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 keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 20:36, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vanity page, very little encyclopedic content. Knowing Is Half The Battle 20:49, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom ReverendG 20:54, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete No assertion of notability.--Húsönd 22:39, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Notable school. I added some details. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 00:20, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep We have near-complete agreement that high schools are inherently notable. While this article can use more details and expansion, it demonstrates far above the minimum necessary to justify retention. I can never understand why some users devote so much time to AfDs without taking the time to "try to make general improvements when I see them needing to be done". Alansohn 02:26, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Verifiable and notable school. --Carioca 03:54, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep nom's claim this is vanity appears to be false. If you think it is vanity, then explain how/why, and then feel free to fix that, and any other problems you see in the article (no deletion required). --Rob 04:19, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep doesn't appear to be vanity (at least now). Fg2 07:55, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep — Current content doesn't appear to be vanity. — RJH (talk) 20:11, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and expand! Patrick Hurston 00:39, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Large high school. -- Necrothesp 18:17, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Given the notability of this school, I find a subtle irony in this nomination.  ;-) RFerreira 01:07, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep- pointless nomination thanks mostly to the numbers of votes schoolwatch can turn out. --ForbiddenWord 14:10, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pointless comment. AfD is not a vote. Do you have an actual argument as to notability, other than the argument-by-assertion made by RFerreira et al? Pan Dan 15:02, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Wikipedia's decision-making process is about consensus, and the consensus is that all schools are notable. Just see the general results of how many schools have been deleted at the schoolwatch link I provided for further proof of that. --ForbiddenWord 17:06, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • There is no consensus that "all schools are notable." When an AfD results in "No consensus," that's effectively a "keep," but it still means--um--"no consensus." Pan Dan 17:45, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • Well, if the consensus at schoolwatch is that all schools are notable, and the editors from there can show up in large numbers to influence AFDs however they like, and no consensus = keep, then all deletion nominations are efforts in futility, and my above comment about pointless nominations is right. --ForbiddenWord 18:11, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
          • Comment There is no consensus all schools are notable, primarily evidenced by the number of school AfD's that end in no consensus. Largescale opinion spamming by a wikiproject (as you've describe above; I'm not stating the wikiproject actually does this) may be effective, but it doesn't prove consensus. Your logic above is flawed and just demonstrates an example of gaming the system.--Isotope23 19:26, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
            • I don't think that there's any effort to take advantage of the system. I think the reason School AFDs continue to be such a problem is that there is a small, vocal minority that would mostly like to see all but the most popular schools' articles deleted and a large majority of editors who have declared consensus that schools are notable and that verifiability needs to be the factor considered in AFDs. --ForbiddenWord 19:39, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
              • How odd, I would think that there is a small but vocal minority that wants to keep all schools and that most editors don't. Given that most of the keeps in these AfDs come from established schoolwatch editors (by your own description) and that frequent deletes come from editors who don't have anything to do with school articles at all the above claim is very hard to understand and seems to border on projection. JoshuaZ 19:54, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
              • Comment, actually... School AfD's are such a problem because neither side of the debate has the majority they wish they had, and there is no incentive for both sides to sit down and try and hammer out a good faith compromise (and the views are so far apart I'm not even sure compromise is possible). I'd say it is a pretty safe bet that this will go on ad infinitum as long as Wikipedia exists. If a majority exists at Wikipedia, it is the teeming mass of editors who just don't care one way or another.--Isotope23 20:11, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
                • Hah. Probably more true than most of the school editors would want to admit. JoshuaZ 20:29, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
                  • Comment - ForbiddenWord wrote "a large majority of editors who have declared consensus that schools are notable"...I just visited schoolwatch, and there's a handful of editors that have expressed opinions on the talk page there, but not at all a large number of people, and there's no listing of editors that endorses ForbiddenWord's opinion. Ironically, there is, instead, a statement that the project was going to remain neutral.... Akradecki 21:44, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep this decent article about a notable and large high school, nomination made under false pretenses. Silensor 17:24, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, obviously non-notable school. I don't think I will ever be able to wrap my head around why people cling to every school stub like it's a holy relic. —ptk✰fgs 19:51, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Nothing in the article asserts notability. Montco 01:48, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. I added a reference to a hazing incident reported by the Boston Herald. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 02:32, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep the athletic successes mentioned in the article satisfy WP:SCHOOLS. Cynical 11:37, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep all enduring public institutions. --Centauri 14:37, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Really? Would you favor an article for every DMV office? Pan Dan 22:14, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yes. And eventually we probably will. --Centauri 01:50, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • ...and while you are at it, add your local McDonalds' too! In many towns it is an important social center.--Isotope23 14:14, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep all schools.  ALKIVAR™ 20:26, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all schools. This is a global encyclopedia; "notability" isn't satisfied by merely being notable in the school's local community. -Amatulic 22:31, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree with your comment as to notability, but c'mon, you wouldn't delete all schools would you? Shouldn't a school that's featured in multiple non-trivial, non-local sources, like Phillips Academy, be kept? Pan Dan 15:55, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• keep please this is notable no explanation made how it is vanity Yuckfoo 02:40, 20 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.