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The result was speedy keep, nomination withdrawn after article was restructured. JYolkowski // talk 00:13, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bare stub about a high school that hasn't been touched since it was written two months ago. No assertion of notability (unless one counts the statement that an actor who is not noteworthy enough to have his own article, having had a bit part in one film according to IMDB, is a graduate). Unsourced. Article doesn't even bother to say where in America the school is located -- there are several schools sharing that name, including ones in IL, CA, and CO, and none of them appear particularly noteworthy according to my searches. (This school is the one in IL, incidentally.) Contested prod, on the grounds that it's a school. Shimeru 09:33, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete nothing to distinguish it from thousands of other boring high schools in the world, no chance the article will ever be more than a stub. Mention it in the article about its city if you want, but stop littering Wikipedia with thousands of useless school-stubs. (I'd suggest merging, but there's clearly nothing to merge.) The people who claim "it's a school, it deserves an article" need to start writing some actual articles if they want my support. Stubcruft is annoying. Xtifr _tälk 12:04, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Objections withdrawn after dab conversion. Xtifr _tälk 20:53, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete no sources, no assertion of notability, no evidence of notability, and not even enough info present to qualify as a stub. If the author of this substub can't even be bothered to state where in America the school is, I don't see much sign of any commitment to expand the article. I would not rule out an article at a later date, if it was at least a viable stub with some assertion/evidence of notability, and some sources. --BrownHairedGirl ^{(talk) • (contribs)} 12:14, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • recommendation changed to Speedy keep, now that TruthbringerToronto has usefully replaced the article with a dab page. --BrownHairedGirl ^{(talk) • (contribs)} 14:35, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete NN, not even stub-quality, and one article that doesnt meet the proposed WP:SCHOOLS guideline. There are those bound from the WP:SCHOOLS project that are likely to come on here soon and argue to keep on the basis of "School, notable" without any decent explanation. So they need to clearly expand various school-stub articles with sources if they are to sway my opinion. --Arnzy (talk ·  contribs) 12:41, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Change to Speedy Keep per TruthBringerToronto's disambiguation page. --Arnzy (talk ·  contribs) 14:49, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. I replaced the article with a disambiguation page. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 14:25, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Keep - With new shiny disambig page! Chris Kreider 16:03, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as disambig. page. — RJH (talk) 16:46, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Keep as restructured by TruthbringerToronto. Alansohn 17:25, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I'm not convinced any of these schools should be kept but in so far as this is now a disambig page it makes more sense in this form unless these schools are deleted. JoshuaZ 17:31, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Withdrawn as the article I nominated no longer exists. Shimeru 18:16, 31 October 2006 (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.