Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Denver Online High School

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. The "delete" arguments mostly centered around the lack of in-depth, reliable sources. Another argument was that the school had no physical presence, which was disproven. The "keep" votes point to the existence of reliable sources, such that the article meets WP:V , and noting that secondary education articles have traditionally had a lower "entry barrier", a precedent for which there has been no consensus to overturn. There seems to be no consensus if the reliable sources surpass mere local attention, or the degree of depth of coverage. Overall the consensus based on arguments is "keep" for this topic (meaning this particular high school, not high schools in general), but it is not a strong consensus. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 17:46, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Denver Online High School[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Delete (or merge into Denver Public Schools) as not meeting WP:N, WP:ORG and WP:SIGCOV sufficiently to warrant a stand alone article. Geoff | ^{Who, me?} 16:01, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep -- Isn't there a presumption of notability for high schools? Rhadow (talk) 18:55, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Historically they've been kept, except where there are no independent sources. I'm not finding such sources, particularly significant coverage per WP:SIGCOV. Also see the recent RFC on secondary schools, which concluded secondary schools should not be presumed notable because they exist. By all means point toward some appropriate sources for this organization to warrant keeping the article as a stand alone. Geoff | ^{Who, me?} 19:35, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 09:36, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Colorado-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 09:36, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep whether it should be kept as an independent article pr merged with the school district it is part of is an editing issue. FloridaArmy (talk) 00:28, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:N The Banner talk 17:05, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is it your recommendation, Banner, then, that we nominate all of the other Category:High schools in Colorado for deletion? They seem to have fewer references than this one. Eaton High School (Colorado), Polaris Expeditionary Learning School, and Florence High School (Colorado). While we are at it, Ennis National School, C.B.S. Secondary School Ennistymon, and St. Anne's Community College would be nominated, too. Rhadow (talk) 13:17, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as failing WP:GNG. There are some mentions in local media, but nothing significant here. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:03, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It's not that we presume notability for high schools, rather, we have the practice of normally keeping them as if they were notable; this is part of a compromise to normally not keep elementary schools. The purpose is to avoid the otherwise consequent thousands of debates. Before we had the compromise, I (and others) could generally source about 1/2 the highschools well enough to keep, and perhaps 1/4 of the elementary schools *somewhat better than that in NYC). The RfC of schooloutcomes said there was no consensus to change the practice of generally keeping high schools (It also said there was no consensus that quoting schooloutcomes was enough of an argument--yes, these two findings are somewhat contradictory, but in cases of doubt, we follow the status quo ) (And I will admit that some people do interpret that AfC otherwise, and they are entitled to their views, even though I think they're not analyzing it properly. As an admin, I alway give very conservative advice, but in a discussion, I think I have the actual responsibility to give whatI think the correct interpretation. ). There is furthermore a reasonable amount of sourcing for this one. Perhaps ones that merely appear on a list might be candidates for removal, if we could get consensus on that--it might be an acceptable compromise. I, at any rate, normally do ~vote delete if there's nothing more than presence on a list, because that isn't enough verification. I usually will support any compromise that gets articles out of AfD, even if I don;t quite agree it's the best compromise possible. DGG ( talk ) 11:26, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Can't see significant coverage and the school is tiny. I take the point about other high schools failing [[WP:SIGCOV}}, but the size and lack of real physical campus of this school seems to make it a special case. Tacyarg (talk) 10:33, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Tacyarg -- I acknowledge your argument that there is insufficient press coverage of the school, but I disagree. The Denver Post and Colorado Public Radio are reliable sources. Size, however, is specious argument. Monaco should be deleted from WP because of its tiny size. The school does have a physical presence, even if students are not required to be there. Tennessee Virtual Academy if it had an article, has 634 students. It is no less a school than any other. Rhadow (talk) 12:28, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This was closed as "keep" but is now relisted per Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2018 February 6.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 20:23, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Consensus for keeping high schools has not changed (RfC was no consensus). But more so, the CPR story is a fine RS. It has around five paragraphs on this topic. The rest is either in-passing or non-independent I'd say. But it is a high school and it has one solid independent reliable source with plenty of non-independent sourcing we can use for facts. Hobit (talk) 06:09, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as there are reliable sources in the article Atlantic306 (talk) 17:51, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Whether or not high schools are inherently notable, there's an established low barrier to entry which this article meets. Namely, based on RS (incidental mentions in the Denver Post, a more substantive mention on Colorado Public Radio, and a listing on the Denver Public Schools website) we can do the bare minimum of proving it actually exists which - while not normally sufficient - seems to be for secondary schools. Chetsford (talk) 18:42, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the rule for high schools only works with institutions that have a physical presence. For institutions that only exist online, they need to be judged by general institutional notability standards, and this institution fails those standards.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:40, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm unaware of that being a requirement, but in any case, this one does have a physical presence. Hobit (talk) 16:28, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete-Per CLarry and JPL.~ Winged Blades^Godric 16:04, 19 February 2018 (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.