Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Duveneck School

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 02:50, May 23, 2005 (UTC)

Duveneck School[edit]

Non-notable elementary school, delete. Neutralitytalk 05:13, May 17, 2005 (UTC)

  • Delete unless wikipedia wants a short, pointless article for every run of the mill school on the planet. CDThieme 05:16, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep schools. Verifiable and NPOV. Schools are perfect for involving new Wikipedians. First, preserve knowledge, then expand knowledge. Thanks to Neutrality, I've had no time for adding content today. --Unfocused 05:51, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Another good way of preserving knowledge is by merging and redirecting (to Palo Alto, California in this case), it's better to have a long, comprehensive article than an array of substubs. JYolkowski // talk 22:37, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Kappa 05:55, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Instutional Vanity. Wikipedia isn't a triviabase Gmaxwell 06:27, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, vaincruft. Master Thief Garrett 07:58, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge into Palo Alto, California and delete - Skysmith 09:36, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Outright delete: Elementary school (the bad "peace of the schools" from a year ago had elementary schools on the "never notable" side), and the article simply does not provide any rationale for this being an encyclopedic topic. Geogre 11:57, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep.JuntungWu 12:42, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Good stub. Of recent schools listings, I've found 2 that were deletable because they were substubs, not identifying their subjects adequately. But the rest have all been verifiable. Please exercise more discrimination in listing schools for deletion. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 13:48, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - has potential Lupin 14:09, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • keeep Lotsofissues 14:29, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep schools in wikipedia. --Howrealisreal 14:43, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, vanity - but nominator should be warned for WP:POINT. Radiant_* 15:02, May 17, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete not neccisarily nominated in good faith, but there's still a good point here. Notability not established. --InShaneee 15:04, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Note that his user page says "I consider myself a school inclusionist. ... I object to three-line articles that have no content at all ... how is the subject of this article different from others?" Therefore I don't think that this mass-nomination is done in bad faith... Master Thief Garrett 15:45, 17 May 2005 (UTC) And I should add that according to the guidelines of WP:FAITH you should be assuming a generous margin of good faith. It's not like he wanted to delete Columbine... Master Thief Garrett 16:17, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge/Consolidate into an article on the local school administrative district. — RJH 16:11, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep -- Longhair | Talk 17:04, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, though I agree that this this mass-VfDing is probably not the best way to go about things. Couldn't we find some sort of (possibly BEEFSTEW-based, though with a little more emphasis on the school instead of the article) compromise that will at least get a reasonably large majority of support? (I'm not going to vote on all of these school VfDs that are never going to get consensus to delete anyway, there are better uses of my time). --W(t) 19:13, 2005 May 17 (UTC)
  • 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 20:28, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep the schoolcruft. Ketsuban has spoken. The debate is over. 21:21, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Bogus (non-policy) mass nomination, clogging the system - notability is still not a listed deletion criterion - David Gerard 23:19, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Non-notable primary school. Quale 23:59, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge with Palo Alto, California per my school article policy. Kelly Martin 02:12, May 18, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, schoolcruft. —RaD Man (talk) 08:04, 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 18:32, 19 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Introduce a limit of 3 nominations per dayCalJW 18:47, 19 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Notable elementary school worthy of inclusion. All Palo Alto school's are notable. User:GRider/Schoolwatch Klonimus 23:36, 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/Duveneck_School&oldid=50028129"