Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Odle Middle School

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 of the debate was keep (no consensus). Sjakkalle (Check!) 09:09, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Odle Middle School

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Odle Middle School (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Non-notable middle school full of attacks on teachers. If it was cleaned up ther would be about two sentences left. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 01:38, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that vandalism is not a reason to delete. However, do we need articles on middle schools? The high schools are bad enough. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 05:19, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not going to comment on whether this article should or should not be deleted, but we all know that it won't be. Please stop nominating school articles. Even hoax schools get votes to keep, so deleting a real one is impossible at present. fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 07:05, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep. Middle schools are notable.--Nicodemus75 07:06, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep and Merge with district, NN, woefully inadequate article, and vandalism to the extreme, but per developing consensus and compromise at WP:SCH I yield to the new view on middle schools.Gateman1997 07:15, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all schools are inherently notable, think of all the people that it influences during its period of use. All of these people who come from it are the REASON the school became notable.  ALKIVAR™ 07:41, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, for the usual reasons at the usual place. Cleanup is not a valid reason for deletion, and there is no consensus to delete these schools, please stop nominating them. My two sentences have been added. Silensor 07:58, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep A good start. CalJW 08:08, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete like almost all schools, this is unnotable and below thresshold for encyclopedic consideration. Dottore So 10:19, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, now it's been cleaned up. -- Necrothesp 10:53, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, and take standard measures to prevent vandalism A1kmm 11:10, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Argh! Not another school article!! On the one hand, we all know that most schools are not really encyclopedic. On the other hand, my non-encyclopeic school has an intake of 300 pupils a year. It has been open for about 50 years. That means it has been significant to around 15 000 children. Each child has 2 parents: so that's around another 30 000 lives impacted on. Then there are teachers, support staff, neighbours, local businesses which support the school and so on and so on, so that, all told, my old school has probably had a "notable" impact on around 100 000 lives. If only people would just stop writing these da**ed articles the problem would go away.... Marcus22 11:19, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Conversely, if only people would just stop nominating these fine articles, the problem would go away....Hipocrite - «Talk» 12:25, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Fair point. Perhaps the easiest answer would just be to speedy keep any school article. However notable/unnotable the place, any deletion vote is always going to end in no consensus. Marcus22 20:46, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep in view of precedent. Perodicticus 13:20, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep, the current version (trimmed of the personal attacks) is all OK by me, but if it continues to be vandalised, it may have to be deleted. — JIP | Talk 13:44, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete schools below university level unless they (A) played a pivotal role in the history of schools or pedagogy, (B) are notable research institutions - i.e. a noteworthy new experiment in schooling, or (C) are otherwise the subject of sustained regional, national, or international interest. This article asserts none of these. flowersofnight (talk) 14:17, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as non-notable. I can just about see senior schools as notable, but I'm not aware of precedent re. middle schools, and this one makes no claim of notability. Just zis Guy, you know? [T]/[C] :: AfD? 14:49, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Attempts to find a compromise have so far been ignored, and I doubt one will ever be attained. As always, I vote to delete every school below college level unless it did something ENCYCLOPAEDIC (and being a box of bricks for teachers to work in does not make it encyclopaedic). Proto t c 15:00, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • A compromise would be a victory for school deletionists, just as a "compromise" to delete articles about countries with less than a million inhabitants would be a victory for people who thought that small countries are not encyclopedic. About two hundred school articles are added a week and almost none are deleted. It is obvious which way things are going. The only posssible resolution to the problem is for the school deletionists to give up this fruitless and time wasting campaign. CalJW 16:06, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • No, CalJW, a compromise is where all dissenting parties agree. There is no 'campaign', 'victory' or sides - it's not a war, and comments like yours do not help. The very loose (and very informal) compromise was heading towards 'high school articles kept, below high school not kept, unless particularly notable'. However, this soon got ignored. Which was a shame. An earlier suggestion was merging short school articles into an article on the educational district. Which also