Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dr Bruce Carter

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 delete. —David Eppstein (talk) 08:08, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dr Bruce Carter[edit]

Are school principals notable? I don't know but I don't think so, even if people pay small fortunes to send their children to the schools he has run. The only source provided is not independent of the subject, being his employer. Mattinbgn\^talk 23:22, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. -- Mattinbgn\^talk 23:23, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment School headmasters can be notable either if the schools are extremely notable, or if there is some good reason--but there is not enough specified here to tell. Obviously in need of expansion DGG (talk) 03:26, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletions. —David Eppstein (talk) 04:26, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
delete He's currently principal of a school established in 1984, with approximately 700 students. I see no notability accruing from that. His former job, headmaster of a boarding school (established in 1918, enrollment 1400 students pre-school to high school) may be more convincing to others, but I don't see notabilty, not without demonstrable extensive coverage by reliable sources, preferably secondary sources, etc. Pete.Hurd (talk) 05:38, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- How does one accrue notability according to the actual wikipedia guidelines? By student numbers???? Ansell 01:11, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Delete, no reliable secondary sources, and probably not notable either. Lankiveil (talk) 06:25, 17 November 2007 (UTC).[reply]
- Would you mind reviewing the article again now. Ansell 01:11, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Delete -- no cited secondary source coverage leads to serious notability issues. -- Myke Cuthbert (talk) 09:03, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- "Serious notability issues" must be a pretty shallow definition if it can be based entirely on what is actually in a stub article. Better be careful reviewing articles like that without making an effort to do some research to get articles past that stage. Ansell 01:11, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
  - Reasserting delete. I am careful in reviewing my articles. The AM membership helps but does not in itself put the subject above the notability threshold without further evidence, which I don't know where it could be found (nor has Ansell provided a place we might search for it). The AM citation lists, "For service to education as a principal, administrator and educator, particularly through Cranbrook School and professional educational bodies and forums." -- i.e., essentially what we already know about him, and does not seem to imply a level of service above the WP notability threshold. Yes, it's tragic that the notability guideline for people is so much higher than for Pokemon characters and Bus stops, but that's a discussion for another time. -- Myke Cuthbert (talk) 04:08, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. School principals are not notable per se (I'm even not sure that all schools are notable), and the article does not assert particular notability. GregorB (talk) 10:15, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- That has no relevance to the discussion of this article at all. Please review again however as the article is different now. Ansell 01:11, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Delete and should have been speedy because notability is not asserted, and there is no "special case" applicable beyond WP:BIO that says he is notable just for being a principle... the closest would be the professor test which he comes nowhere near.Ga rr ie 13:15, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Whilst it is accepted that headmasters of notable schools (eg. Eton) are notable. I find nothing in this article to assert that this school is indeed very notable. There is a lack of reliable sources within the article. Twenty Years 16:25, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep The guy has a ~~Medal~~Member of the Order of Australia (AM). Everyone is assessing the current state of the article instead of going out and getting references. Is this a vote for deletion of a discussion of the subject of the article. Of course, you could make a subjective decision to delete based on a prejudice, but it wouldn't fit with the current state of the page. Ansell 05:34, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Comment I am not sure an OAM makes one notable enough for Wikipedia. It is the lowest rung in the Order of Australia and is generally given to a number of very worthy people for community service and the like, but not necessarily (for Wikipedia purposes) notable people. A quote from the Oder of Australia article "The organisation also attempts to increase awareness of those honoured by the Order, since many of their number are not household names, despite their contributions." -- Mattinbgn\^talk
Comment. The subject has received an AM (Member of the Order of Australia) rather than an OAM (Medal of the Order of Australia). -- Mattinbgn\^talk 05:55, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for getting the reference to Medal instead of Member. Member is however a rank above Medal, giving more impetus to the statement. Is wikipedia really reduced these days to subjective observations about these things however? Ansell 00:59, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

For the people here who run on figures. "At 30 June 2006, there have been 5,693 recipients appointed a Member of the Order of Australia." That isn't many really when you consider the size of the country. [1] Ansell 01:03, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Comment So he has an AM:

For service to education as a principal, administrator and educator, particularly through Cranbrook School and professional educational bodies and forums.

In getting noticed for that - did anybody write anything about him?? I'm guessing somebody did - if it can be sourced as a reference then he is probably notable.Ga rr ie 04:52, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete His removal from Cranbrook led to greater involvment for parents on private school boards, and he's a non-Jewish person as headmaster of a Jewish school. Both of those seem notable to me. However, there really need to be more specific references. Amaryllis25^{"Talk to me"} 15:06, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete School principals can be notable provided there are reliable secondary sources. In the article so far, he is only mentioned twice incidentally in the source materials, so the article fails the test. Assize (talk) 10:40, 20 November 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.