Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brandon Academy Private 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. - Mailer Diablo 22:06, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Brandon Academy Private School
WP:NOT, author obviously violates wiki etiquette Yy-bo 18:27, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
 * This article is about a Florida school, giving relevant information about it. I fail to see why it should be deleted. And what "etiquitte" was violated? Steevven1 18:36, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Smart addresses for personal websites. Wikipedia is not a place for it. User:Yy-bo 18:41, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep : This is a school stub for a school in FL.  I'm not sure I see the WP:NOT violation.  The school's official page is referenced and the information seems to match what's listed at the school's page.  ju66l3r 18:46, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak delete: Unless notability is established, this one does need to go.  ju66l3r 19:04, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment - I don't see the "personal websites" here. Maybe the myspace page could be removed as it's unnecessary, but there's nothing wrong with the rest.  Obviously, the school exists.  I'm not sure if it's precisely notable, however.  Srose   (talk)  18:48, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment - Goooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooogle.com is this argueable? Speedy delete. User:Yy-bo 18:57, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: AfD is related to the article for deletion.  That is a redirect link established because another of the user's articles is for his personal website which has an alias domain called Goo(many o's)gle.com.  If his personal website article were to remain, the redirect would actually be important and correct.  Regardless, though, this discussion should be about the specific article being discussed.  ju66l3r 19:04, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Customers tend to have difficulties remembering long URL - means this article is vanity in terms of customers. Sorry. User:Yy-bo 19:14, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: What does the length of a URL for a redirect for another article have to do with this school's nomination for deletion?  I'm concerned that you're simply out to get the user who created these articles.  Please do not bite the newcomers.  ju66l3r 19:39, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: See above vandalism/hoax/vanity in whatever order. You don't do good defending this. User Steevven1.com can not use Wikipedia for graffitti purpose. User:Yy-bo 22:51, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
 * You are not assuming good faith. Writing a legible article about a school that attempts to present facts in a neutral manner is not graffiti.  (Indeed,  has demonstrated even more good faith by adding references to the article, as noted below.)  It's a far cry from graffiti, especially given what can be seen in some school articles.  Please assume good faith. Uncle G 01:20, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Personally, i assume most graffitti artists perform in actually very good faith. However, the police has a different viewpoint. Webhosting is not really expensive, see WP:NOT - W not a generic webhosting, personal website stuff must go. Otherwise anyone can plug in their personal sites. I don't even call the offensive sitenames. It is not required for Afd nomination, but backs up argumentation. User:Yy-bo 02:40, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * You are clearly not talking about the Brandon Academy article at all, and most of your comments have been highly irrelevant and disjointed. Steevven1 02:43, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't get why they allow your vanity personal sites. Do you pay them money? Why i can not make articles about my various sites? Why it gets not allowed to everyone? Probably you are more important. And, visiting your site, you are lying about the age in the article. I am not interested to extend this discussion. Have your vanity sites on wikipedia, if others allow it to you. And you are right, i am talking about the other articles you created. Not the Brandon Academy. User:Yy-bo 02:57, 4 September 2006 (UTC) possibly personal attack. User:Yy-bo 04:11, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is not a high school; it only goes up to the 8th grade. No independent reliable sources are provided. Also, the article appears to be misnamed, since the proper name of the school appears to be just "Brandon Academy" (it is a private school, but that's not part of the name). --Metropolitan90 18:54, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is only an elementary and middle school and establishes no notability.  I'd like to point out, however, that it doesn't seem like a vehicle for "smart addresses for personal websites".  I'm sure the author was well-intentioned.  Srose   (talk)  19:00, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I think that is arguing that since this article was created by, who also created , this article should be deleted.  That isn't a valid argument, of course.  Uncle G 19:11, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. If it was a high school then I'd be all in favor of keeping the article. Also, if you take a look at WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/High schools, you'll see that the WikiProject for missing encyclopedic articles is for high schools. -- Nish kid 64 20:45, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I added citations, and the official name is "Brandon Academy Private School, but if someone sees it fit to rename the article, I wouldn't take offense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steevven1 (talk • contribs) 2006-09-04 01:06:11