got ignored (again, a shame). Proto t c 16:27, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • While I respect your opinion CalJW, it is inherently a totalitarian argument meant to stifle any dissent from those who don't share the ultra-inclusionist view. I can't fault the logic behind the unwillingness to compromise, but it essentially dooms wikipedia to an endless stream of AfD discussions about schools. If that means endless debate then so be it. I'd rather have an endless AfD debate (and hopefully a WP:CIVIL one at that) about schools than an environment where dissention is silenced. And let me echo Proto... if people would bargin in good faith we could perhaps come to a consensus that would mollify the majority. --Isotope23 16:31, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • Comment: What you are saying, CalJW, is in effect that the simple existence of a vocal group of people willing to vote consistently againt deletion of a class of article is a valid reason for that class of article to be kept in perpetuity, and further debate to be curtailed. How would you feel about a group of unsigned band inclusionists, for example? The school in question is a middle school, not a high school, and the inclusionist cabal [TINC] has not (as far as I kow) extended its coverage to such schools. And as it happens I went to a genuinely notable school (St. Albans School (St. Albans)) so I do find it perplexing that there are schoolw with much shorter histories and zero notable alumni which have *much* larger articles, 90% of which content is trivia - the removal of which trivia would, in most cases, leave "it's a school, it's in this town, it teaches the usual stuff.". - Just zis Guy, you know? [T]/[C] :: AfD? 18:32, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete non-notable, schoolcruft, lack of distinguishing characteristic, no historic value or context... you pick.--Isotope23 15:05, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Maybe I'm odder than most, but it's my belief that most any information on the important infrastructure of a town, be it historical or educational, so long as it is not commercial, is viable encyclopedic material. I could understand if we were suffering space constraints and such, but schools are supposed to be one of the key foundations of a community. If we are having problems with vandals, protect the page and follow the standards for dealing with such a problem. --Martin Osterman 16:19, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Do you also support articles on such important infrastructure as water treatment plants, sewer systems, police stations, and telephone exchanges? I guarantee you that in any given town, they will influence even more people than the school! flowersofnight (talk) 16:29, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • WP:BEANS. Don't give them any ideas. :P Lord Bob 16:30, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • I think that I need to spend a bit more time clarifying my thoughts in my own head first and foremost. :) I think that I should remove "important infrastructure" and replace with historical and educational keystones of a community -- schools, libraries, and points of historical interest (unless the first two fall under this category as well). Now, I'm not suggesting that we go as far as the Elementary School level for articles, but I think that middle and high schools are noteworthy in their communities, just as libraries might be. Once again, my beliefs might be odd, but that's my opinion on the matter. --Martin Osterman 16:46, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge into an article on the school district/local education authority/town. Schools like this are valuable as parts of their communities, but they're not notable in their own right, so we should describe them in the articles on the communities they're valuable in. (Yes, it's pointless to say this. The battle was lost long ago, and we'll probably have articles on individual kindergarten sandboxes in a year or so. But it makes me feel better...)— Haeleth Talk 16:27, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, schools remain not inherently notable. For real. Also, edit conflicts rock my socks off. Lord Bob 16:30, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Schools are inherently notable.--Elfwood 18:16, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge with appropriate geographic entity until the material becomes too much to fit there. Also, rolled eyes for intransigent partisans on both sides of this. --William Pietri 18:41, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or merge/redirect to geographical parent: At present, it contains all the information one would wish for in a directory. WP is not a directory, however. (I appreciate the efforts at improvement, but it's a lost cause, unless the school has some manner in which it is unique and commented upon by a non-local community.) Geogre 18:52, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per Geogre. FCYTravis 21:12, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep this established school per 24.16.36.37, wikipedia:Schools/Arguments#Keep and various other keep arguments above. Kappa 01:39, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep this ENCYCLOPAEDIC article, Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia. —RaD Man (talk) 02:01, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, DEFINETLY It's not exactly non-notable, it's got the PRISM Program. The PRISM Program has been very successful and almost eveyr single student that has come out of it has had a successful high school life, taking many AP Classes or taking IB and doing extremely well (as in top of the class) on all those classes. The PRISM Program has been very helpful to advanced and gifted students. Not only that, but PRISM is going to extend into high school, and a suggested high school program has been sent to Harvard and got a reply saying that the program was a very good idea and was a great college entry program.

