Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Butte County High 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 keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 04:28, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Butte County High School

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Not sure how this article has lasted so long. It's been a 1 sentence stub since it was created back in January 2006. The article has 1 sentence stating that the town the school exists in and a mostly empty infobox (so there isn't anything worth merging). No indication of notability. Lrrr IV 06:41, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, I think information about enrollment figures and perhaps mascot may be worth holding onto, but something is wrong when the infobox is ten times taller than the body of the article. Merge with Arco, Idaho (or Butte County, Idaho), by making an "Education" section, then redirect. Sjakkalle (Check!)  09:45, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Expansion is OK, keep. Sjakkalle (Check!)  06:06, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete under . Article is a simple rephrasing of the title.  VanTucky  (talk) 16:30, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge a summary into town article. &mdash; RJH (talk) 16:54, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep High school. The above comments pretend that the information in the infobox isn';t there, but infobox as just as legitimate as a means of presenting encyclopedic information as sentences. Golfcam 19:12, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * How does being a school mean anything? Schools are not inherently notable. As VanTucky said, just being a school is not an argument (yet alone a good one). Schools have to pass WP:NOTE and WP:V just like any other article. If the school district for this school has an article, mention the school there (or in the town article if the school disctrict doesn't have an article). Lrrr IV 06:01, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Perhaps it was before you were around, but there were endless debates on this issue, and the overwhelming consensus was that high schools are notable.  It absolutely should not be necessarily to go through it all again every time someone nominates yet another high school.  Golfcam 12:11, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Unfortunately Golfcam, "Highschool" is not an argument (much less a valid one). Articles on high schools are not automatically notable when they have zero significant content or independent sources. VanTucky  (talk) 19:15, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I can only assume that you are unaware of the history of discussions on this matter which took place before you had an account. Those who wished to delete high schools have always been in a minority, but they have shown unlimited willingness to disrupt wikipedia to make a point - the same point hundreds of times. It went beyond all reason or decency. Hundreds of high schools have been kept and it is long past the time for everyone to get over this issue. Nominating further high schools at this stage is disruptive. Golfcam 12:11, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Unless more information is provided on the school I say merge with the town's article per RJHall, basically in a list of schools in this town or area with then a redirect also to the town article.--JForget 23:05, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletions.   -- Bduke 23:13, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep on the basis of the new information. A sports powerhouse is notable. Let's focus on the individual school and the individual article- For those who think all schools are notable, show it in this case. For those who think they can never be, show how it isn't. Alansohn has show how this particular one is notable. DGG (talk) 02:36, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete the reason we ignore the infobox is that the infobox --as intended -- presents only directory information--if there is no more than an infobox, then the subject is unlikely to be notable. DGG (talk) 02:36, 12 July 2007 (UTC )


 * Keep Article has been expanded beyond directory information. A preliminary search has added information regarding debate and athletic state championships documented using reliable and verifiable independent sources to establish notability per Notability. Alansohn 16:45, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete No notability asserted: just another nn school. Eusebeus 17:15, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep article is heavily referenced, content is fine.  ALKIVAR &trade; &#x2622; 21:33, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep thanks to Alansohn, there are plenty of references now. Noroton 01:23, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * All of them are just for sports results, which you can find on almost any high school. Lrrr IV 01:34, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * And I believe every high school is inherently notable. Noroton 01:57, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Your opinion is just that, an opinion. We use guidelines and policies in AFD debates and I hope the closing admin takes that in mind that you are basing your keep vote purely on your opinion. If I though all people named Bob was notable, would that be a valid reason to vote keep on every article about someone with the name Bob? No, for the same reason that just saying "all high schools are inherently notable" isn't a argument (yet alone a strong one). Lrrr IV 02:01, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Lrrr, have you ever wondered why we never have local community articles up for deletion even though many of the small ones have no more notability than most high schools? Also, my argument is in the link, and if you're going to criticize me for it you might acknowledge that it actually exists, and maybe show that you've actually read it. And I don't have to refer to a Wikipedia policy if I don't want to, and we get to form a consensus to keep despite most Wikipedia policies under Deletion guidelines for administrators and WP:IAR. Say hello to Bob for me. Noroton 03:02, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, just because other things have articles when they shouldn't is no reason to keep this. From what I have observed, people here have started to crack down on school articles here, realizing that schools have to pass the guideline and rules just like everything else. Most schools are not notable, and this one doesn't seem to be any different. Almost every source are just for local sports results (which are common). Lrrr IV 04:40, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Lrrr IV, neither you nor I may be swayed by the sports results and other minor guff that Alansohn has seeded here as "verifiable sources" to "establish notability" for this school (as with many others). However, absent any consensus on school notability (and there is none), Noroton' s position is perfectly reasonable that all schools are inherently notable. Is it absurd that the result of the school's bantam football team is being used to establish encyclopedic notability? Of course, but in the case of schools, this risibly unimportant trivia is being harnessed to a wider cause - keeping school articles - which is perfectly defensible even if (in my own highly personal view) wrong-headed. Eusebeus 11:34, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Response I didn't argue that Other Stuff Exists, I argued that There Is No Precedent in deletion discussions to get rid of either high school or locality articles based on WP:N. For someone arguing so vociferously, you should do the reading of Wikipedia policy that I've directed you to, because it's something I think we should all understand (I think I should add this to my little school-protection essay). My other argument is that the consensus in deletion discussions has long been more powerful than WP:N and other guidelines except for the ones mentioned in Deletion guidelines for administrators. Did you read that? Do you understand it? If you're not looking at my arguments, we can't ever come to consensus, can we? Because I've been doing this longer than you and I and others are highly unlikely to come around to your way of thinking if you haven't shown you care about our way of thinking. Bluster gets us nowhere. Then again, maybe reasoning gets us nowhere. Noroton 23:48, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * And another thing... Take a further look at WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Look at the bottom of that page. Click on the link "Deletion precedents" also known as Articles for deletion/Common outcomes, go down to "Education." The very essay you refer me to backs me up.Noroton 00:16, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Fine, you can have your opinion that all schools are notable (even though I strongly disagree) since everybody is entitled to an opinion. That doesn't change the fact though that they have to pass guidelines and policies like everything else. I should also point out that people here have started to crack down on school articles since mid-2006, with many articles on non-notable schools being deleted instead of kep just because they are schools. I also think it's ridiculous that that article was a 1 sentence stub for for 18 months and it took this AFD for it to get expanded. Lrrr IV 04:39, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notability established with multiple reliable secondary sources. -- DS1953 talk 03:41, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, for as of now, it's well-done, as per DS1953 and Noroton. High Schools may be said to be usually or presumed to be notable. Bearian 14:22, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment In Wikipedia we presume nothing factually. Notability is proven through verification in reliable sources only, not assumed for anything. As such, the sources provided for this article are not in any sense of the word, reliable or significant. A general statistical source, one article in a regional newspaper, and a ton of links to the "Idaho High School Activities Assc." (which, as the state's overseer of high school athletics, is not an independent source) are not significant coverage in independent sources sufficient to establish notability. VanTucky  (talk) 23:58, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I have removed all references to the Idaho High School Activities Association. As the state's in-house overseer of high school athletics, this is not in any way an independent source as per WP:V and WP:RS. VanTucky  (talk) 00:14, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep in its current form, the short article would have been fine too. AfD is a wonderful cleanup tool in circumstances like this. &mdash;Xezbeth 21:30, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep .... That's why --roy&lt;sac&gt; Talk! .oOo. 04:50, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, expansions since AfD nomination indicates notability. bbx 02:21, 18 July 2007 (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.