 * Thank you. You are approaching this the right way.  However, in order to show that the school satisfies, say, the WP:SCHOOL criteria, you'll need to cite some sources that aren't the school itself, i.e. not its web site and not its publicity blurb.  Has anyone published a book about this school?  Has an independent inspection agency published a report about it?  Stuff published by sources independent of the school is what we need here.  Uncle G 01:56, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the help. I added 3 reviews of the school and another unofficial external link. Does that help at all? Also, when and by what means will this debate be resolved?Steevven1 02:08, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * A bit. An independently published history of the school would be much better, though.  As for this discussion, see Guide to deletion. Uncle G 02:18, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I'll try my best over the next few days to improve on the article. Thanks again for the help. Steevven1 02:38, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep if some reliable sources are provided. Otherwise, delete. Atlantic Gateways 01:15, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Article needs some work, material can definetly be useful to some. Wmgries 9:42 PM, September 03, 2006
 * Keep or merge, established and significant component of education in Brandon, no need to screw the users over by deleting it. School websites are adequately reliable sources for non-contentious information, even more so than private individuals. Kappa 03:38, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - article definitely needs work and could be improved substantially. It's a long-standing tradition to refer to WP:NOT as an excuse for deleting an article, without specifying what part of WP:NOT is being violated by the existence of this article, and we are not left unfulfilled in this regard. However, this must be the first time a nominator justifies an AfD because the article violates his/her perceived version of "wiki etiquette" Alansohn 03:43, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I have missed also to argue the article is not noteable. Sorry for confusing nomination. Why list it on wikipedia if it is included in directories. User:Yy-bo 04:21, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per Nish. Unlike High schools, which are usually deemed notable by default, this is a private elementary school which does not appear all that notable. I found 309 unique out of 753Ghits for "Brandon Academy" + florida, including many directory listings. I found nothing to indicate any notability per WP:ORG or WP:SCHOOL. Ohconfucius 03:59, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per Ohconfucius. JoshuaZ 04:39, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep The article clearly meets all criterion for being "notable. It now has proof of an award, and numerous links to external reviews and articles about it. No reason to be deleted anymore. Steevven1 04:47, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment &mdash; The WP:SCHOOLS states a "significant award". I don't think they mean "First Place for Blueberry Muffins". Is the Peace Education Awards even remotely notable? Their web site looks amateurish and I don't see any notable sponsors listed. &mdash; RJH (talk) 17:33, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, most schools are notable, as is this. bbx 09:02, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Meets our standards for verifiability, the WP:SCHOOLS guideline, and my own personal standards for inclusion.  Silensor 03:12, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment WP:SCHOOLS is not a guideline, its a failed guideline and your personal standards have many problems with them, including the fact that by their logic anything should be included. JoshuaZ 01:22, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and allow for organic growth. It is not clear to me what sort of "wiki etiquette" issues there are with the article, but if someone attempts to clarify I will do my best to address any perceived problems.  Bahn Mi 15:52, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment See author contributions. It is not desireable other people start contributing that way. Article can be re-created by someone else if it is a significant school. User:Yy-bo 14:41, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: Author's other contributions are not relevant.  AfD is not a punitive action to be taken based on other article creations.  If I had created the George Washington article and also an article about my dog, it does not invalidate the George Washington article or mean that someone else must create it because I created one about my dog.  ju66l3r 18:02, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Just concern about future vanity links. I do not write linkspam. It is just clearly not allowed to create an article about oneself's websites. They use the same domain (myspace) as the links in the school article. User:Yy-bo 13:32, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and expand. Nickieee 20:59, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep  ALKIVAR &trade;[[Image:Radioactive.svg|18px|]] 01:09, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete and delete the muffins too. KillerChihuahua?!? 01:24, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * 'keep please per alansohn and steven1 this school is notable and should be documented here Yuckfoo 06:29, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete schoolcruft. Primary schools simply are not notable. &mdash; Dunc|&#9786; 09:48, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete While having an article for for every bloody school in the English-speeking world would nicely pad Wiki's numbers, the real question is whether they add any value to the project. I'd have to say no -- such a story may add perhaps a sense of pride for those going to the Rusty Blade Prep and Primary School for Children of misplaced Guppy's, but that's not worth the wasted bytes.  &#0149;Jim 62 sch&#0149;  09:55, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. --Myles Long 23:11, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - over-blown article that is under-whelming. NN. BlueValour 02:40, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:DP. --Usgnus 18:58, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Week keep per Steevven, meets our proposed guidelines based on awards and verifiability. RFerreira 20:51, 8 September 2006 (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.