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 no consensus to delete. W.marsh 02:23, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mission Viejo High School (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

This article doens't assert notability, is not NPOV, and is written very unencyclopedically (even with first person references). NauticaShades 22:19, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. It's much better, now. NauticaShades 08:06, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Article is a mess, and despite its attempt to puff up the school, doesn't even manage to assert notability. —ptk✰fgs 22:25, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep (or Merge with Mission Viejo, California per WP:LOCAL). The fact that the school's been an IB school for the past 20 years and was once ranked #2 in football in the United States indicates to me that if the article doesn't cite any secondary sources (although it does cite two, now), that's because no-one's bothered to look for any before, not that none exist. Anyway, the article now cites enough secondary sources to meet WP:SCHOOL. JYolkowski // talk 23:05, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • But WP:SCHOOL isn't official yet. NauticaShades 11:08, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Guidelines are guidelines because people agree to abide by them. If enough people make AfD decisions based upon WP:SCHOOL, then it'll become official. If not, the criterion that it met in WP:SCHOOL is around number of secondary sources, which is "official" since it's based around our content policies (-: At any rate, the article's a definite keeper now, so good job to those involved. JYolkowski // talk 23:17, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Merge with Mission Viejo, California. Redirects to place articles are the only effective way to avoid non- or barely-notable school pages being recreated by the students. DrKiernan 10:24, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep School is a three-time awardee nationwide by the Blue Ribbon Schools Program -- the highest honor an American school can receive -- and has also been recognized three times as a California Distinguished School. The school has won top awards in its athletic and extracurricular programs. All this and more, plus all of the reliable, verifiable sources we all expect from a Wikipedia article. If you wanted an excellent example for a school that passes WP:SCHOOL with flying colors, look no further. Alansohn 05:36, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Again, WP:SCHOOL is not policy. NauticaShades 08:07, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • What policy should we use to judge school articles? Alansohn 15:40, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Well, one could use WP:SCHOOLS3 which seems to have about as much consensus behind it, but it would probably be a keep by that standard as well. JoshuaZ 23:57, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • As neither WP:SCHOOL nor WP:SCHOOLS3 are official Wikipedia policy (yet), what standard are you using to judge notability and what standard should the rest of us use that will satisfy you? Alansohn 22:37, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Per mainly Alan's comments. The school has the second best football team in the entire US, Blue Ribbon and 2 notable alumni. Furthermore, of the notable alumni, one of them is a notable football and the reference given mentioning him as an alumn explicitly connects his highschool football career to the school. JoshuaZ 23:57, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Definite keep — Well beyond minimum necessary level of notability. RJH (talk) 20:36, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete There seems to be an unspoken assumption here that the academically stronger schools are the most notable. But this is elitism, and notability is better proven by notable graduates.DGG 02:18, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Academicly more notable schools generally have more written about them so they are in that sense more noted and thus more notable. Furthemrore, this school does in fact have two notable alumni one of whom has his notability associated with the school. I therefore am having trouble understanding your above comment. JoshuaZ 02:25, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As you just now asked me on my talk page, I have taken another look. Yes, high-quality schools will have notable alumni. These alumni will have articles here or mentions elsewhere, and thus can be given as proofs of the school's quality. (You are saying we are high quality because we will have notable alumni, and we be able to prove it some day when we actually have them.) There are only 2 mentioned: one managed to get on a college football team, and one was unfortunate enough to be killed early on in Iraq. Thanks for encouraging me to take another look; I find my delete opinion confirmed.DGG 02:43, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge any significant information to Mission Viejo, California per WP:LOCAL). Otherwise, delete. Argument per ptk, puff piece != notable. Blue Ribbon Schools Program and California Distinguished School notwithstanding - these are hardly highly notable achievements. KillerChihuahua^?!? 21:21, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Are any schools notable by these bizarre standards? What standard would a school have to establish to meet the minimum you've set? Alansohn 21:42, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • California Distinguished School is not a particularly notable award. For example, there were 377 recipients in 2006, and 192 recipients in 2005. Additionally, it is a local award for California schools. How many recipients are there of the Blue Ribbon award? —ptk✰fgs 23:15, 5 December 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.