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. fishhead64 01:03, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Milton District High School (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Thinly disguised vanispamcruftisement for a school reunion. I'd also like to see a discussion on the school's notability, as it seems rather unremarkable. Contested prod. MER-C 04:44, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have checked out articles re: other local high schools (Lester B. Pearson, Burlington, ON; M. M. Robinson, Burlington, ON), which have obviously not been deleted. Not sure why the inconsistency here, as they seem no more remarkable than this one.

See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. MER-C 05:18, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Fails WP:NN, WP:V. If, in fact, there are other local high schools that likewise fail to assert notability, sure, nominate those as well. MER-C's point about this being created solely as an advertisement for the school's reunion is bolstered by the fact that this article is the sole Wiki activity of User:Mdhs reunion.  RGTraynor  14:57, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete the only claim to notability is two alumni, and that is not enough. Just for comparison Lester B. Pearson High School (Burlington) has more notable alumni & athletic championships--I consider it borderline notable. As for MMRobinson, it's just now been nominated for deletion.DGG 05:48, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep The discussion of schools has been discussed often and from time to time proposals have been offered but none have reached consensus within the community. Until we decide, I would err on the side of caution and leave the article in place. I think this goes a bit beyond WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS because there have been frequent discussions on this specific topic. JodyB 14:03, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• • Change to Delete (hope I did this right) After rethinking my position and re-reading prior debate, I realize that a lack of consensus means there is no consensus to make an exception from WP:NOTE for schools. This one does not seem to meet it. Therefore, I change to delete.JodyB 14:17, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep WP:SCHOOL is not an accepted guideline, so there is no policy statement which says high schools are or are not inherently notable, but Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Common outcomes says"Schools are frequently nominated for deletion, but consensus is frequently not reached. Most of the approximately 270 school articles nominated for deletion in the eight months January to August 2005, resulted in no consensus, with fewer than 15% actually deleted. " Pending an accepted guideline for schools, I feel the article should be kept. Most high schools will have multiple independent substantial coverage in newspapers, since they are an important part of the community and a large expense to build and operate, and often get into controversies of administration policy, beyond sports scores and graduation lists. The presence of a sentence in the article promoting a reunion is perhaps a reason the EDIT THE ARTICLE but not a good reason to delete the article. Edison 19:21, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Even in the half-year I have been here I have seen this attitude change, and a new analysis would show it. DGG 06:01, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Err ... the limitations of the cut-and-paste AfD !voting approach shows up when one notes that WP:SCHOOL hasn't been cited as grounds for deletion, and moreover just because some editor wrote in an essay that few school-related AfDs two years ago resulted in deletion doesn't mean that school articles which completely fail WP:V get a free pass eternally. Personally, I find the growing consensus that public schools are subject to WP:V and WP:NN just like other articles quite heartening. If you have actual citations which meet the grounds editors have used, please present them.  RGTraynor  19:49, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge — It's on the small-ish side as a combined Jr./Sr. High School of 800 students. The best approach would be to merge into the Milton, Ontario page. — RJH (talk) 22:23, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Article makes explicit claims of notability in terms of alumni. Any AfD "reason" that cites "vanispamcruftisement" as an excuse deletion is probably worth keeping on that basis alone. Alansohn 04:11, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above. ffm ✎talk 13:34, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Alumni. Abeg92Hokies! 17:11, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletions. -- TerriersFan 17:58, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - the combination of the Hurricane Ivan radio interview and the censorship row that reached provincial level (both sourced) with the notable alumni is sufficient to meet notability standards. TerriersFan 18:56, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• KeepThis school is notable and the article contains information which is supported by references.LordHarris 19:07, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep sourced, encyclopaedic. Apart from the fact that high schools are usually kept where there's any verifiable information, this one actually has a few independant references on it's notability to boot. WilyD 20:15, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as passing WP:N and WP:A in its current form, not because of notable alumni. --Butseriouslyfolks 22:05, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• keep please it meets the polcy in current form and has improved much yuckfoo 02:06, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Does seem to meet minimum notability guidelines with content and references. Camaron1 | Chris 18:37, 20 April 2007 (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.