Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Avenues: The World School


 * 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   no consensus. If it is desired to merge or redirect the article, that can be done with a discussion on the talk page (or an implementation of WP:BOLD). Stifle (talk) 12:53, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Avenues: The World School

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Article is about a school and/or a group  of schools that does  not  exist  yet, and which may  not  exist  for a long  time. As such, the subject cannot  have accumulated any  notability: WP:CRYSTAL, WP:GNG, and WP:ORG. Any press reports are about  the project and not  about  the school  itself : WP:RS. Will not  serve grade 12 until  2016. Kudpung (talk) 19:11, 4 February 2011 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Article is about a school system that does not yet exist. It is also written in an overly promotional tone. RadManCF &#x2622; open frequency 19:28, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep but needs rewrite from the article lead Avenues: The World School is a worldwide system of independent pre-K-12 schools, so the page is about the system, not a particular school. As such citations about the project as a whole are perfectly valid and there are two from Reuters who are clearly a reliable source. It needs a major re-write to change the tone and take out the promotional slant, but I think notabillity is established so it shouldn't be deleted.--ThePaintedOne (talk) 20:51, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete If we ignore the sources which are not independent, we have a few news reports about the announcement that the project is planned, all published on the same day, and having all the character of write-ups of a press release. There is no evidence of satisfying Wikipedia's notability criteria. In addition, the article is totally promotional. It has already been speedy-deleted once as promotional, and has been re-created either word for word the same or very nearly so. JamesBWatson (talk) 21:33, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Hmm, on the one hand deletion is not cleanup and if the subject is notable (which it may be) the article could be trimmed to an acceptable stub. OTOH, if the only person adding stuff to this looks to be COI and has ignored a speedy to put the promo material back in again, its might not be worth the effort.--ThePaintedOne (talk) 22:16, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:38, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - Notability verified by these independent news sources  , but a clean-up would greatly help to improve the article. Utterman (talk) 18:51, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

So that we know what is in the cited 'sources' above:
 * Chelsea Gay City:The World School put forth their plan for fall 2012. That’s the preordained time by which 259 Tenth Avenue (a former warehouse which dates back to 1928 and bears the mark of designer Cass Gilbert) will make its debut as the Avenues’ flagship campus.
 * Reuters: Avenues: The World School," will open in a soon-to-be renovated warehouse in New York City's Chelsea neighborhood in fall 2012,
 * Philadelphia Business Journal:The company plans to open its flagship campus in fall 2012 in Manhattan’s Chelsea neighborhood

All reporting almost  verbatim the same info, probably  as a result  of a press release. Ans all sheer speculation about  something  tha  hasn't happened yet and is not  scheduled to  happen until 'Fall' (Autumn) 2012) How can something  that hasn't happened yet  be notable? Kudpung (talk) 12:39, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
 * WP:CRYSTAL does not say that all things in the future are non-notable. Rather it says there are limits. In this case, the article is about a project, and the project would appear to be under way. The fact that a particular part of the project doesn't 'go live' until fall 2012 doesn't mean the project itself has no notability. To quote specificaly from policy If preparation for the event is not already in progress, speculation about it must be well documented. which by implication means that if preparation for an event has begun this does not bar entry and even before that it may be notable provided reliable sources can be supplied. Preparation would appear to be underway here, and reliable sources have been supplied. Incidentaly, while I have voted keep I could be persueded otherwise, but I don't think the issue is as black and white as you are suggesting above.--ThePaintedOne (talk) 13:04, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
 * This ref http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20110131/FREE/110129855# (which is numbers 7 and 8 on the article as the inline cites are a mess) states that planning work began in 2009, the headquarters building is opening in March 2011 and first admissions are being accepted from fall 2011, so I think invkoing WP:CRYSTAL is inappropriate here.--ThePaintedOne (talk) 13:15, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
 * If commentators want to  keep it,  based on a project, then it  is not a school and it  should be moved. As a school however, it  cannot  possibly be notable - it  doesn't  exist  ad will not  for nearly two years. It  will still not  meet notability for schools until 2016 when it starts offering  Grade 12 classes.Kudpung (talk) 14:45, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
 * It's not listed as a school? The first line of the article says Avenues: The World School is a worldwide system of independent pre-K-12 schools, so the project as a whole is called Avenues: The World School, it's not an individual school called 'Avenues'.--ThePaintedOne (talk) 14:57, 11 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Merge and redirect to Chris Whittle, as the latest in his series of educational enterprises. Based on the coverage this has received and the participants, it's notable in spite of not existing yet, but there isn't much to say in a stand-alone article. If the project comes to fruition, it can be split off as a stand-alone article in the future. --Orlady (talk) 21:17, 11 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep per WP:HS. The policy is that high schools are almost always notable. In this case the school is pre-school to high school.  This is a school created by notable people who had articles before the school was even created.  And the founders played important roles in very notable schools.  In addition the building itself is notable.  I wandered in here after seeing the full page ad in The New Yorker which in itself should have flagged it as notable.  Yes, the article may currently be promotional but that can be fixed.  There's very few high schools that bear the pedigree this one has.Americasroof (talk) 20:19, 16 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment - The school does not  exist  yet. As  a non functioning  project  that  exists only  on  an architect's blueprint  and a hole in  the ground it  is not  yet  a place of learning, and as such  cannot  possibly  have accumulated any  notabilty  for its academic standards - it  doesn't  have any, and has no  pedigree.  A building  out  of steel, bricks, and concrete does not  make a school. Schools are made, and their reputatioins are established by  the students, the teachers, head teachers, and governors - not  the New Yorker. It  won't even be a high  school  until 2016, so  unless it  does something  really  extraordinary  before then, it  will not  meet Wikipedia criteria for schools.Kudpung (talk) 01:10, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
 * This article is not about a single physical school building (or hole in the ground). This page is about the organisation and their project to open a series of schools. So WP:HS doesn't apply and exclusions to it equally don't apply. The headquarters building is opening next month (March 2011), so it's gone considerably beyond a blueprint and I fail to see where in the sources you can back up 'non functioning project' as all the evidence suggests its moving along to plan. Presumably once that first school opens a new article will be created for that building, as a child of this article, per WP:HS.--ThePaintedOne (talk) 08:34, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Let's have this project actually do something, like opening a 'projected' Grade 12 school in 2016 or two  before including it in an encyclopedia. Either rename this article "Project X" or delete or merge it, but  please do not  call it a school. A school is a place of learning, a building under construction is not. I have been unable to  find sources that  confirm that a school under this project  exists already  and has students on seats in classrooms at Grade 12. Kudpung (talk) 09:36, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
 * This appears to be your own personal definition of notabililty, which once again fixates on the word 'school' in their title, rather that what they are actually doing and the sources backing it up.--ThePaintedOne (talk) 19:28, 18 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment. If "press reports are about the project and not about the school itself" then the project is notable. Wikipedia's notability policies do not require specific organisational milestones - building a school or teaching students - before we can report on a project or startup; policies require substantial coverage in independent sources. In this case I'm reluctant to say keep because it looks a bit spammy, but I firmly disagree with Kudpung's interpretation of notability policy. Whatever next? Delete Airbus A350 because nobody's flown on one yet? bobrayner (talk) 09:06, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
 * 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.