Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Walker Middle 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 no consensus. Mailer Diablo 15:31, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

nn Tony Bruguier 03:03, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Delete. Not notable enough. DarthVader 04:16, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong delete It takes a very strong case to keep a middle school for an encyclopedia. TeKE 04:26, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep most schools are notable. bbx 04:57, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, I believe the school debate only really concluded that high schools were borderline notable. I might vote to keep if it was a decent article. —Cuiviénen, Sunday, 16 April 2006 @ 05:34 (UTC)
• Delete - I can't believe that all high schools are notable. Elementary schools certainly aren't. Montco 06:09, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per well established precedent. --Rob 10:00, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. I ask that you please, please don't consider precedent a reason for an AfD. With a thousand articles deleted every day through speedy, prod and here, context for the current situation is applicable. Sure, there are other middle school articles that may exsist because they escaped notice of the process, or notability exist (which isn't an official guideline either). Seriously, do you think paraphrase "Walker Elementary School in Oregon has a 1,000 students. They have education and sports" is the foundation for anything? TeKE 00:20, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I certainly will consider precedent. I don't beleive in acting randomly. Over the last year there have been a huge number of school AFDs. The overwhelming bulk of schools (including ones like this) are kept. It's not "happen stance" that elem+middle schools are kept. It's the norm. Deletion is the exception, and almost always involves non-verifiability. Wikipedia:Watch/schoolwatch/Schools for deletion archive and Wikipedia:Watch/schoolwatch/Schools for deletion archive/2005 shows the standard is it to keep all verifiable real K-12 schools (including elems and middle schools). Schools are in Wikipedia, because they are wanted, not because they "escaped notice". It is very intentional that school articles are created, and kept. Incidently, I don't vote to keep preschools normally, because I feel there is a clear precedent to delete them. I think we need to follow precedent, in order to provide reasonable and predictable results. --Rob 01:48, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your rational response. I was looking for evidence on votes to provide concensus, and I respect your POV. TeKE 02:06, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, real middle school. Kappa 10:18, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep if it's a real school. Tyrenius 14:25, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per Montco. RexNL 14:56, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Non-notable. — Rebelguys2 ^talk 18:03, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or Merge w/district unless article expanded and referenced. Currently fails WP:VER and WP:SCH. Gateman1997 18:37, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nothing can fail WP:SCH. It's a Wikiproject. The old Wikipedia:Schools page is a rejected guideline, since nobody could agree on anything. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 19:15, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Wrong, WP:SCH did have a proposal out... and this fails it. Gateman1997 06:49, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Well, a proposal that isn't supported by consensus (or pretty much anyone, any more) doesn't carry a lot of weight. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 03:55, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • Well I still support it as it was the only good faith compromise brought to date. Gateman1997 17:06, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete (or, failing that, merge to district or high school articles). "There's a school named X" isn't an article. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 19:15, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Rob. Jcuk 23:24, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Notable subject. Hawkestone 00:47, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Let's see an end to these tiresome nominations. Many school articles are created every day. The odd one is nominated and usually it doesn't get deleted (never if it is a high school). What is the point of going on with these nominations. There are many classes of article on the margins of notability, but only this one gets picked on regardless of how many nominations fail. CalJW 10:15, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep useful info Jordanmills 22:34, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Wikipedia:Schools/Arguments#Keep. Christopher Parham (talk) 06:27, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • You're citing a subpage for a rejected policy proposal. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 03:55, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, schools are more notable than train stations, and train stations are by policy notable per se. Monicasdude 22:55, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Which policy is that? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 03:55, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• I wish there were an article on the school district so that we could merge this two-liner article there, but we don't. Well, it is an article at least, and precedent on schools is clear, so keep and hope for a merge or expansion later. Sjakkalle (Check!) 06:46, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Does not really meet even the minimal suggested standard for a school. This could probably be speedied as an empty article. Vegaswikian 21:14, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge with district article. I'm from Oregon and can verify this is a real school. --Liface 22:58, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Isn't it about time to rethink this "all schools are notable" nonsense? Hirudo 06:08, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and allow for organic growth. Schools are notable and without question worthy of an encyclopedia which aims to be the sum of all human knowledge. Bahn Mi 17:03, 21 April 2006 (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.