Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carpenter Middle 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 Redirect to Plano Independent School District in lieu of deletion. —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-02-17 22:07Z

[edit] Carpenter Middle School

Carpenter Middle School (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

This article has been speedied, prodded twice, and this time hit with a notability tag. As it has been prodded twice I am bringing it here for debate. I have no opinion either way, save that it would be helpful if we were consistent in our dealing with schools. FWIW, I brought a primary school to AfD only to see it survive. As I say, consistency would be nice --Richhoncho 19:53, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

• Delete as wholly non-notable. — Scm83x ^{hook 'em} 21:16, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete I tend to err on the side of keeping middle schools, but this one does not even assert notability. -Selket ^Talk 21:49, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. To begin with, I want to remind everyone that there is not policy of notability on schools. The requirement of stating some assertion of notability is mainly created on the fact that millions of articles that are commercially based or focused individual self-promotion would be littered all over wikipedia. I believe that if any article that is not advertising in this said manner is viable. In addition, as an additional requirement, I believe that articles should have some substance and according to policy, they should have some referenced material or at least list some legitimate sources. This article appears to have some information, and I am sure that in the future, individuals could work on and improve the article based on these sources. As always, we should not be excluded articles on wikipedia on just notability alone; self-promotion and commercial characteristics of articles with illegitimate sources should be the targets of deletion. This article appears to have some possibility for growth, and I believe that if until some templates for clean up and additional sources are added, and then if no progress is made on the article within a few months, then the article can be properly assessed. --Thank You. Sukh17 ^{Talk | Contribs} 22:56, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

• Delete Browsing through the non-wiki g-hits, I'm not seeing evidence of notability as defined by the notability proposal for schools. Kathy A. 23:00, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, while there is no accepted policy or guideline relating to schools, WP:N suffices, and in this case, I do not see multiple, indpependent, non-trivial sources about this school. The two sources listed, and the only ones I can find on google, are the school itself, and the school division. Neither are independent. I would also suggest that the class nicknames and lunch schedule are about as indiscriminate as you can get, leaving the meat of the article as nothing more than "This school exists." Simply put, this school is not notable. Resolute 00:02, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per Resolute. By the way, this article should not have been PROD'd twice; WP:PROD provides that an article which has once had its PROD tag removed should be taken to AfD if anyone wants to delete it. --Metropolitan90 04:32, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. No evidence of notability. WMMartin 18:01, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

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.