Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beaumont Hills Public 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 delete. Again, for one, this is not a high school, it's a primary school (and is a fairly new primary school). It would not meet the proposed guideline WP:SCHOOL, and even if you disregard that, no reasons for keeping were given (again, something existing, or the fact that Schoolwatch exists are not reasons for keeping, and in the case of the latter, stare decisis does not exist here). AfD is not a vote. Furthermore, the article reads like an ad. --Core des at 03:44, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Beaumont Hills Public School
Primary schools are generally not notable, generally it is only high schools that are listed. I find no reason why this school has any reason to be listed based on its notability. It also fails the proposed guideline WP:SCHOOL TheRanger 02:22, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - fails to assert notability. Also full of irrelevant trivia. MER-C 02:40, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. TJ Spyke 02:47, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete There is nothing on the page to assert the school's notability--150.203.177.218 03:23, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete No assertion of notability.-- Hús  ö  nd  04:27, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails to assert notability. Pursey 04:49, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Catchpole 06:33, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions.   -- Longhair\talk 08:17, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, non-notable. Merge somewhere if you want to. Tizio, Caio, Sempronio 12:56, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Verifiable and notable. Merchbow 15:36, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
 * What makes it notable? TJ Spyke 18:59, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Please explain how its notable you have left same reply on several AfD's without details.TheRanger 20:00, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Again, I don't see that he needs to reply, everything that he has said seems to be self evident -- Librarianofages 21:35, 17 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep Per Merchbow, All schools are inherently notable -- Librarianofages 21:35, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Since when was it wikipedia policy that all schools are notable?150.203.177.218 05:02, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Since the development of coordinated spamming of VfD's. Read any comment by ForbiddenWord on a school AFD; they all say "keep, because we'll spam it with keeps regardless". It's honestly the most appalling thing ever to happen to notability on this encyclopedia. People spend far more time, over the course of their lives, at work than they do at a school, and yet we don't have articles for every place of employment (which, in any reasonable interpretation, are often more notable in their communities than schools are said to be). The ability of the schoolwatch crowd to bully every non-notable school into the encyclopedia is truly depressing, but it doesn't seem like there's anything left to do about it. &mdash;ptk✰fgs 20:29, 19 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Merge with the local community page per WP:SCHOOLS. The later is not a deletion criteria. &mdash; RJH (talk) 21:58, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge into the local community page or respective district per WP:SCHOOLS. RFerreira 00:59, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep as per Schools/Arguments --Vsion 01:12, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, almost all schools are notable (see link above). This one with 550 students is no exeption. bbx 01:45, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete when a school is so special that the best one can find to say about it is "Playground Awards are for behaving well at lunch or recess." you know that you're in trouble. But, yet again, school inclusionist fail to provide anything beyond their statement of principle that "every school is notable". This school is 5 years old. By the article's own admission it is "not exccedingly popular", it has a modest enrollment, it has received pretty much no reliable third-party coverage whatsoever, it most clearly does not meet the current WP:SCHOOL or any previous version of that guideline. Pascal.Tesson 03:39, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and clean up. There are some sources for this school notably a story in the Sun Herald about the high rate of burglaries from 2001. Google News Archive shows something as well see . The stuff about the playground awards can go though. Capitalistroadster 04:26, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I followed your "news link" and got three things related to the school two were comunity clanader (which are not notable) type notices a notice of ceremony for the ground breaking in 2000 and a up coming movie night in like 2006. Also a brief notuce that Children have been evacuated because of concerns about an odour in the classrooms in 20003. Now I would not call these notable at all.TheRanger 04:37, 18 October 2006 (UTC)


 * KEEP, pointless nomination. Everyone at schoolwatch agrees all schools are notable and should be allowed organic expansion and growth. --ForbiddenWord 14:14, 18 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment: Let me just say that what is important is the consensus among all Wikipedians, not among schoolwatch this is a very alarming statement and not at all in the spirt of wikipedia goals. I visted the link to Schoolwatch and found no discussion as to what are notable or what is not. All I found were a list of AfD's current and a past AfD's with results totaled by month list with totals by month.  As to its point of view I found this statement right at top of page "the terms 'keep' and 'no consensus' are used interchangeably (as no consensus defaults to keep)." TheRanger 15:54, 18 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep and expand for reasons established at User:Silensor/Schools. Silensor 17:38, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment and see reply essay at User:JoshuaZ/Schools. 19:03, 18 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete as being not notable, not even meeting the proposed highly inclusionist standards at WP:SCHOOLS. Furthermore, there is no substantial material that would even help in regard to simple WP:V concerns. JoshuaZ 19:06, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, nothing here resembling an assertion of notability. &mdash;ptk✰fgs 20:14, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete wouldn't qualify for SP:SCHOOLS. --Marriedtofilm 21:59, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete non-notable regardless of schoolwatch. Montco 01:45, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep all enduring public institutions. --Centauri 14:25, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Should Wikipedia have an article for every DMV office? Every post office?  Pan Dan 22:34, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per User:Silensor/Schools.  ALKIVAR &trade;[[Image:Radioactive.svg|18px|]] 20:11, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per JoshuaZ; non-notable and no chance of expansion with verifiable material. This position is confirmed by Pascal.Tesson, TheRanger's response to Capitalistroadster, and a Lexis-Nexis search by me which shows only trivial local coverage of the "community events" sort.  Pan Dan 22:28, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * keep please per capitalist roadster and bbx there is no reason to erase this Yuckfoo 02:43, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete or Merge do not keep. Just as non notable as most schools. Vegaswikian 23:22, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Rebecca 02:41, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Keep why? Just saying keep is not adding to this AfD, as this is not a vote. What is needed is reasons based on wokipedia policy as to why it should be keep or deleted.TheRanger 14:54, 21 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep or merge into the appropriate locality according to the proposed WP:SCHOOLS guideline. Yamaguchi先生 03:43, 22 October 2006
 * 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.