Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saddleback High

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was - kept - SimonP 02:00, May 23, 2005 (UTC)

Saddleback_High[edit]

Vanity page

  • Weak keep. Could be expanded into viable article, given time and interest, although certainly somewhat unencyclopedic as currently written. Rlquall 02:04, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Useless collection of generic facts about an insignificant school. This is not an encyclopedia article. Individual schools are not inherently encyclopedic and there is nothing to distinguish insignificant schools like this one from thousands of nearly identical schools around the world. Gamaliel 03:39, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Three-day-old high school stub. Reasonable for now. Give it time. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 03:58, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Even if the article were expanded, the subject would still be non-notable. I'm sure you could write a very long article on Greenhaven Drive, but it wouldn't be notable either. Notability flows from the unique and important details of the subject, not the logorrhea used to describe mundane trivia. Quale 04:27, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete unless wikipedia wants a boring, pointless article for every average school in every country. CDThieme
  • Keep schools. Verifiable and NPOV. First, preserve knowledge, then expand knowledge. --Unfocused 05:22, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, not encyclopaedic. Agree with Quale. --bainer 05:44, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and expand. Kappa 06:11, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Instutional Vanity, wikipedia is not triviapedia.Gmaxwell 06:15, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge into Santa Ana, California and delete - Skysmith 08:59, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge as recommended by Skysmith. Too granular a level of detail for a separate article. Average Earthman 09:02, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • A phonebook entry, oh how useful indeed. The pinnacle of Schoolwatch usefulness [sic]. Merge and Delete. Master Thief Garrett 11:07, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete- doesn't give any facts that are wikipedia-worthy --Cynical 13:14, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, non-notable. Neutralitytalk 13:56, May 17, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep - has potential. Lupin 14:05, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep schools in wikipedia. --Howrealisreal 14:32, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • This isn't a school, it's a phonebook listing. I could search-n-replace it with McDonald's and it would look exactly the same. Master Thief Garrett 14:51, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • I think your point of view here is real shallow. Sure, at this moment, this article is not up to the best of standards, but does that really qualify it to be deleted? Instead of giving up on all these school articles, they should at least be available to be improved in the future. --Howrealisreal 15:13, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • Probably it *is* broad and shallow at this time of night, but the problem is it will sit as a stub for the rest of eternity. And, if someone *did* come to add it, doubtless they'd say "oh, my school won't be here at all, so I'll start Saddleback High School" and no-one will ever deal with *this* stub. If someone wants to recreate it with valid content that's another story. If you see what I mean... hmmm, at this time of night I don't even know if *I* see what I mean... Master Thief Garrett 16:16, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete no potential for growth into noteworthyness. --InShaneee 14:52, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, vanity. Radiant_* 14:54, May 17, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep and mark as stub. High school articles can be very successful (like this one). It should be judged by its potential, not by its current standard. Eixo 15:48, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge/Consolidate into an article on the local school administrative district, or else *keep. — RJH 16:39, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep -- Longhair | Talk 16:54, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move to Saddleback High School and expand. Ketsuban has spoken. The debate is over. 20:59, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Verifiable. Notability is still not a listed deletion criterion - David Gerard 22:40, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as with others. Christopher Parham 00:41, 2005 May 18 (UTC)
  • Merge with Santa Ana, California; does not meet my standalone school article criterion. Kelly Martin 00:51, May 18, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep and make room for extra servings of BEEFSTEW. —RaD Man (talk) 00:57, 18 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge into Santa Ana, or an article on the relevant school district, unless it can be expanded beyond the one sentence substub that it is (the contact info doesn't count as true content). Stop the dogma, people. Whether or not schools are or can be notable has nothing to do with what the insubstantial content of this article is. I challenge anyone voting an unqualified keep to put your money where your mouth is and expand the damn thing. Postdlf 01:36, 18 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - What ever happened to "Don't bite the newcomers"? This was the first new article of a new user who has made a number of decent edits and we are VfD'ing his first article before it has been a stub for four days. What a friendly bunch we are! DS1953 03:40, 18 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Rather than saying anything in my own words, I will instead quote from the great Shigeru Miyamoto: "A delayed game is eventually good, a bad game is bad forever." The same could easily be applied to Wikipedia articles. If an article up for Vfd has potential for expansion and/or is expanded during the course of the Vfd, people vote to keep it. If it can never ever ever be improved in the eyes of the Vfders, it should go. Leaving it to stagnate just to cushion newcomers isn't going to help anyone. And, as an aside, a large percentage of Vfd articles are put up the second they are created, and in this case they are almost always by anon IPs and new users. Master Thief Garrett 05:35, 18 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge as above. If the article is kept, the name needs to be changed to the formal name of the school. Vegaswikian 05:55, 18 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Non-notable phonebook entry of a school. Should I make phonebook entries at Wikipedia of the 4 schools near where I live? Sarg 14:05, 18 May 2005 (UTC). Changing vote to Keep after recent changes. But still needs some more work. I don't believe in "organic growth". Perhaps we should create "inorganic growth". Sarg 06:54, 21 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yes, all stubs on valid topics are useful contributions. CalJW 18:17, 19 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • Well, I won't do it, that is quite absurd, since I don't think they would be "valid". Sarg 22:06, 19 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Wikipedia is not a phonebook. Jayjg (talk) 21:29, 18 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and expand. - SimonP 02:38, May 19, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Wikipedia is not a high-school directory. --Calton | Talk 04:12, 19 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. If you want to write a school article, write some useful content! Harro5 10:21, May 19, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, useless article. Grue 16:13, 19 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Time wasting nomination. CalJW 18:17, 19 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Lots of articles start out as mere stubs. Visit Schoolwatch to vote on other schools up for vfd. --Zantastik 18:19, 19 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and note that needs to be improved--AYArktos 21:50, 19 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep until Wikipedia runs out of space. -- BD2412 talk 02:15, 2005 May 20 (UTC)
  • Delete = not notable. NoAccount 02:45, 20 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and allow it to expand for this has the potential to be encyclopedic. -dozenist 05:19, 20 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - As per all schools, I vote to keep. --Irishpunktom\talk 14:42, May 20, 2005 (UTC)
  • keep please it is important and encyclopedic Yuckfoo 18:23, 20 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. In its current form, this article has a BEEFSTEW score of 7. By allowing the natural organic growth process to take its course, there is no doubt in my mind this school can achieve a perfect 10. --Bahn Mi 20:29, 20 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Notable school. User:GRider/Schoolwatch Klonimus 23:25, 22 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Saddleback_High&oldid=1142609807"