} 20:13, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Paul VI High School

I am withdrawing the nomination. Somebody please close this. James Luftan ^contribs 20:18, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not notable, barely any refs, seems to have been created by a student, among other things. James Luftan ^contribs 21:42, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Article makes clear and explicit claim of notability in the form of a 28-year winning streak in cross country meets, which just ended, fully supported with a reliable and verifiable source. This is on top of the clear consensus that such schools are notable per WP:OUTCOMES. I assume only Z-class nominators are unfaimilar with this consensus. Z-class editors are also apparently unaware that Wikipedia:deletion policy requires dur diligence by nominators to edit and improve the article, a process which seems to have been ignored, in violation of Wikipedia policy. Alansohn 22:09, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment A. I dont see anything on that document that refers to a win streak as notable. B. Please be courteous. I nominated an article and refered to a former student as "barely notable". This gives you no reason to attack me, my contributions or my intellect. Thank you. James Luftan ^contribs 22:17, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly suggest reading Wikipedia:deletion policy, which seems to have been violated here, presumably out of ignorance. Future violations of this policy will not be tolerated. While even a student might have recognized a 244 meet win streak as notable, it took me seconds to find an editorial that states exactly that. As a tip, treat all content regardless of its creator in good faith without any attacks in the nomination. Individuals are notable or not notable; there seems to be no "barely notable" or "Z-class" status, other than intended as a derogatory remark. Alansohn 22:23, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've noted the creator as a possible student because, well, isn't that COI? And you're right, I changed it, I shouldn't be derogatory toward that one alum. James Luftan ^contribs 22:31, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - A major school with over 1,100 students and per WP:OUTCOMES, high schools are notable and the nom has provided no reason to single this one out for deletion (being created by a student is not deletion criteria). The Philadelphia Inquirer and the Courier-Post stories about the very long cross country winning streak demonstrates further notability. --Oakshade 04:03, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 13:39, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep School doesn't seem especially notable, but does have some mention in reputable news sources. Also, high schools are generally not deleted as non-notable. See WP:OUTCOMES. Wstaffor_talk 14:42, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Seems to be notable enough, its a well written article and is better than most school articles on Wikipedia. Kevin 14:45, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Since when is being written by a student a reason for deletion? Wouldn't the students of the school have the best knowledge of the school? I mean, aren't students technically the consumers? I mean, if we consider the consumer of something a COI, then virtually EVERY article is a COI article. Smashville 18:01, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- What I meant was that it seems as a guide or advertisement. As a result, I am withdrawing the nomination and will just add a clean-up tag. James Luftan ^contribs 19:57, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Alansohn Zedla 20:35, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Just a general comment, WP:OUTCOMES is no more valid of a keep excuse than WP:ILIKEIT or WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. All that essay (meaning it's just an opinion, not guideline or policy) is based on past results. High school articles are no longer automatically kept since most people started to realize that schools have to pass existing notability guidelines just like any other article. I was gone from Wikipedia for most of the summer, so I don't know why people started using that essay in AFD's, but I hope admins ignore people whos only argument or main argument is "per OUTCOMES". I am not voting here, but a 28 year winning streak in track seems impressive. TJ Spyke 21:38, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Since you give credence to at least 2 Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions points (WP:ILIKEIT and WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS), that essay also includes WP:ONLYESSAY, an argument you are using to ignore WP:OUTCOMES. --Oakshade 22:02, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Most of the people I see citing OUTCOMES though only say "Keep because OUTCOMES says that high schools are notable". I don't mind people using that in their argument, but far too many people are using it to say all high schools should be kept (the section you pointed out even says that people shouldn't use that arguement). TJ Spyke 22:08, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
WP:OUTCOMES demonstrates what consensus has decided over time, that consensus being that high schools are notable, even if some HS articles don't have the frequently sough secondary sources writing about them. --Oakshade 23:12, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the usefulness of OUTCOMES is that it serves as a quick help to knowing to what is likely to happen here, based on what generally happens. It's just a summary, but it's summary of our actual practice, and a good guide to what is or isn't worth sending to AfD. DGG (talk) 05:40, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Many articles are created by students. They do not WP:OWN them though. Yamaguchi先生 02:13, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — Notable. — RJH (talk) 18:21, 20 October 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.