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. John254 02:48, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

No evidence that the subject meets the notability criteria, lots of original research, probably conflict of interest from primary contributers. Guest9999 17:52, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. I'm confused...I don't see any original research. In addition...it's an 81 year old private school with notable alumni. Per WP:OUTCOMES, high schools have generally passed notability requirements by being in existence. I have trouble believing an 81 year old school is not notable...so yes...my keep reason is essentially..."It's old". Smashville 18:39, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep as obviously notable school, around a long time, with notable alumni. No reasonable attempt to fix the article or to research its notability has been made. Also, fulfills WP:OUTCOMES. BTW, I reverted the removal of its AfD tag and blocked the SPA who did it. I'll find some sites. As a courtesy, fellow sysops, please leave this AfD open for at least a few days unless you keep it. Bearian 21:07, 19 October 2007 (UTC) P.S. 24,000 Ghits; see [1]. Bearian 21:09, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep Ample reliable and verifiable sources are provided to clearly satisfy the Wikipedia:Notability standard. If only all school articles were of this quality. There doesn't seem to be any OR here, and COI seems to be irrelevant here. Alansohn 21:29, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, folks, let's refrain from nominating high schools unless their campus is someone's garage. SolidPlaid 22:11, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I do not feel it's old is a reasonable arguemnt for keeping the article - there are trees in my back garden that are far older which don't have articles (and probably shouldn't). common outcomes is not a policy or guideline - it is just a summary of past decidions it does not superceed policies or guideline (see at the top: "For rules, guidelines, and consensus on a more detailed basis, visit the various notability policy pages instead"). I do not think the fact that notable alumni may have attended makes the school notable, notability is not inherited and a subject should be notable in its own right. Unless the alumni have caused there to be "significant coverage by reliable, independent secondary sources" of the school then it should not have its own article per WP:NN. Currently the article is not written from a neutral point of view (although this could be changed) and unless there are independent sources that show that the article is notable (per WP:NN) that will make the information contained in the article verifiable I do not feel it belongs on Wikipedia. Of course if such sources are found I will withdraw my nomination if there is no dissenting arguemnt within the debate. [[Guest9999 22:40, 19 October 2007 (UTC)]][reply]
• Keep the very purpose of a school is to produce alumni, and its fame in the world is measured by who the alumni turn out to be. This is a major element of notability. Among the various high schools with potential articles, this is probably in the top bracket by any reasonable standard. Even those who do not think all high schools notable agree that the best of them are. DGG (talk) 05:36, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Reply It says specifically on WP:NN that notability "is distinct from "fame","importance", or "popularity".". I would also question the level of "its fame in world" personally having spend significant amounts of time in various locations around Europe, Africa and Asia I do not think I have met anyone who could name an American High School they are not personaly linked to, even though they would be able to name hundreds or thousands of Americans have (in all probablility) an education. [[Guest9999 11:24, 21 October 2007 (UTC)]][reply]

• If Wikipedia notability is distinct from fame, etc., why would its notability be dependent on how many people in Europe and Asia have heard of the school? Alansohn 13:33, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Sorry if I wasn't clear, my point was two-fold. 1) Fame isn't the same as notability and 2) The topic in question isn't famous anyway (at least on the world scale that was claimed). I know that the second point is a bit redundant but I felt it was worth bringing up, it was meant as a reply not a stand alone comment. [[Guest9999 14:51, 21 October 2007 (UTC)]][reply]

• The claim is that the school is notable, not famous. Let's leave famous out of this and address the claims of notability made in the article for the school. Alansohn 15:49, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Reply I completely agree; forget about fame. My point is that there is no evidence given on the page that the school is notable - in that there is no evidence of significant coverage by multiple indepedent secondary sources. No such sources have been presented in the debate - people have just talked about fame, age and famous alumni. [[Guest9999 18:52, 21 October 2007 (UTC)]][reply]

I and others have added more cites to prove notability. Famous alumni and teachers are often the only way to prove a school's notability -- students are the products or outcomes of a school, and teachers are the means, which prove its worth. Bearian 15:24, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, because the article is extensive and has many references and also per this. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 17:05, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Article seems written and reffed to an acceptable level. If any major flaws exist they should be addressed with regular editing per WP:AfD. Benjiboi 18:38, 23 October 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.