Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wasatch Elementary (Ogden, Utah)

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 no consensus, defaulting to keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 20:55, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No article just an address entry -Nv8200p talk 23:12, 16 September 2006 (UTC) -Nv8200p[reply]

• weak keep Just because it's a stub doesn't mean that it should be deleted. I didn't see anything in deletion policy that suggests it should be deleted, but agree it should be fleshed out. Guinness 00:18, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Still a stub, but improvements mean that my vote is no longer weak. Guinness 13:25, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Besides the fact that it's an address entry, the article is to be deleted in accordance to the deletion of several other elementary school articles. We have a WikiProject for adding high school entries, but not elementary school entries. There just wouldn't be that much to write about. For high schools, you could write about various things such as athletics, academics, etc., but for elementary school, you probably could not write about those things. --Nishkid64 00:55, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment- That would be a valid point if it were not for the general community consensus on schools' notability. --ForbiddenWord 19:04, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment Now there is a claimed consensus on the notability of elementary schools? Don't be ridiculus. JoshuaZ 19:28, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Comment- Looking at the points Kappa makes below I think it's impossible to honestly say otherwise. One quick glance at the log at schoolwatch will tell you that trying to delete School articles is a frivolous waste of time. --ForbiddenWord 19:38, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. This school is not at all notable. Aside from being an elementary school, there's very little to say about it. It has no assertion of notability. What makes it different from any other elementary school? Nothing. Perhaps if it was a controversial school, or the site of a few murders, or had many famous pupils, it would deserve its own article, but there's nothing that distinguishes it from any of the other hundreds of thousands of elementary schools in the United States. Srose (talk) 01:12, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per NishKid64. —dustmite 02:51, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment — Suggest creating a Provo School District article, followed by a redirect/merge to that location. — RJH (talk) 19:04, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep for being notable as a multiple award winning school; the article has been expanded briefly. Yamaguchi先生 11:39, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Would you be opposed to a merge/redirect as suggested by RJ? Srose (talk) 22:49, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, verifiability over notability. --Myles Long 22:16, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. The fact that I was in a certain high school production is verifiable; it's in two newspapers. Does that mean that particular production deserves an article? I'm trying to get to the bottom of your reasoning, Myles, not attack you. Srose (talk) 22:41, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, good stub, passes proposed WP:SCHOOLS criteria. Kappa 01:40, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete The notion that Elementary schools need a strong burden of proof to be notable this does not get anywhere near it. A few minor awards does not confer notability. And Srose makes a good point, by the sort of inclusion criteria people are trying to use for schools, we would have articles about everything under the sun. I find it disturbing that a few months ago we were arguing over whether to keep highschools and the argument has no shifted to elementary schools. What's next daycares? JoshuaZ 01:55, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I wouldn't worry too much about daycares. Kappa 03:06, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment Really? See Forbidden's comment below and note that many daycares would probably have verifiable info about them. JoshuaZ 01:29, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yes, really. Kappa 01:33, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, all subjects are notable and deserve a groundswell of articles --ForbiddenWord 18:54, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment All subjects? JoshuaZ 01:29, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and allow for organic growth, meets proposed WP:SCHOOLS criteria. Bahn Mi 01:12, 21 September 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.