Talk:Payson High School (Arizona)

Importance
Grace Note removed the cleanup-importance tag with the comment "Article clearly says this is a school so no question of importance here." On the contrary, schools are not inherently important, and articles on schools must establish that the school has some particular importance that sets them above the majority of other schools. I'm restoring the tag until such information is provided. Angr (talk • contribs) 07:51, 31 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree with Angr; see WP:SCHOOL for notability criteria for schools (under development). Basically, something nontrivial and verifiable needs to be said about the school before the article is really acceptable. Mangojuice 19:29, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

"Notability criteria" for schools? You boys crack me up. Grace Note 05:29, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

WP:SCHOOL does not have notability criteria for schools (and its not even a guideline anyhow). It suggests merging for very short articles, but that's it. No need to state importance. It's important for being what it is, just as a town is. Incidently, WP:SCHOOL is not "under development" any more. The tag serves no purpose whatsoever, other then causing clutter. The stub tag is what tells people it needs expansion. --Rob 02:45, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

There are plenty of stubs that make clear why the article will eventually be important. This article does not contain anything to show why this school is any more notable than any other example of a school. That is why the cleanup-importance is relevant and useful. Johntex\talk 03:04, 6 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Will you be putting this tag on every little township's article as well? This is just clutter.  If you wish to improve the article, feel free to do so, but the tag doesn't serve any purpose.  --Rob 03:15, 6 April 2006 (UTC)


 * You're right, an AfD would be more appropriate. &mdash; Saxifrage &#9998; 06:30, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

The tag is just deletionist POV pushing. Look, guys, we disagree on whether we should have school articles but you have to ask yourselves what harm they are doing and why you need to waste time on trying to destroy them that you could spend writing content. An AfD would be tantamount to trolling, Saxifrage. I suggest you don't list schools for deletion because you are or ought to be very aware that pisses other editors off. That shouldn't in any way be your purpose here. Grace Note 03:46, 8 April 2006 (UTC)


 * You make several arguments from emotion but give nothing about your reasons. There are a lot of reasons to do all the things you suggest be avoided, and none of them have to be about pissing off other editors. (And avoid telling other people how they should constructively contribute&mdash;some of us are better editors than content-creators, and have different hats to wear. Also, it might piss someone off.) &mdash; Saxifrage &#9998; 06:56, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Agreed. The main argument seems to be about aesthetics, which is not a good reason to remove a template.  I restored the tag. Johntex\talk 23:15, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

The tag was re-removed with the edit summary, "removed tag, which serves no purpose, ; feel free to add whatever you feel is missing". This is specious reasoning, as we're saying that there is apparently nothing of importance about the subject of the article. As such, asking us to add what we "feel is missing" would be impossible if we are correct that there is nothing of importance that could be added. If you want to remove the tag, add the information that demonstrates importance first&mdash;that's the entire purpose of the tag. &mdash; Saxifrage &#9998; 04:34, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
 * It seems what is happening here, is a few editors are very frustrated because they think most schools aren't important, and wish they could delete them as such. It is inappropriate to take your opinion about the importance of the school, and express it in article space.  Frankly, it's no different then simply writing out (without a template) "this school is unimportant, I wish it wasn't here" on the page.  I'm frankly disappointed in what I see here.  This school is important, for being what it is, just as a township is important for being a township (I don't see every township getting an imortance tag). If you wish to argue about the importance of the school, that is fine.  But you must keep your arguements and greviences *out* of article space.  It seems you're intent on having a *permanent* opinionated message on the article.    --Rob 09:18, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Schools are not inherently important, and comparing them to townships is inaccurate (since when is home to a few thousand exactly the same and deserve exactly the same treatment as a high school?). This article, if it were about anything else, would have to justify its existence by adding something of value to the encyclopedia. If this place is not utterly non-notable, then surely something can be added to the article to say so.
 * Further, keep your opinions of the motives of other editors out of article space, Talk space, and anywhere else. Nowhere is that appropriate. &mdash; Saxifrage &#9998; 14:25, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Thousands? Well, some townships have thousands, many have just hundreds, some have less then a 100; but all may have articles on Wikipedia.  It's interesting you based your comparison of the two (schools and townships) on size, which means you effectively conceded that this and other high schools are at least as important as many township (and other place) articles.  I certainly think this high school, with around 900 students, is at least as important as the Perth Township, North Dakota with 63 people, and definately more important then the city of Perth, North Dakota with just 13 people.  Also, if you wish to refer to the reasoning of others as "specious", don't complain when somebody questions your reasoning.  Frankly, I think your edit to this school article, is about as "productive" as this last one you made to a school article.  If you've made some other positive edits to school articles, that I'm not aware of then, I sincerely apologize for my comment.  --Rob 15:20, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Poor example with the Shawnigan Lake article, and extremely poor demonstration of ability to assume good faith, since that was my mistakenly editing an old diff after following a vandal to that page. Which, incidentally, is also the reason I'm at this page: I came here after following a vandal and discovering it to be a vanity page.
 * Your specious reasoning doesn't get any less invalid because you make a straw man argument against my reasons for keeping the tag. Townships are geographical locations where people live. Therefore they are by default important until significant lack of importance in a particular instance can be seen. To the contrary, schools are not important until significant importance can be shown in a particular instance. Though schools are not inherently important, this school might be. However, so long as no effort is made to show why this school is an exception this article has little value except to declare the existence of the school (which would be served just fine by a List of high schools in Arizona article). &mdash; Saxifrage &#9998; 17:11, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

I tried to de-escalate the conflict a bit by searching for something notable about this school that we could put on the page, but I still haven't found anything. Isopropyl 21:16, 11 April 2006 (UTC)