Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shepherd's Hill Academy

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. RL0919 (talk) 03:44, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Shepherd's Hill Academy[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

This is a boarding school that appears to fail WP:NORG and WP:GNG. The provides references are not independent, reliable journalistic outlets. I can't find evidence that it has won any awards or some other notable achievement. Citrivescence (talk) 03:42, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Citrivescence (talk) 03:42, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Georgia (U.S. state)-related deletion discussions. Citrivescence (talk) 03:42, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disability-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:24, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I've substantially trimmed some sections for NPOV and found archives for two refs that are reliable independent, secondary sources(The Idependent Mail and Athens Banner-Herald.) I veridfied most of the refs to external agencies such as accreditation and state agencies. While the article could use more citations in currently uncited paragaphs, it meets GNG. Cheers! — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 19:56, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There's still a lot of trivia, cruft, and tangential information in this. Bearian (talk) 21:25, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Coment Agreed. I mad only a first pass. Just ran out of steam, plus my eys were watering from cruft in the last half of the article. Maybe tomorrow. Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 21:29, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments - I'm still unclear about its notability, but I removed all of the unsourced material, because allegations that all the students have ADHD and other such conditions violate WP:BLP and FERPA, putting the Wikimedia Foundation as risk for a lawsuit. Bearian (talk) 21:34, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Bearian: Thank you for cleaning up the article! I still see this as a good candidate for deletion because these two sources are regional, and the school itself seems like a run-of-the-mill WP:LOCAL institution that is not itself notable for any particular reason. Citrivescence (talk) 00:15, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Citrivescence: First, the "regional sources" argument you advanced above is not based in any Wikipedia policy; if a source is reliable, it can contribute to notability. Second, I found a series of two more articles that tell quite a different story of the practices and history of the school related to its licensure. While the fact checkers at Medium (website) are listed by name in the articles, I hesitated to include much more of the content in trying to observe restraint, per WP:UNDUE. I may have added too much-- I'm confident other editors can approach the Controversies section with fresh eyes and can trim my excesses as needed. As for me, I feel the need to shower my brain after this one. Gah! — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 03:31, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep -As of 9 January this is a well referenced balanced article- virulently throwing around WP:XXs may prevent this from becoming a GA anytime soon but it is not the level scrutiny needed at AfD.ClemRutter (talk) 15:26, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is 2020, and everybody knows we have rules, policies, and guidelines, so throwing them around is what is expected at AfD's. If you don't like them then cite WP:IAR. "Sin boldly," said Martin Luther. I am still putting some thoughts into this matter, but will be occupied IRL due to dental work over the next two days. [[User:|Bearian]] (talk) 17:10, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bearian, thanks for taking time to make a considered judgment. I came across your personal Standards for Notability of High Schools and understand why this may be a close call for you. It's a good list. Best wishes for speedy recovery from your dental work! — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 17:31, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. Based on media coverage, it appears to skim by because I found at least two reliable sources with technically significant coverage. It has 7/10 factors according my own standards: Has (or has had 50) or more students? No, only 25 boarders as of 2019. Has (at least) 10th through 12th grades? Yes. Has been in existence for (at least) 10 academic years? Yes. Grants a diploma, GED, or an International Baccalaureate? No direct evidence, but we'll assume its accreditation allows it. Pays its teachers (who presumably have Bachelors' degrees or higher). 9/12 do have a bachelor's degree. Is a Public school, or an Accredited Private school, or an Accredited Charter school? Yes. Has 2 or more notable alumni, who already have their own articles? No. Has 2 or more reliable sources? Yes. Has 1 or more notable academic programs, major annual events, or scholastic sports. No evidence. Is located in a country large enough to have significant media presence online (in order to verify its existence, and has competitive sports and other teams that garner media exposure). Yes. Bearian (talk) 21:36, 9 January 2020 (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.