Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Calvary Christian High School, Clearwater, Florida

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was no consensus, with a majority favouring keep. -- Joolz 20:36, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Calvary Christian High School, Clearwater, Florida
This entry was tagged for deletion on September 6th but never added to the main page. Completed listing. Pilatus 20:58, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

DELETE Originally a joke page that was up for vfd, but was heavily edited in favor of being deleted, in hopes that someone would add to it. No additions have been made in over a month, so vfd is back. -Hermes Statement left by User:65.32.208.92


 * keep and please stop relisting schools to be deleted Yuckfoo 20:33, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
 * First of all, I've never relisted a school to be deleted. Secondly, the moderator stated that if the article wasn't built upon after 28 days, vfd could be implemented again, so it has. -Hermes Statement left by User:65.32.208.92
 * Keep, neutral school article. Kappa 21:29, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, Which fails to provide any info apart from the fact it exists (CSD#A1) and per Soltak's views below. - Mgm|(talk) 22:08, September 10, 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete per User:Soltak/Views Soltak | Talk 21:32, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, Yellow Pages entry and hasn't been touched since last time it came up for deletion. Pilatus 22:25, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, education in Clearwater, Florida; its student newsletter is pretty cool! --Vsion 03:31, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep for the usual reasons. -- DS1953 06:10, September 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Litte encyclopedic relavance exists in the article, but it can still be useful. Also, it is not hurting anything by being in there, other than a few kilos of space. It will get almost no hits, but as I said, it does give contact info and a location stub. Voice of All  (talk)  06:15, September 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Nevermind, now that I think about it, including every school is just pointless as they have no encyclopedic value and as any useful info can easily be found through other means. Voice of All  (talk)  06:22, September 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, normally I'm for keeping most highschools, but based on the last VFD this probably should have been deleted then and definitely should be this time. There is no useful information about this school and it's a private religious school to boot. Also per Schools for Deletion. Gateman1997 08:10, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. per User:Soltak/Views. Blank Verse   &empty;  11:21, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep &mdash; high school. Why would it matter in the least whether it is a private school or religious? &mdash; RJH 17:33, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep because this is a private, religious school. --Nicodemus75 21:08, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete non-notable. Nicodemus, why not create a project page called something like "Schools of the world" in which you and like minded users explain to the rest of us your rationale for wishing (apparently) to create an individual article on every preschool on up in the entire world.  What on earth is the rationale?  I really can't imagine, but if these articles were part of a project and had a header pointing puzzled readers like me to a place where we can read about the rationale for the project, I might feel better. E.g. like any good citizen of the world, I favor education, and I know that in the U.S. and other places, many teachers feel undervalued.  Is your idea that a forum for boosterism can boost teacher or student morale, or even school budgets?  Or what?  On another such VfD, I see you complained that everyone's opinions are entrenched.  Well, mine is not!  I just have no idea what this is all about.  If you can make a good case for your school project in a project page (maybe put a draft in your user page?), I'll change my vote on all these school VfDs.---CH  (talk) 22:54, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I can't speak for Nicodemus but in my opinion having articles on schools enables users to better understand the environment in which children grow up and how their lives are shaped. See also Schools/Arguments. Incidentally preschools tend to be small, ephemeral and/or unverifiable so they are less of an issue. Kappa 00:18, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Kappa, gimme a break! That's the best you can come up with?  This is vapid pablum, in fact, this argument is so silly that I find it rather insulting.  I take this seriously and you should too.  But how the heck is a stub like the one under discussion going to help anyone "better understand the environment in which children grow up and how their lives are shaped"?!  C'mon, be serious.  If that is your goal, you should be writing good Wikipedia articles exploring (in NPOV fashion) important and widely recognized social issues involving education (I mention some in another comment below).---CH  (talk) 23:02, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I can't speak for him either, but I don't think that he or anyone else has suggested that they want to create an article on every preschool, grade school, etc. in the world. Even people who believe that schools are notable also require the school to be notable enough that someone would bother to write an article about it in the first place.  However, if the encyclopedia already contains the information, why not keep it, especially if it's verifiable and NPOV?  Merge it somewhere else if need be, but personally I don't think it makes sense to delete the information outright.  Oh, and keep; private high schools usually end up being interesting enough.  If anyone wants to merge that's okay with me too.  JYolkowski // talk 01:57, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the links. Alas, these pages fail to provide a coherent rationale for the school articles.  I don't spend much time on VfDs (yesterday's wikiservice was very exceptional for me), but I can see a clear problem here and I can suggest a simple and long over-due solution.  Specific comments:
 * There seems to be an ongoing and long-running debate over the suitability of "all the world's schools". JY, I demur: I think it is clear that this is the goal of some editors.
 * Yuckfoo, don't let the long running debate obscure a more important fact: casual inspection suggests that users like me who are not involved in this debate (except on a temporary basis) regularly nominate these articles for deletion, because to the average users they are likely to appear clearly nn.  There is a set of people who watch these VfDs and routinely vote to keep, so the VfDs almost always fail.  But the fact that they keep occuring at all is clearly a huge waste of time and wikiresources (at least, of the human CruftPatrol kind).
 * The solution is for those of you who are creating these articles to band together, reform the Schools Project, write an Explanation For the Rest of Us of the rationale for your project.
 * Anyone who creates a school article should always add a header to every school article so that casual readers who stumble over one of these will follow the link, find out that you all do have a rationale (actually, right now, it seems that you don't, but if you try I imagine you can come up with something), and on second thought decide not to start a VfD. Failure to do this is the reason for these perennial and proably pointless VfDs.
 * Rationale: I am saying you should make it easy for casual readers to find out that an apparently nn school article is in fact part of a project which has a well-thought out rationale. Alas, the pro arguments I saw on the page someone cited seem quite incoherent to me. The issue is not whether eduation is important or that teacher/student morale or school budgets and political interference with public education is a serious social concern in many countries.  The issue is why the world needs individual Wikipedia articles on every school in the world.  So far it seems the best you (plural) can come up with is a vague argument that searching Google for information on your child's school is unlikely to bring up relevant information.  That might well be true, but Wikipedia policy specifically states that Wikipedia is not a directory.  I can't advise you on rationale for your own project, but I would add that you need to cogently counter arguments like the very elementary argument offered by User:Soltak/Views And btw, Soltak, well put! I think you've clearly and concisely expressed the gut reaction of the average user who stumbles over a school stub, decides the subject is clearly nn, and starts the ten millionth school VfD.
 * I am not trying to stop your project, I am suggesting that by not organizing it properly and explaining yourself coherently to other users you are quite unneccessarily wasting everyone's time. I feel that following my suggestions will not only save your own time (since far fewer VfDs), but will improve the quality of whatever articles you come up with in future.---CH  (talk) 22:37, 13 September 2005 (UTC)


