Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steve MacLean Public School

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 delete. Drmies (talk) 02:20, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Steve MacLean Public School

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Contested PROD. Concern was: Non-notable K-8 school. Eeekster (talk) 00:38, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Not notable.--Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 01:03, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and redirect: Non-notable primary school. I couldn't find anything substantial about it with Google other than routine, trivial, tangential and local coverage. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 01:22, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:11, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:11, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to school board, Ottawa-Carleton District School Board. Standard practice for non-notable schools. RS coverage is not enough to satisfy WP:ORGDEPTH. • Gene93k (talk) 19:45, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The school was named after a notable Canadian, Ottawa-native and graduate of a high school in the same Ottawa-Carleton District School board. This article has received almost 500 hits since its publication on Wikipedia a few days ago. The school is only a few years old, so it is not unexpected that it may not have as wide a presence on Google as other schools. This, however, does not trivialize its importance as a source of information to the community and public at large. The article is well written and has been edited to include several references to reliable third-party sources to make the information verifiable. Also refer to this template which lists other Ottawa-Carleton District School Board schools: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:OCDSB. Many of these schools have published Wikipedia articles. The publication of Wikipedia articles on certain schools and not others, especially within the same school board could appear discriminatory. This inconsistency would result in under-representation of certain schools in relation to others. --Lfroms (talk) 02:13, 14 November 2012 (UTC) — Lfroms (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Being named for a notable person does not make a school notable. Primary schools are generally not notable, and this one is not an exception. Being part of a template doesn't establish notability either. WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS comes under arguments to avoid. Other non-notable primary schools in this school board will probably be dealt with in due course. • Gene93k (talk) 03:22, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia article has been further modified to highlight notable accomplishments and projects. The school has won various national and provincial awards. It is believed that the notability criteria have been met and the subject matter is worthy of notice. The information in the article is verifiable with multiple reliable third-party sources. Also, the school has and continues to receive significant detailed coverage in various publications and the media (see citations). --Lfroms (talk) 00:58, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That all falls under WP:Run of the mill, nothing extraordinary for an elemetary school. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 20:38, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Non-notable primary school, only six years old. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:24, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Age is just a number, and numbers are not used to judge notability on Wikipedia" WP:OLDAGE. The fact that this school is only 6 years old does not influence its notability. According to Wikipedia notability guidelines, a school is notable " if it has been the subject of significant coverage in secondary sources. Such sources must be reliable, and independent of the subject" WP:ORGDEPTH. Further, the guidelines indicate that a school "can be considered notable if there is substantial verifiable evidence of coverage by reliable independent sources" WP:CLUB. There is verifiable evidence of coverage of this school and its notable accomplishments by reliable independent sources including the media and publications by nationally-known organizations. Therefore, the school is notable. --Lfroms (talk) 21:30, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Age alone is not a defining element, but older schools are more likely to have notable histories. This is a new school without notable history (due to its age!) or architecture whose "achievements" include winning a couple of prizes, just like most other schools in the world. It has been mentioned a few times in local media, just like most other schools in the world. Being named after someone notable does not make it notable itself, as notability is not inherited. I repeat, it is not notable. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:30, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Notability" is not synonymous with "fame" or "importance." WP:ORGSIG. In the Wikipedia guidelines, the criteria for notability do not appear to rely on a "notable history" or "extraordinary" accomplishments of a subject matter. It is reiterated, that according to the Wikipedia guidelines, this article fulfills the requirements for notability. The school has been the subject of significant coverage by reliable, independent sources. It is further added that the jist of the arguments to keep this article is not based on placing this school in a category of schools that have a notable history and are in some way "extraordinary". The purpose of this Wikipedia article is to include this school in the collection of schools already published on Wikipedia as a source of important information to the public. --Lfroms (talk) 14:11, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But I see no "significant coverage". I see a few articles about the school in local media. So what? That could apply to every single school in the western world. That's not significant coverage. That's ordinary, run of the mill coverage. Failing that, we must look for notability elsewhere, and frankly there is none. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:22, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

According to Wikipedia guidelines, "Significant coverage means that sources address the subject directly in detail, so no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention but it need not be the main topic of the source material" WP:SIGCOV. The publication sources cited in this article have indeed addressed the school in detail (e.g. newspaper articles). It is true that many schools of the western world, including those which already have their own Wikipedia articles, are covered in regional or local media. However, regional coverage also counts towards notability. The Wikipedia guidelines states that "Evidence of attention by international or national, or at least regional, media is a strong indication of notability" WP:ORGDEPTH. Further, the school has been covered by nationally-recognized organizations which publish outside the local area (see citations). --Lfroms (talk) 17:27, 16 November 2012 (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.