The program consists of (in middle school) an extended math program into 11th grade (pre-calc), a 9th grade Honors Freshman composition/Philosophy/Ancient world studies class, and a 9th grade biology class (of course these highlights are for the 8th graders). Not only that, but the programs are more in depth than other schools; there is more discussing rather than reviewing the material. Those who go into high school from this program say they are BORED in AP classes, some even skip from 9th to 11th grade in high school.

The High school program extends the Math, English, and Social studies classes even further, and if it takes the AP path, will create a biotechnology class, along with other classes, just for the PRISM Students. In the IB path, the PRISM students take the IB program from 10th to 11th grade, and in the senior year in both paths, creates University of Washington classes, such as the "Social/Political/Economical/Ethical Case studies" program. I don't think this is exactly non-notable.

Odle has also done extremely well in Chess competitions and has won the Blaine Math competition for sixth grade in '04, and the seventh grade division in '05. It has great confidence in he '06 competition. Do you REALLY think it is great for deletion? How about if the information just given to you is added? 8 November 2005, P.M. Preceding comments by User:24.19.161.160

To User:24.19.161.160. If you want the school to be included and it's so good then why add attacks on teachers as you did a little while ago. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 05:09, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I can understand why some people would vote to keep this article. They think that the subject is notable and the substance could be improved... but "top-notch article"? This article is crap by any standard. Do you just blindly vote on all school articles to save them from deletion? What do you call a featured article? It's pretty evident that this article wouldn't show up in any encyclopedia. Also, what's up with Ryan Delaney? If all articles of "real places" were automatic keeps, my driveway should have its own article. AngryParsley (talk) (contribs) 18:33, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Well, maybe not top-notch, but it seems pretty good to me. I wish that the topics I'm interested in had such clear, concise, comprehensive, well-sourced coverage! Christopher Parham (talk) 23:19, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

(see talk page)

(see talk page)

In that case there should be nothing deleted including articles on you and me. Yet we see that all kind of nn people are deleted all the time. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 00:08, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
You are correct. Such articles should NOT get deleted. Just because they do anyway does not mean that they should; such deletions are wrong. Kurt Weber 00:11, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
So to take this to the extreme. If I write an article about a rock and it's put on AfD, then you would vote to keep? There has to be a limit somewhere. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 00:22, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid the answer is "yes", based on some of his past statements ("Every event that ever happened in the history of the world is indeed notable" [1]).
Basically, Kurt Weber seems to believe Wikipedia should be a vast informational garbage dump, a sort of Special Olympics of Data where every factoid is on equal footing with every other factoid, where my fountain pen is on par with, say, New York City, and exact one-to-one reproduction of the world, without hierarchy, ranking, or levels of importance. Jorge Luis Borges wrote about people like him in On Exactitude in Science [2]. (preceding unsigned comment by Calton (talk • contribs) )
  • A bit unnnice? I find it outrageous that Kurt's comments about "deletionist vandalism" (which I do not really consider a personal attack) are excised from the page, but a back-handed insult calling him retarded is somehow allowed to stand. Incivility and personal attacks by "those who routinely nominate and/or vote to delete school articles" are commonly allowed to stand across school AfDs while the self-appointed hall monitor cabal descends upon school inclusionists who lose their patience with castigation and threats of RfCs. In my opinion, it is partisan and unabashed partisanship.--Nicodemus75 15:55, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I removed the personal attacks from all of Kurt's cut-and-paste votes and griped at him on his talk page. Aaron Brenneman (who voted delete in this AFD) just griped at Calton (who also voted delete). I've griped at Denni, Gateman, Trollderella, Kurt, and you. Heck, I even defended you personally when someone was griping at you for stumping up votes. Who, exactly, are you accusing of partisanship? - A Man In Black (conspire | past ops) 16:18, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I think we've all had days where we start editting things by rote and fail to notice other examples of what we're editting, so I'm willing to give A Man In Black a free pass for removing one personal attack and not any others. And, by the by, I would consider implying "everybody who votes to delete something is intentionally causing harm to Wikipedia" a personal attack, even if I'm not exactly crying myself to sleep over how devestating the words are. Lord Bob 17:13, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
It may be worth mentioning that he says "My attitude towards policies is that one should make decisions and act based on what policy should be, not what it currently is." Dpbsmith (talk) 01:09, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • So according to Calton we are deleting things to provide wikipedia with hierarchy, ranking and levels of importance. But there are many, many things in wikipedia which are less important than New York City, how will we ever find time to delete them all? Kappa 02:38, 14 November 2005 (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.

made a 2nd disscusison and moved comments there... --Kraftlos (talk) 07:12, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Odle_Middle_School&oldid=1146747113"