Talk:North Carroll High School

North Carroll High was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. 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 CONSENSUS NOT REACHED though since the article was improved all votes were to keep.

Untitled

Non-notable high school. --LeeHunter 17:26, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

• Delete: The author isn't even sure where it is and has trouble writing in standard English. No sign is provided in the article that the school is remarkable in any way. Geogre 17:57, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Allow me to point out that this article qualifies as a speedy delete for being a substub from which nothing could grow (inasmuch as the author didn't know where the school was) and for being nonsense (incomprehensible sentence sthat showedn o effort at al by the author). However, some people are hyperventilating over schools. No argument on why schools are inherently needed, just "Well, the whole system won't crash if they're there." I've done a fair bit of historical research. When the archeologists of the present appear in 50 years, they will not go to an encyclopedia to find out about routine high schools: they'll go to reliable, informative sources like local county records. If they want to know what one child thought about it, they'll go to whatever Internet archive exists and look at the school's own website. They won't come here. We can't do the job, don't need to do the job, and shouldn't be doing the job of cataloging routine schools without discussion. Geogre 20:14, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I disagree that this is a substub "from which nothing could grow." Clearly there is a lot of factual information about this school that could be added. Also, we are not solely working towards being a record of information that archeologists would look to us for in fifty years time. Surely this would not be where they would go to find information on most historical notable persons, because there are other sources of information on those people; but we still have articles on important historical personages. Posiduck 00:31, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I was only talking about the "useful" argument for school inclusion. To me, it seems like the argument for universal school inclusion is only that we provide a service to information or to browsers. I think we do not, on the former. To the latter, I think that way lies Everything2.com. The reason that we have historically notable people is that it is at least the hypothesis of Wikipedia that we might achieve as good or better with our open model as others have with peer reviewed proprietary services. I think the farther back in history a thing is, the better we can do, because we can have multiple researchers culling from stores of information. When things get right up to the second, again we do better, because we don't have a production lag. Where we do worst is in stuff like schools, armies, national economies, and other things that change quickly and where massive information is required and where the information is not easy to get. Otherwise, I think my "doughnut shop" analogy is in play. I think we should have notable schools. I just ask that a school be notable (and therefore something that can be discussed rather than just entered into a list). As it turns out, this article is by a vandal. Also, it was a substub to which nothing could be added on its face because it did not give editors an idea of where to go. That we are clever enough to figure it out anyway is just a bonus. Geogre 03:49, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Geogre; While I can respect our difference of opinion on the issue of school notability, I would ask that you don't leap to the conclusion that the contributor was a vandal. Careless and green, perhaps, but making a test page and a short stub on his own high school does not make him de facto a vandal. Besides, I think we'd both agree that regardless of whether or not he was trying to vandalize the wikipedia, if the stub he created was about a notable topic, and not false or nonsense, we should keep the article and expand it (though keep an eye on him if he is indeed vandalizing). Does that make sense? Posiduck 04:33, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I based that charge on the contribution of Harry Anuszewski by the same person. That article is a crude schoolroom pun. The contributor had only that and this. I think in this case the contributor didn't make a useful stub. I think that was our doing. The contributor was, I think, vandalizing and getting jollies, but he gave a valid name of a school and a state, and we did all the rest. It's only pertinent in that I fear that school articles, when they get to VfD, are getting radically different appraisals by virtue of being schools. They're being instantly built up, where an article on the daughter of a Congressman wouldn't. (I regard a congressional daughter as equally inherently notable.) Geogre 13:21, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

• Delete, no claim or evidence of notability. Sietse 18:01, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
• No vote. Withdrawing vote to delete. Not voting to keep. Because of Mark Richards' expansion, it is now a real article about a non-notable school. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 20:20, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC) Delete. Wikipedia is not greatschools.net. Or publicschoolreview.com. Which seem to me to be doing a fine job. The website cited, NorthCarrollHigh.com, does not appear to exist, by the way, which seems odd. The town of Hampstead, Maryland does exist and is in fact located in Carroll County. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 18:24, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
• keep, school articles are easily verifiable, and in my opinion, schools (like towns) are inherently notable. Posiduck 18:28, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Does anybody actually verify them? [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 18:39, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

• Well that's an entirely separate question, perhaps there should be a wikiproject specifically for fact-checking school information. At any rate, I think its a separate issue from whether or not this article ought to be deleted. I cleaned up the article somewhat, and added a stub notice. Posiduck 18:52, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

• Well, it's not an entirely separate question, since if there isn't a wikiproject in place it isn't as "easily verifiable". -- WOT 23:03, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

• • • I often do verify them. anthony 警告 04:23, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
• Keep I am becoming somewhat disturbed at the level of deletionism occuring for seemingly worthy articles. There little, if any, harm in keeping interesting and esoteric material. If someone does not want to know about this topic then they will not be subjected to it, yet it will be here for people who do want to know about it.--ShaunMacPherson 18:30, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • And if we delete it, it will be here, listing at GreatSchools, for people who want to know about it. And here, Public School Review listing, for people who want to know about it. And, of course, here McFly listing, for people who want to know about it. So, what's the problem? [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 18:55, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

