Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mayfair 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. Angus McLellan (Talk) 22:13, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mayfair High School

This was originally speedy deleted as CSD A7. A DRV consensus overturned this deletion as out-of-process and unwarranted. The matter is brought to AfD for full consideration. This is a procedural nomination, so I abstain. Xoloz 17:05, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, a reasonably well-written article that meets our content policies. JYolkowski // talk 19:21, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete vanity schoolcruft that fails WP:SCHOOL per WP:N. Fails to put forth any notability and is mainly original research. The precedent has been set for deletion. NeoFreak 20:05, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Oakshade. NeoFreak 06:51, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Weak ~~Delete~~ Keep Currently lacks independent references to verify its claims. Mentioned in passing in a couple of news stories, along the lines of "Joe, a senior at Mayfair High School, won first place in the art competition." California Distinguished School is hardly a notable award -- lots of California schools get one, including over 300 in 2006 alone. Blue Ribbon, as a national award, might be an argument, though thousands of schools in the US have achieved one of those. A better, more developed case for its noteworthiness needs to be made. Shimeru 20:27, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Changed !vote, since case has been developed to what I feel is an acceptable level. Shimeru 20:34, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete; Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a place to republish schools' annual reports. — Haeleth Talk 22:09, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. As a fairly large high school and Blue Ribbon winner, there is almost certainly non-trivial media coverage of the school. Try harder to find references. --- RockMFR 22:42, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The burden of proof is on the editor that wants inclusion not the challenger. The nom and his/her supports have no obligation to "try harder" to find proof of notability of something that fails WP:N at face value. Oops, Fram beat me to it. NeoFreak 22:53, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. "Try harder to find references" is the duty of those wanting to keep it. No claims to real notability (too many schools get the Blue Ribbon or the other award to be notable), no independent coverage given (so the current article does not meet our content policies, i.e. WP:V). This school is not remarkable in any way, so why do we need an article on it? Fram 22:49, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Changed to Weak keep. I appreciate the work done by those wanting to keep it to make it verifiable, and there are at least some claims to notability here. While I still don't feel the need to have this article, it is now at least enough to meet our policies and to give some interesting info to the casual reader, contrary to many other school articles (compare e.g. to Andros Karperos Middle School, another AfD for today). Thanks! Fram 09:47, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

~~Weak delete~~ per Shimeru. There are claims of notability, but not strong ones. -- Kicking222 00:42, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Change to Keep per alterations. -- Kicking222 14:58, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per precedent regarding secondary schools and the school is a large one at that (3,500 students). --Oakshade 02:03, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep based on awards received, championships won and notable alumni, all of which are sourced in full compliance with WP:RS and WP:V, the school meets and exceeds the standards set by WP:SCHOOL and deserves to be retained. Alansohn 02:15, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. What? It doesn't meet any on of the standards of WP:SCHOOL and I'm wondering what precedent you're talkin about. NeoFreak 05:29, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Response While I'm not Alansohn, I will say it appears to satisfy most of the standards of WP:SCHOOL. Point 1 "subject of non-trivial public works" (several Long Beach Press Telegram articles). Point 2: "participates in the highest grade of the state, province or regional competitions in at least three extracurricular activities and has won at least two regional championships or one national championship in any of these activities, or holds a verifiable record in such an activity." (Won several state championships.) Point 4:"Significant awards or commendations have been bestowed upon the school."(recognized as a California Distinguished School) Point 5:"The school has notable alumni or staff (e.g. would qualify for an article under WP:BIO or WP:MUSIC)." (Josh Childress,Jay Gibbons and yes, Geri Reischl). Looks like Alansohn was correct. --Oakshade 06:42, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, I completely failed to notcied the pro sports players that are alumni (don't ask me how). I would debate the real notability of the other portions but in conjunction with the alumni I would have to agree and will change my vote accordingly. NeoFreak 06:51, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Alansohn --Rob 02:40, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Oakshade. Edison 20:10, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Keep per above args. — RJH (talk) 20:50, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
keep this one please it is a large and notable high school with famous alumni too Yuckfoo 21:48, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. Accurizer 16:44, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per arguments above. ALKIVAR™ ☢ 09:31, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I agree with the above statements. If anything, all high schools should be given an article, especially high schools with data and well-sourced information. Nominations of deletions should occur, if at all, first with high school articles with poorly written prose and/or no citations before getting to ones like these. Plus, you never know if the next president might come from Mayfair High School. AManSac 10:28, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment If the next president comes from a school we can worry about it then. It isn't like merging or even deletion throws edits into a bottomless pit. JoshuaZ 04:55, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Another comment: note that at the time of deletion, the article had only one citation, which did not give any notability / importance: good sources were only added after the AfD started. So it was perfectly allright to start an AfD for this article (just like it is for most school articles). Fram 06:21, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. NN. WMMartin 18:37, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. N. --JJay 18:54, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, non-notable school. Article mentions an award, but it's not a particularly significant one. It's a state award and there were about 400 recipients in 2006. —ptk✰fgs 22:57, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The devaluing of the awards received by this school is unfounded. The article passes WP:SCHOOLS with flying colors. Silensor 06:59, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, but an award given to around 5% of all schools in the state every year, and awarded for 4 years, meaning some 20% of schools have the award at any one time, is hardly an indicator of excellence. The two news articles cites don't appear to be non-trivial, since they seem to be short-ish, and of primarily local interest. Notable alumni are pretty worthless too, since the school had no part in the process that got them their own articles. There's still nothing in this article which sets it apart from any other similar school. The references are all trivial mentions and purely local interest stories. Doesn't quite pass WP:V still. Chris cheese whine 08:52, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
weak keep per Blue Ribbon and having multiple notable alumni at least one of whom (Josh Childress) has his notability arguably connected to the school. JoshuaZ 13:25, 30 November 2006 (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.