Talk:Saint Jerome Emiliani Institute

Note for reviewing admin
( Please skip to lines below for a quick overview. -- Ohiostandard     02:34, 3 May 2012 (UTC)  )

I've marked this with db-author speedy deletion request. It was created last year by a person who probably owns these three wp:spa accounts:



No accusation of bad faith at all, by the way, nor of purposely socking; you'll see what I mean if you look at the history of each of the above, along with the histories of this article and the new "St." article described in the next paragraph. Someone probably just forgot their password a couple of times; this person is obviously well-intentioned.

User account Bearezzan created this article last year, and Sjei and Bearezzan subsequently blanked it or otherwise tried to delete it several times without knowing how to go about it. I didn't understand why, until I noticed that Sjei account copy-pasted this article's content to a new article a day or two ago, viz. St. Jerome Emiliani Institute. Sjei also expanded the content there. It's not in bad shape, and although it's very much an advert in the language it uses, I'm not going to get excited over that, personally.

Editor Ripley Hunt and I discussed this a bit, on his talk and agreed that asking an admin to sort the mess, via a speedy nomination for this named-version of the content would be a reasonable plan. We both know that there was some kind of recent change to notability requirments for schools, but we're not sure what the result was.

This school appears to fail the only notability requirements I could find that seem to apply to schools; a search of Google News and Google News Archive returns just 8 hits for the school, each of them a brief mention of its sports scores.

Re the three accounts, my recommendation would be to block the two "Sjei" accounts, as a violation of usernames policy - since they appear be the initial letters of the four words of the school's name - and to ask the user to stick with "Bearezzan". If no real change to notability requirements for schools has transpired, then perhaps the new "St. Jerome" school article should be prod'd or AfD'd too, although I'd personally be inclined to let it slide; YMMV. I see from a revision of CSD A7. "No indication of importance..." that schools are now excluded from speedy nomination under that rationale, btw.

I see that almost all of the content for both the old article and the new is a copypaste from http://sjei.bravehost.com/. I suppose to be strictly correct we'd have to make the school jump through OTRS hoops to "license" that, although it seems obvious that the school itself is the source of both that site's wording and the presence of a corresponding article here.

If the new "St. Jerome" version of this article sticks around, I suppose a redirect to it will need to be created from "Saint Jerome Emiliani Institute", btw.

Right, then: I've been long-winded enough. I'm going to hum myself to sleep now, with the "Oh, I'm hap - hap -happy I'm not an admin, because I don't, don't, don't have to decide what happens next with this" song. Seriously, though, we'd all appreciate it if the reviewing admin could properly sort all these loose ends.

Many thanks in advance for your work, –  OhioStandard  (talk) 07:19, 2 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Even if it can be proved that these users are the same (I haven't investigated), subsequent substantial edits such as this mean that G7 isn't appropriate here. The substantial edit in question is mainly deletion, but to my mind, this is no less relevant. I suggest restoring the AfD and taking it through the full course.  An  optimist on the  run!  11:57, 2 May 2012 (UTC)


 * That would be possible, of course, but it's not an option I'll be taking myself. As I see it, that would just waste everyone's time, including my own, to conform in exquisite detail to a rule that provides zero advantage or benefit in this instance, given the creation of St. Jerome Emiliani Institute a day or two ago. There's no one who wants this kept for any intrinsic reason.


 * , and there's no reason, imo, that can't be dealt with efficiently. The multiple accounts still need attention, also, and someone who understands the notability requirements for school articles better than I do needs to look at the new article to determine whether it has to be deleted along with this one. Not to mention (again) a judgement on the copyvio question I raised above, and the need for a redirect if the new "St." article is judged to meet whatever inclusion requirements apply to schools. Otherwise they should be AfD'd together, and I've never done even a single AfD.


 * That's what I meant by my request for an admin to "properly sort all these loose ends". I'd be willing to post to AN/I for another admin who might be willing deal with those in a unified way, but I've already spent over two hours on this, and the ten minutes it'll take to post to AN/I is all the additional time I'm willing to spend. You'd have no objection, I suppose, if I were to make that post, and another admin were willing to deal with the deletion in whatever way he sees fit, and with these other loose ends, as well? –  OhioStandard  (talk) 14:23, 2 May 2012 (UTC)


 * I don't think an ANI is required here - there's more going on than I've got time to investigate at the moment (I'm going out for the evening in a few minutes), but it doesn't seem particularly urgent. I've stuck an adminhelp tag on to get another admin to have a look - if this doesn't work I'll investigate later.  An  optimist on the  run!  16:34, 2 May 2012 (UTC)


 * No worries. We're all volunteers, and I have at least a half dozen things I'm behind on here myself, so I do understand. If I don't see anyone show up in the next day or three, though, I probably will go ahead and post a polite, low-key request to AN or AN/I to ask for additional assistance. Oh; I've also added a top note and highlighted some text, above, to make it a bit easier for any admin who happens by to quickly grasp the situation. Thanks, –  OhioStandard  (talk) 02:34, 3 May 2012 (UTC)


 * As there's been no response to the adminhelp, I've posted a request at WP:AN.  An  optimist on the  run!  22:09, 3 May 2012 (UTC)