Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Riverside High School (Launceston)

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. MBisanz ^talk 01:07, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Riverside High School (Launceston)[edit]

fails WP:ORG, nothing really notable about this school to justify its own article. Michellecrisp (talk) 03:02, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. -- Mattinbgn\^talk 03:57, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment If this was anything other than a school deletion as original reseach would be a no-brainer. However, given that the article is about a place of learning, the article will no doubt be kept, along with the articles on other high schools in Launceston, Launceston College and Brooks High School (Launceston, Tasmania), all shining examples of the typical school article. If editors focused on the quality of school articles as much as they do on the quantity, the encyclopedia would be much better off. -- Mattinbgn\^talk 04:02, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Launceston, Tasmania - I've merged the single sourced sentence there. For a complete article on Launceston, discussion about eduction is required. For this school though there is no significant mention, beyond directory entries and passing notes, in reliable sources - Peripitus (Talk) 04:23, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I don't think the Launceston article is the place for details about schools. You would also need to include other high schools from the area too - Kings Meadow High, Queechy High, Prospect High. I think that would be too much for the Launceston article.Barrylb (talk) 06:01, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Since all high schools are found to be notable if enough work is done, this is the stub for a valid article. Instead of trying to delete, look for sources. One cannot say there are no valid sources available unless one has checked local print material. Is there no newspaper in the area? DGG (talk) 04:42, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Notable or not for schools is a debate that will never end here. I take on board the comment by Mattinbgn as most pertinent. If we merge to the Launceston article we keep the material and provide perhaps a more visible place to improve it. If it grows excessively large it can bud off in the normal way. - Peripitus (Talk) 05:06, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep because...well...DGG said it. High schools are found to be notable. I know it is a debate, but I support the fact they are worth mentioning... K50 Dude ROCKS! 06:11, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Given the fact the article is only four months old and there are not a lot of local editors and even less that attented the school, it is quite hard to expect this to be a quality article, I do believe that even if this is deleted it will only be re-created again. Stony ^¿ 07:48, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to Launceston, Tasmania. There's not enough material to support a separate article and adding other schools to make things complete as per Barrylb wouldn't take up too much space. If any of the schools wwarrant more coverage, the town article can have a one line mention with a link to an expanded article on the school. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:13, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I've made a few edits to the article. High schools aren't in and of themselves notable, but see the essay Wikipedia:High Schools. My own opinion is Strong keep, but I will and must defer to the consensus outcome.--Shirt58 (talk) 11:37, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete There's a serious misunderstanding here. Australian public education doesn't stop at the 10th grade. Riverside would not fall in the inherently notable category, because it is not a senior high school and does not confer a diploma. It goes only as far as 10th grade, whereas to earn the equivalent of a high school diploma, the Tasmanian Certificate of Education, one has to complete the equivalent of senior high school level (11th or 12th). The rationale for finding a high school notable is that it provides the highest certification available in a school district, and Launceston, Tasmania #Education goes beyond the 10th grade. Unless someone can go straight from Riverside to the university, it's not inherently notable. Mandsford (talk) 14:18, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment All public high schools within Tasmania only go as far as the 10th grade, I believe this is also the case in the ACT. Stony ^¿ 00:42, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - far exceeds the usual standard of sourcing demanded of such schools. Wily D 14:52, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - like all public high schools this is a public institution which plays an important role in its community. Sources available to meet WP:ORG. Such pages should be expanded not put up for deletion. TerriersFan (talk) 17:35, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Like Terriers and DGG, I'm a staunch defender of the proposition of inherent notability for the highest level institution in a school district, which in America we refer to as a high school or a senior high school. Again, it's a question of semantics; the terms "high school" and "college" have different meanings in the United States and in Australia. The equivalent to the high school in Launceston is Launceston College, which confers a "certificate of education". In the U.S., the terms "college" and "university" are use interchangeably, but that's not true everywhere. In other nations, "college" is a synonym for "senior high school". All schools play an important role in their communities, but we've kind of compromised on the senior high school as the most important of those schools because it provides the highest level of education in the school district. It may be that Riverside has demonstrated its notability in the same way that an American middle school might, either by recognition or by virtue of a notable alumnus, but it isn't inherently (i.e. beyond debate) notable. Mandsford (talk) 18:18, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. —TerriersFan (talk) 19:03, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - How is it any different to any other school on wikipedia?? I don't understand why it was put up for deletion! A part of the article was merged into the Launceston article, but i removed it because a list of 'High Schools' would make a mess of the article. Aaroncrick (talk) 22:45, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment As a student of the school, I could add a lot information about it, but then it would need sources and there isn't a lot about the school on the net.

Comment There is no Wikipedia policy which states all schools are notable and must have an article, they still must meet WP:ORG in particular significant third party coverage. Otherwise, all it gets is a one line mention in a locality article. Michellecrisp (talk) 22:52, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Looks to be a valid high school stub article. Passes WP:N. Refs seem ok and a couple of notable alumni mention. Keep and expand.--Sting Buzz Me... 23:50, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Biscuits and gravy" for everyone then. A 7th grader at Riverside High School will be serving white gravy over a plateful of Oreos. Mandsford (talk) 03:16, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to district most of the information in the article is not verifiable, and this is not a high school under the definition for which Wikipedia:Notability (high schools) was written. This is more like a middle school. Even if it was (grammer wonks might prefer even if it were for the subjunctive, but I don't like it), the article needs to have encyclopedic content that is verifiable. Note that I usually don't !vote delete/merge on high school articles (being the author of the essay linked above). Jerry delusional ¤ kangaroo 05:40, 17 January 2009 (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.