Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cogan primary school
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. Jaranda wat's sup 03:10, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Cogan primary school[edit]
Tagged for speedy (that way lies ArbCom!), this is a very short article for a generic primary school, written in the first person. Seems like someone has misdirected Year 6 as to what Wikipedia is for, so will a schoolwatcher please pop over and be Kind at them for a bit until they realise the problem? Anyway, I say merge to the community. Guy (Help!) 13:04, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge as per nom and WP:SCHOOL. --Brad Beattie (talk) 13:11, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry merge to what? Delete per WP:School Amists talk • contribs 13:46, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Even if there were something to merge to, what would get merged? Very obviously, there's no notability asserted. Now, let's see how many inclusionists vote keep without actually looking at the article. -- Kicking222 14:47, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Please permit me to suggest that you not vilify the inclusionists. I realise that you "...have nothing wrong with AfD ... school inclusionists," except when they "...can't provide any rationale whatsoever besides 'this seventeen-student-strong elementary school is Mozambique is notable because all schools of all kinds are notable....'" But your opinion that "... when [inclusionists] just state 'all schools are notable,' [they're] doing nothing more than voting" appears to be a fallacious Guilt by association argument: a tactic to discredit all inclusionists, whether they vote without reading the article and providing rationale or not, by associating them all with voters. Please note that I do assume that you are acting in good faith, and am not attempting to attack you in any way. What I intended to do was leave a friendly suggestion after becoming frustrated with repeated, what I think are, fallacious Reductio ad Hitlerum arguments at another school afd. Also, as protection for myself, please note that I am more deletionist rather than inclusionist; if you want proof, check my user contributions and go to the other school's afd. --Iamunknown 23:47, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per everything else. I thought I saw the last of "Do this per a proposal I support" at WP:CHILD... Stop using controversial proposals like policy. -Amarkov blahedits 15:28, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I was told that the only way proposals become guidelines is by people citing them and using them from both sides of the argument, until they are accepted. If I want to see WP:School become policy, I have to cite it. Amists talk • contribs 15:39, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. I do not remember any specific details about proposals becoming guidelines, but I would suggest two things. First, Amarkov, please do not discredit someone's argument solely based on the fact that it is "convtroversial". Only by introducing new, potentially controversial ideas into discussion can we change. By polarizing arguments, one merely stagnates the discussion. Second, Amists, I would suggest that you not provide citations to proposals as your only argument for your decision. Consider providing a thoughtful analysis and argue why the article should be deleted. Granted, your thoughts may parallel a specific policy proposal, and you may wish to append a statement such as, "Thus my thoughts are parallel to X policy," (but use something extemporaneously, because that statement is awkward and silly), but nonetheless, this is a discussion, not a vote. And please do not consider me condescending at all. I do not intend to be. I merely got frustrated at another school afd and intend to go out and read the other afds and offer any suggestions I can. --Iamunknown 23:55, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I was told that the only way proposals become guidelines is by people citing them and using them from both sides of the argument, until they are accepted. If I want to see WP:School become policy, I have to cite it. Amists talk • contribs 15:39, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I don't particularly care what the outcome here is; but I stubbed and added a ref. I agree with JzG, if kept this will need watching because the kids who created this could use some guidance.--Isotope23 16:28, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Meets none of the WP:SCHOOLS3 criteria. Denni talk 20:06, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge on over to the Cogan article, there is nothing here at all to warrant a dedicated page. RFerreira 05:23, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete too little context. --Vsion 04:14, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge per nom. lack of notability or content makes it unsuitable for a stand alone article. Trusilver 02:42, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. WMMartin 18:49, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. Audiobooks 21:22, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Just pointing out... The nominator is pushing to merge not delete. The fact that the last two editors here said "delete per nom" fills me with a meaure of pessimism concerning, what I'm really starting to see as, the lost art of reading about an issue before commenting about it. Trusilver 23:43, 20 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.