• Well, the existence of that information in other places doesn't seem to be a good reason not to also have it here. Posiduck 19:23, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
• Why not have it here as well, As well Jimbo Wales said the goal of Wikipedia is to have the sum of all human knowledge, and that sum of knowledge includes important institutions like schools. --ShaunMacPherson 21:04, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Schools are not important in and of themselves. Chris 02:54, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

• • • publicschoolreview.com and greatschools.net aren't free. mcfly.org is, but it's not editable (yet, anyway). anthony 警告 04:32, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
• Delete, I'm disturbed at the level of inclusionism for seemingly unworthy articles. Shaun, How the !@#$ is this article worthy? "X high school is a high school in Y state. It is located near P city in Q county. It has been recently renovated." Substitute appropriate values for any school and it'll be true. Generic articles with no notable content are not encyclopedic. -Vina 19:30, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

• Look at this, and tell me you don't think just about any school could be expanded in a similar way. Posiduck 20:25, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

No, it couldn't be, because there isn't a large pool of contributors like User:Gerald Farinas. Look at the edit history of Moanalua_High_School. Articles do not grow by themselves,...

Couldn't be, or won't be? There is a difference. One is about whether or not the article has the capacity to be expaned, the other is your prediction about the interest level of contributors. Posiduck 00:31, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

No they do not, however you are not even giving them a chance to grow.--ShaunMacPherson 21:17, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

...there need to be people to do the work of writing them, people that care about the subject matter. I can see that there are several people dedicated to voting "keep" on school articles, but I don't yet see a lot of activity in the way of expanding them.

The last 4 hours of my time has been spent in here voting. If you want articles to be expanded upon then I suggest you get busy writing them and not in here causing others to divert their time in making the articles that you want 'activity' in.--ShaunMacPherson 21:17, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

The point was that if you're so keen to have one-line articles kept, go expand them into something useful. VfD is usually judged on a case-by-case basis. This vote is not about whether all schools should be kept, it's about why this school should be kept. Eton College is in, but that doesn't mean this should. Eton is a notable public school, this school is unremarkable. In the same way that Albert Einstein is in here, but I am not. Einstein is one of the most important (if not the most important) physicists ever. I am a lowly student. Chris 02:54, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

ShaunMacPherson, spend your time as you like. Relax and stop trying to control something that's not very controllable. Accept the fact that some schools are going to be deleted and some are going to be kept. There's no consensus, no likelinood of achieving one, so schools will be debated case by case and the decisions aren't going to be exquisitely consistent. The range of opinion clearly includes people that believe that all school articles, no matter how short, badly written, incomplete, inaccurate, and non-notable the school should be kept, even if it's an elementary school. It also includes people that believe that superb articles about non-notable high schools should be deleted. In actual fact, many articles about schools do get deleted so there's no point in asserting as SimonP has that "these articles get kept anyway." And many get kept. So there's no point in arguing against their being listed here, since the outcome is variable. Trying to control the process by investing personal energy is not a recipe for happiness. When the deletionists are asleep, out of town, or working on articles more school articles will be kept, and vice versa. Hop into VfD when you feel like it, vote as you wish, spend your time as you please, and don't pretend that you're saving the world. We're not talking about human embryos, we're talking about very poor, very short, articles about non-notable schools, typically by anons. Think in specifics, not abstractions. If some dedicated person contributes half-a-dozen superb articles about borderline-notable schools and they get deleted in some parliamentary maneuver by deletionists and the contributor leaves Wikipedia in a huff, then we can talk about it. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 09:42, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

There's no point in an article like this one. 208.198.210.253 isn't Gerald Farinas and isn't coming back to expand the article. And as for Posiduck, he has not only not expanded the article, he has removed material from it. By and large people are not that interested in working on school articles about schools they have no personal connection with, and most school articles stand or fall on the energy and writing ability of single contributors [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 21:09, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Look at it this way; lets say there was some Gerald Farinas for this particular high school. And they turned it into an amazing page. Would you vote to delete it then? Based on the reasoning you are giving here, I think not. At least, I haven't seen the Hawaiian school I linked to on the deletion block. So, the subject matter isn't the problem. Now, is "currently a stub" a good reason to delete? No. "Not expandable" would be, but clearly, it is expandable. Perhaps if high schools weren't voted to be deleted so often, people who care about those high schools might realize what they could do here, and we'd have more Gerald Farinas. Posiduck 00:31, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

• Keep. Agree with Posiduck and ShaunMacPherson. -- Radman1 20:16, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. Indrian 21:52, Oct 27, 2004 (UTC)
• Delete - Geogre pretty much stated how I feel. Ian Pugh 22:17, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. No realistic potential to become encyclopaedic. -- WOT 23:03, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. — Bill 23:07, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. I agree with Vina. NeoJustin 23:28 Oct 27, 2004 (UTC)
• Delete if fewer than 370 students attend this school, keep otherwise. I don't really mind either way, but a 370 person town was unanimously voted for keeping a few days ago, so I feel we should be consistent. Shane King 23:32, Oct 27, 2004 (UTC)

