Content deleted Content added
Nicodemus75 (talk | contribs) |
Duncharris (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
**'''Comment''' I probably should take the phrase, "those that vote keep on schools" to be a [[WP:NPA|personal attack]]. Why make the assumption that it is "those that vote keep on schools" who are responsible for stub creation? Lately, "those who vote delete on schools" have been creating stub articles, including hoax schools to try to make a [[WP:POINT|point]]. As to an article "lying" [sic] around - give articles some time to grow, just because I believe a school article should be kept for later expansion, doesn't mean I have time to edit and change it right now. The call for immediate re-write is counter-productive.--[[User:Nicodemus75|Nicodemus75]] 11:00, 23 September 2005 (UTC) |
**'''Comment''' I probably should take the phrase, "those that vote keep on schools" to be a [[WP:NPA|personal attack]]. Why make the assumption that it is "those that vote keep on schools" who are responsible for stub creation? Lately, "those who vote delete on schools" have been creating stub articles, including hoax schools to try to make a [[WP:POINT|point]]. As to an article "lying" [sic] around - give articles some time to grow, just because I believe a school article should be kept for later expansion, doesn't mean I have time to edit and change it right now. The call for immediate re-write is counter-productive.--[[User:Nicodemus75|Nicodemus75]] 11:00, 23 September 2005 (UTC) |
||
*'''Keep''' Maybe I'll expand this article some time next year.--[[User:Nicodemus75|Nicodemus75]] 11:00, 23 September 2005 (UTC) |
*'''Keep''' Maybe I'll expand this article some time next year.--[[User:Nicodemus75|Nicodemus75]] 11:00, 23 September 2005 (UTC) |
||
*'''Delete''' crap. [[User:Duncharris|Dunc]]|[[User talk:duncharris|☺]] 12:18, 23 September 2005 (UTC) |
Revision as of 12:18, 23 September 2005
Gracey (Leontine) Elementary School
Badly formatted substub on a non-encylopaedic topic. Primary school with no assertion of notability, inherent or otherwise. Delete. Proto t c 13:23, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
- Why would an article about a school assert it's inherent notability?--Nicodemus75 11:00, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
- Delete Jwissick 13:56, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
- Delete cruft. Dunc|☺ 16:33, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
- keep please this subject is encyclopedic based on the definition of the word so why should we erase this Yuckfoo 18:56, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
- Delete doesn't even provide the info most other school articles include. And I do not agree with Yuckfoo. Schools are often named after famous people, but that doesn't have anything with the school as an institution itself. I don't particularly like school stubs, but if this is to be kept it should at the very least include enrollment info, ethicity of students, and any historically important aspects like the other schools we've got. As it stands now it doesn't even provide the most basic of information a good "definition" would have. - Mgm|(talk) 21:11, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
- Delete, this is a verifiable, public, institution, that actually exists.... but it's not encyclopedic.Gateman1997 21:36, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. Article fails to establish notability, and almost fails to establish existance. --Carnildo 23:35, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
- Comment: I am in the process of expanding this article. Bahn Mi 01:06, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
- Keep per Wikipedia:Schools/Arguments#Keep and allow for continued improvement. Kappa 01:16, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
- Comment: The fact that 87% of students have free or reduced lunch seems a particularly significant fact that deserves mention in a comprehensive encyclopedia. Kappa 01:19, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. per m:eventualism, please accept it. --Vsion 02:30, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
- Yet another verifiable permanent public institution to keep. --Gene_poole 03:24, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
- Keep per the usual reasons. Constant nominations for school articles discourages any serious work at improving articles, since nobody wants to invest serious time, knowing it will probably be wasted. This article has *not* been made instead of another more worthy article. It has been made in *addition* to other articles. This AFD nomination has been *instead* of making more worthwhile productive contributions to wikipedia. --rob 04:15, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
- At the same time, constant, uncritical "keep" votes on school articles discourages people from nominating them for deletion, even when they are unverifiable hoaxes. --Carnildo 04:49, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
- Well actually I did vote against the last unverifiable school here. Take a look at who created that article, and you'll see it's not the "blanket keepers" who create unverified school articles. Now, for this school, I see different mentions of it in different places like this article, which mentions a former principal, who died in a car accident. It specifically named the school and the district. If this is a hoax, it's well done, involving multiple web sites, and a false death report. --rob 05:28, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
- It would be a good thing if people were discouraged from nominating verifiable public institutions for deletion. Grace Note 07:06, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
- At the same time, constant, uncritical "keep" votes on school articles discourages people from nominating them for deletion, even when they are unverifiable hoaxes. --Carnildo 04:49, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. Vegaswikian 05:47, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. All verifiable public institutions are encyclopaedic. Why not spend your time creating rather than wasting yours and ours trying to destroy? Grace Note 07:06, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
- Keep and go ride a bike. —RaD Man (talk) 07:27, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
- Comment. I would like all those that vote keep on schools so they can get expanded to take a break from creating stubs and actually do some expansion of the schools that survived AFD. I would also like to see less of an US bias. Voting keep and expand and subsequently leave it lying around doesn't improve my trust that someone will ever expand them past stub level. - Mgm|(talk) 09:45, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
- Comment I probably should take the phrase, "those that vote keep on schools" to be a personal attack. Why make the assumption that it is "those that vote keep on schools" who are responsible for stub creation? Lately, "those who vote delete on schools" have been creating stub articles, including hoax schools to try to make a point. As to an article "lying" [sic] around - give articles some time to grow, just because I believe a school article should be kept for later expansion, doesn't mean I have time to edit and change it right now. The call for immediate re-write is counter-productive.--Nicodemus75 11:00, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
- Keep Maybe I'll expand this article some time next year.--Nicodemus75 11:00, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
- Delete crap. Dunc|☺ 12:18, 23 September 2005 (UTC)