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. —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-03-18 09:10Z

St Thomas More High School for Boys (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Policy Reference:
  • Wikipedia:Miscellaneous_FAQ#Is_allowing_everyone_to_edit_pages_safe.3F_I_could_start_defaming_people._Then_the_legal_implications_of_this_could_become_a_problem_to_the_provider_of_this_service.
  • Wikipedia:Schools'_FAQ#What_keeps_someone_from_contributing_false_or_misleading_information.3F
  • http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?WikiAndIllegalMaterial

The page St Thomas More High School for Boys needs to be speedily deleted. It has been vandalized a few times, as you can see in the history page, by placing a Scandal section on the page, which was completely fictional. Because of this risk and how it may affect the status of the school on wikipedia and overall really, it needs to be speedily deleted at the wish of the school's headmaster, P.P Travis. OM, a pupil of the school User:Olz06 19:57, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - High School that is notable as a Mathematics and Computing Specialist College, only a small minority of secondary schools achieve this in Math, with a sixth form that OfSTED has described as 'Outstanding'. Vandalism, or the reported wish of the Head, are no grounds for deletion. TerriersFan 18:47, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep-A page getting vandalized isn't a reason to delete it. If it were, we'd have to delete more or less the entire site. The best solution is just to watch the article and revert any vandalism.

Also: I certainly don't see where this is a candidate for speedy deletion. Which of the critiera do you think it meets? --Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:52, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - The headmaster should have the overall say on whether it is deleted or not! I put this article on here and I should have a right to get rid of it! He does not want this on the wikipedia website because absolutely anything bad about the school could be put on here. User:Olz06 19:58, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - This page has been recently vandalized with a scandal section which is fictional and somewhat offensive to the school's reputation, and therefore is at risk of more. At the wish of the school's headmaster, this page needs to be deleted, incase of further vandalism which may affect the status of St Thomas More High school. User:Olz06 19:57, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - All schools get vandalised (really and virtually). This is a good stub on its way to a start. However if the head puts pressure on those who improve it, then it will get worse Victuallers 20:07, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Vandalism on an article is not a reason to delete, nor is desire of the administration of a subject of an article a reason. BTW, when saying something, you need only place a bold statement once. If you feel a need to follow-up please just add whatever you want to say, or even just comment. Furthermore, as a contributor to Wikipedia, you agreed to license your contributions under the GFDL. As such, you do not possess the legal right to demand its deletion. Nor does your headmaster, who we cannot even verify wants this page deleted. Certainly, the concern that the information on this page be accurate and not the work of vandalism is a valid one, however, that concern is not limited to this article, but one across Wikipedia. The best I can suggest is that your school take responsibility to educate the students regarding not vandalizing this article, and if it is a problem, perhaps ask some employee to watch it. As long as that person takes care not to edit out material that is otherwise valid, I have no objection to that kind of action. If your school has further concerns about the content of this article, I suggest they hire an attorney who can contact Wikipedia's administration directly, not through this method, which has limited verification, but through other channels where the persons involved can be authenticated. I don't think there is any real reason to do so, but it would be the better option. FrozenPurpleCube 20:14, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep We do not delete article because they get vandalized, or we would delete every featured article, which get vandalized every minute in some familiar cases. Articles about historical personages may get vandalized several times a day. Put it on a watch list and revert, or semiprotect, or block the vandal account. Edison 21:52, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - High schools seem to be regarded as notable per se. This may be not be a very good article, but no worse than many others. Vandalism is no ground for deletion. In any event, the article is now semi-protected, which should keep vandals away, or at least allow them to be identified and blocked. Peterkingiron 00:17, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. While in all means, the proper way is to contact our administrator, I remember there was an article about a certain woman, which had went with 5 AFD. The legal status can be contacted Community portal. If this article was originated by you, let this be a lesson to you: once it goes out to GFDL, it can't be taken back. George Leung 00:25, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. The Specialist Schools tag is no badge of notability in secondary schools these days, but this one looks notable regardless. EliminatorJR ^Talk 01:23, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep A well-written article, amply provide with reliable and verifiable sources establishing notability. Placing an sprotect and monitoring the article will address vandalism; deletion is a rather blunt instrument to deal with vandalism, sort of a "we had to destroy the village to save it" logic. Alansohn 03:24, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:N. There are plenty of sources, but what they show to be notable are the people that have passed through the halls, not the school itself. Incidentally, to delete an article because of vandalism would be to give in to the vandals. As important, an article's subject has no more control over an article than any other Wikipedia editor. Unless the article invades the privacy of a nonnotable subject, the subject has no right to insist that its article be deleted. --Butseriouslyfolks 03:41, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment for deletion: I would personally prefer starting a new AFD for WP:N, since I don't think it should be deleted due to "vandalism" or "false info". Allowing AFD be approved under such condition may set up precedents, allowing anyone who don't like a certain article to be deleted. Keep for now, then submit a new AFD under WP:N if needed. Personally, I think it is notable, and should be keep. George Leung 07:10, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The headmaster should have the overall say on whether it is deleted or not! I put this article on here and I should have a right to get rid of it! - Unfortunately under the GFDL neither the article originator nor the subject (assuming the part about the headmaster is even true, we have no way of confirming it) has the right to demand that an article be removed from WP. The article creator should have read up on what he was "signing up to" by adding content to WP, and if he didn't take the time to do so well unfortunately that's just tough luck. I see no deletion criteria which this article meets. Message to User:Olz06: If the head gives you any grief over this incident you could always point him to this page and show that you honestly tried to get the page deleted but that WP policies don't permit such an action.... ChrisTheDude 08:01, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The school has far more content than many other school articles which have not been nominated for deletion. Notability has been demonstrated. Very few headteachers are awarded OBEs. The "Incidents" section is trivial and would be best deleted. If the current head does not like the article he is free to edit and improve the article as he pleases. Dahliarose 09:48, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep For a school article, this article is one of the best. Its well written, has a lot of references from a variety of different sources. They have demonstrated that the notability of the school is acceptable. I agree with Dahliarose above re: headmaster. LordHarris 17:31, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep If an article just kept on getting vandalized and didn't have any interested editors who would keep watch over it, I'd be in favor of deleting. Although I think all high schools are notable, I don't feel the same way about what I call "vandal magnets". This article was started on January 7 and for at least a short while so far, TerriersFan has been making a lot of edits to it (as have some others). Noroton 01:42, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. It's a good article and serves a useful purpose. Vandalism can be dealt with, just as it's dealt with for every other subject on Wikipedia. The headmaster should be pointed to Wikipedia:Attribution, which may help set his mind at ease that only attributable information can be added to the article -- anything else can be rapidly deleted. --Elonka 23:14, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - may I suggest that we are now approaching the snow-line? TerriersFan 00:19, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sorry, no snowball. Potentially controversial, especially seeing the keep-votes are from followers of Islams. We already have that complain on 300, so why would this that touch more than Persian be put to rest this easily? Sorry, that was for Militant Islam, which i was also watching. yes, this one can easily invoke WP:SNOW. George Leung 02:58, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - I think the outcome is pretty conclusive, but this page deltion page should be kept for a few more days. Olz06 18:38, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

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.