  Schools are not towns. Schools are not important in and of themselves. New schools go up every day. New towns do not. Chris 02:54, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

• Delete. Non-notable, as are most of these school articles, but that doesn't bother those who would prefer to attack the motives of those of us who believe in making a real, valid encyclopedia instead of a Garbageopedia. Why don't you all work on McFly, which will accept anything? RickK 23:39, Oct 27, 2004 (UTC)

• Why don't the people who think we shouldn't include all of the Factual NPOV information we can go start some slimwiki project which contains only that information a traditional encyclopedia would? It seems unfair for you to say that because I disagree with you about whether or not schools are notable, I should go work on another project. Posiduck 00:31, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • McFly doesn't accept direct contributions anyway. anthony 警告 12:16, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

• Keep. Mark Richards 00:49, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. Joke or test, could have been a speedy. Andrewa 01:05, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

• On what grounds would this be a speedy? Posiduck 02:14, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

  On the grounds of being a joke/test page. Chris 02:55, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

• Right, except, let's say that we didn't have a page on Louis the Fifteenth, and someone created it as a joke/test (not containing false information, but instead containing very small amounts of correct information). Surely we should amend that article rather than deleting it. It seems as though it should only count as a joke or test page if the content is false or the content clearly indicates that it is a test page. Posiduck 04:05, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

• Keep. School. anthony 警告 01:21, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
• D One line, no evidence of notability, Google seems to agree. The Keep voters are not providing valid reasons for their votes other than "why not just keep it?" - a point which has been validly answered several times. Chris 02:54, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

• I urge you to reconsider your position. Here is reasoning in support of keeping articles about schools.

1. Articles about schools would contain factual verifiable NPOV content.
2. There is evidence of how robust an article about a "non-notable" school can become: Moanalua_High_School
3. Many, many newcomers seem to create articles about schools. I.E. many future wikipedians could begin by creating a school article and then, as a result become more active members.
4. A fully robust article on any given high school is unlikely to emerge in one or two short edits, but given practically any stub, someone can add a little bit to it at a time; (the general idea of the wiki process).
5. A growing number of wikipedians consider schools to be, on the whole, notable merely in virtue of being schools.
6. And, finally, in light of those considerations, and because we ought to catalogue as much verifiable, NPOV knowledge as possible, unless there are very good reasons to eliminate an article on a school, it should be kept. And I, for one, don't consider "not notable" to be a good objection, and I think the objection "unlikely to blossom into an article" is overly pessimistic.

Posiduck 03:25, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Verifiable and NPOV is not enough to make something worth having. What would you think if I literally went and created an article on, say, my pet Iguana, my neighbor's birds, the sidewalks of my neighborhood, the sidewalks of somebody else's neighborhood, a random bus stop in Cleveland, some graffiti I saw in a bathroom stall, the menus at local food stands, some kid I met, or similar things. Would you actually vote to keep such stuff? --Improv 19:43, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I'd be surprised if you can write a verifiable, factualarticle on some graffiti you saw in a bathroom stall, and to be honest, it looks like a straw-man argument. But if you think you can, go ahead, and we can vote on it. Mark Richards 23:37, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Kill it or I'm going to have to create an article on Saratoga High School, which Steven Spielberg thought was the worst experience of his life. Obviously we need an article on Eton, just as obviously we don't need one on every high school in the world. Gene Ward Smith 03:55, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

• Delete. Few schools meet the high bar of notability required to be encyclopedic. Surprised? :) --Improv 04:24, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

• From the OED: encyclopedic: "that aims at embracing all branches of learning; universal in knowledge, very full of information, comprehensive." In exactly what way do schools fail this criteria? Posiduck 05:07, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
• I'm especially impressed as how you've managed to beg the question twice in one sentence. anthony 警告 13:31, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

• Delete. Fuzheado | Talk 04:46, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
• Comment: My claim above that this is a joke or test and a possible speedy was based on the link that I supplied, showing that the user's only contributions were this and a related joke or test page also listed for deletion. You might like to read the original text they contributed. Despite a lot of comment and work since, as I write this the only material yet added to the article is a latitude and longitude, so the only claim to notability remains The school has recently been renovated, now spelled correctly. If we keep that, we will be a laughingstock. This goes a bit deeper than being a test case for high schools. No useful content, no change of vote. Andrewa 19:08, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I made some changes. Mark Richards 19:25, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

What we now have is an actual article, about a non-notable school. I'm not going to vote to keep, but I'm simply going to withdraw my delete vote, as I do not care whether this article is kept or deleted. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 20:20, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

• Merge and redirect to a Schools section of Hampstead, Maryland. The Steve 19:45, Oct 28, 2004 (UTC)
• Keep (change of vote). Now a reasonable article. Too much content to merge. Andrewa 21:22, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. Trollminator 00:07, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
• Comment. I am glad someone actually took some time to attempt improving one of these articles rather than just complaining. I still do not think it is notable enough, but this is certainly a step in the right direction. Indrian 01:58, Oct 29, 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. older≠wiser 16:55, Oct 30, 2004 (UTC)
• Keep - David Gerard 12:51, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)
• Keep —siroχo 10:28, Nov 1, 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.