Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alonso High School

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Dpbsmith (talk | contribs) at 01:48, 21 September 2004 (No, this is not an argument not to write stubs at all.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Jump to navigation Jump to search

A non-special primary education high school.

  • (Note: above rationale was added by User:DraQue Star.) --Ardonik.talk()* 05:06, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)
  • A Google search for "Alonso High School" gives 263 hits. Since I think the community's consensus on high schools is to let each one stand or fall on its own merits and notability, I find it hard to vote for anything but delete. As always, I'm willing to be convinced otherwise. --Ardonik.talk()* 05:06, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)
    • However, note that "Alonso High" gets 1380. Quadell (talk) (help)[[]] 23:20, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete: The article does not establish anything special about this high school. It is not poorly written, but it does not establish notability. Geogre 12:51, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Not notable. --Improv 16:31, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep consensus is not to delete high schools and 90% of them listed on VfD are kept. - SimonP 17:01, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)
There is no such consensus that I'm aware of. If there is one, please point me to it. I believe that the correct statement is that because there is no such consensus, and because consensus is required for deletion, it is fairly easy for a high school article to survive VfD. That is not a reason for automatically keeping them without discussion. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 19:49, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
The difficulty with having no policy on high schools is that most of them are kept, but some also end up being arbitrarily deleted. Since we are fairly evenly divided on the inclusion of high schools it generally works out that stubs or unformatted articles on high schools get deleted, while longer ones are kept. This violates basic Wikipedia principles. - SimonP 20:00, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)
I'm not trying to be argumentative—really. This is not a rhetorical question. I agree that the tendency is that "stubs get deleted, while longer ones are kept." But I'm happy with that. What basic Wikipedia principles does this violate? I'm willing to listen. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith
How many other articles get deleted simply because they are stubs? Being as stub has never been a criteria for deletion, nor should it be. Yet high schools are getting deleted simply because they are stubs. Not because people vote to delete them for that reason, but because others refrain from voting to keep them. - SimonP 23:25, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)

(talk)]] 20:42, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I agree with [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith. Furthermore, I can point you to the "consensus." It was informally reached when someone wrote List of schools and someone else listed it on VfD. That debate went on for a few epochs, and, in the end, people voting there sort of kind of agreed that high schools stay (there) and others go (there). That's it. No policy, no consensus reached in any deliberative forum except the VfD debate on one article. Since then, people have used the chimera of a consensus that "High schools stay" in VfD voting, but the truth is that it's exactly as Dpbsmith says: every single nomination is its own case. The only policy is the deletion guidelines. Thus, notability, encyclopedic content, non-advertising, etc. Geogre 00:50, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete - not notable - Tεxτurε 17:32, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Why not? There are lots of high schools and lots of colleges. There's no good to add all of them, but, so far as I'm concerned, there's no good reason to delete them either. Quadell (talk) (help)[[]] 18:53, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)
My view is that they should be kept if they are good articles, and discarded if they are basically stubs, because stubs are essentially a request for someone else to write an article. In a developing encyclopedia it makes sense that there are those who can reliably judge "we need an article on X," knowing that they can't write it themselves, and that there are others around ready and willing to flesh out the skeleton. In this case, there is value in submitting a stub. This is not the case for non-notable high schools. If we had a high-school expert who loved to write articles about high schools, such a person might well take high school stubs into account in prioritizing his work. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 19:55, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. There is good reason to delete anything that is not notable, that isn't likely to be mentioned in books or other media outside of its local area (and is considered rather ordinary and non-notable in its local area). There is good reason to add only those that are notable in some way or other. This particular uninformative substub article contains more information on Braulio Alonso than on the school. Since the Braulio Alonso article (created by the same editor who created this article) is marked as suspected copyright violation, perhaps the Braulio Alonso information here could be moved to that article's /Temp subpage to create a new stub there. Jallan 19:06, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Not notable. RickK 19:13, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)
  • delete. While there is no consensus to delete high school articles, there is no concensus to keep them, either. This school appears to lack notability. Gentgeen 19:47, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete unless greatly improved before the expiration of VfD. Delete because it is not an article that says anything of much use or much interest even to alums; because stubs are not worthwhile in themselves, but only as they lead to articles; and because it is unlikely that the Wikipedian community contains anyone able and interested in adding more to this than the original contributor. People who want high school articles to Wikipedia should submit articles, not stubs. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 19:49, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
    • Just curious -- is that an argument not to write stubs at all? Quadell (talk) (help)[[]] 23:20, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)
      • No. There are better stubs and worse stubs. See Wikipedia:Perfect stub article. A stub is not useful in itself. It's only useful if it grows into an article, or if it provides a useful amount of information itself. We should write articles when we can. We should write good stubs when we are quite sure that the topic is encyclopedic, and the stub provides enough information to have some value of its own, and we think there's a reasonable likelihood that someone will expand it within a month or so. We should not write worthless stubs, and we should delete worthless stubs if others write them. Wikipedia:Perfect stub article says that when you do write a stub you should be prepared to keep adding to it yourself. "If nobody contributes to your stub for a few weeks, roll up your sleeves and expand it yourself." This is an encylopedia; it's not the Britannica "Micropedia" and it's not a nanopedia. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 01:48, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. I don't have a good reason why, maybe I'm just feeling generous. Something about the former high school of a former NEA president lends it a touch of notability to me. - KeithTyler 21:22, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep, agree with KeithTyler about NEA president! -- Old Right 23:00, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • Comment: I just wanted to point out that this high school (and most high schools, actually) has more students than Alligator, Mississippi has residents. I'm just saying. Quadell (talk) (help)[[]] 23:20, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)