Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Collingwood School

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. 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 keep. Postdlf 23:02, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Collingwood School[edit]

Vanity -- Chris 73 Talk 04:14, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)

  • Weak keep. Barely. —RaD Man (talk) 10:17, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
    • Changing vote to a normal (sorry, not extreme) keep since this article has been revised. There is still room for improvement but this article is definitely not vanity as originally suggested by User:Chris 73. —RaD Man (talk) 07:35, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. All schools are inherently notable. --Andylkl 11:57, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete unless actual notability established. And Andylkl, adding an infobox 3x the size of the actual article doesn't make it any better. --Calton 12:01, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
    • At least it's better than nothing. --Andylkl 12:08, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)
      • It wasn't really better than nothing. Most of the fields are empty, and some of what is filled in entirely duplicates the article text. The only information that it in fact adds, taking half a screen to do so, is the name of the head-teacher and the enrollment, neither of which make the school notable. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of facts. Uncle G 02:15, 2005 Feb 2 (UTC)
      • A good rule of thumb (which I just made up) is that if you can't fill in the space to the left of an infobox, you don't really need the infobox. --Calton 06:22, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • I have a feeling the British school is probably notable because it's an independent school and therefore prestigious, (Note: It's a primary school, so no Dunc|☺ 13:14, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)) whereas the Canadian school seems to be fairly boring and minimal info is available. This page should probably be a dab page between the two but the info on the Canadian school is pitiful and doesn't appear to deserve its own article. Dunc|☺ 13:11, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC) delete. Dunc|☺ 13:14, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Not notable, delete. Lacrimosus 22:45, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Notable. Keep and allow for organic growth. GRider\talk 22:49, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. —Ben Brockert (42) 00:00, Feb 2, 2005 (UTC)
  • Schools are not inherently notable, and this article as it stands fails to establish the notability of either school. Delete. Uncle G 02:15, 2005 Feb 2 (UTC)
  • Delete. Notability not established. Indrian 05:56, Feb 2, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete: article doesn't establish notability. Wile E. Heresiarch 06:41, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep - David Gerard 17:28, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Xezbeth 17:32, Feb 2, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep - Yuckfoo 18:59, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Non-notable, despite desperate attempts to disguise this with uninformative infoboxes. Jayjg (talk) 20:17, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Primary schools are more common than bowling alleys, and we don't have articles about bowling alleys. --BM 00:56, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Yet.--Centauri 11:30, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Seems like you haven't figured out the difference between an encyclopedia and the Yellow Pages. --Calton 00:57, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Or perhaps you haven't figured out the difference between the Yellow Pages and Wikipedia? Now, which is it? —RaD Man (talk) 07:36, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. I agree, all schools are inherently notable. Wikipedia is not paper. 69.243.41.28 03:32, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Notable. Keep. --Centauri 03:34, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep Are we running out of hard drive space? If not, why should we discourage Wikipedia from having articles about high schools?Zantastik 07:59, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. {{SCHOOLNAME}} is a school in {{subst:CITYNAME}}. —Korath (Talk) 13:42, Feb 3, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep Philip 20:28, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Schoolcrufta delenda est. Edeans 05:34, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep Wiki is no paper, schools are encyclopedic. --ShaunMacPherson 18:23, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • I knew what I was going to see before I even clicked on the blue link. Yup, another malformed and undeveloped school "article" that some good users tried to expand upon given absolutely no other information. No wonder so many wind up here! All this says is that these schools exist. Nothing more. Delete for lack of content unless someone's willing to take up the task of expanding this. - Lucky 6.9 01:01, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep Spinboy 04:41, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep notable enough -CunningLinguist 01:39, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Non-notable. Noisy | Talk 09:26, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep it now. Samaritan 23:56, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Schoolcruft. Gamaliel 22:04, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

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

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Collingwood_School&oldid=1137725421"