 * I suspect re-stating the obvious is probably just a waste of my time in your case, since you have already classified yourself as someone who agrees with Soltak and other deletionists by your "gut reaction" (whatever that means) which you project is shared by the "average user". However, the rationale you are seeking is very simple. Those of us who believe that schools as institutions of learning are inherently notable, believe that as such, they should have their own articles on Wikipedia as more and more human knowledge is accrued here. I and others are interested in reading and researching information about schools, just as I am interested in what are arguably equally "obscure" or "non-notable" (whatever that subjective "canard" means) such as battleships, cruisers, destroyers, submarines, small towns, provincial and county governments, natural histories of parishes, differences between different sub-species of butterflies and beetles, contenders of elected public office, etc., etc. etc. What it all boils down to, is whether or not you believe that being a school inherently establishes "notability", "interest", "subject of interest", "knowledge" or whatever term you wish to place on it. Those of us who do believe as such, enjoy reacding, writing and researching articles about various and sundry schools around the world. Any attempt to re-state or argue beyond this point is really just grist for the mill. If you believe that a school is noteworthy or notable by virtue of it's being a school, you probably want to see it have an article.  If you don't believe as such, you likely don't see the need to have such articles.  It sounds like you don't agree - fine. There is indeed no concensus right now, as I keep on saying. AfD is the only tool we have to resolve this problem at the moment so vote however you want. All previous attempts to build concensus on this matter have utterly and miserably failed - continuing or re-starting that process is inane and redundant. Fortunately, the deletionists are losing this war of attrition that they are waging against schools and school articles are growing, expanding  and will eventually become accepted by general concensus as part of Wikipedia. Even the latest elementary schools have survived the AfD process.--Nicodemus75 23:23, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Hi, Nicodemus, thanks for your response, but do you see why it is rather insulting to suggest that I am lying when I said that I am responsive to clear and cogent reasoning? I can see that this is a sore point with you, and I am not trying to reopen old wounds, but to prevent this huge time wastage.  I still think the school article authors like yourself should give an improved project page and header template idea a try.  Simply informing casual readers that an apparently nn school article they happen to stumble over is part of a project pursued by a small but dedicated band is likely to give many pause before starting a VfD.  You guys will be the principal benificiaries, I think: wouldn't you rather spend your time writing another school article pursuant to your goals, rather than arguing in pointless and repetitive VfDs?  It's strange that I seem to be arguing with an educator (yes?) about the many virtues of educating others about, let us say, why a buncha people are so dedicated to a seemingly mindless task.---CH  (talk) 23:40, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Afterthought: actually, Nicodemus, I think I am arguing that your best argument might indeed be a reformulation of what you said above: you enjoy this so much that others should let you continue even if they don't quite see the point. If you at least had a header template pointing to a project page, at the very least casual readers like me would be alerted to something they would be unlikely to guess without such a hint: you and like minded people spend a lot of time researching and writing articles about obscure grade schools and so forth.  I think most users would tend to raise an eyebrow at that, but would probably be inclined to let you alone.  I am not unsympathetic to your implicit argument (I think) that while the authors of "all the world's whatever" are certainly pushing the boundaries of what Wikipedia is or should be, perhaps the fact that their activity is so important to them is sufficient to make it acceptable, as long as it does minimal harm to routine use of Wikipedia by others (which I guess is probably true).  I am just saying that you could probably avoid 50-75% of these VfDs if you simply had a template header to alert puzzled casual readers to the fact that some school stub is part of an on-going and extremely ambitious project.  As I say, even if they don't see the point of this project, I think most causal users are likely to then decide not to complain about said stub.  Do you see where I am coming from yet?  Anyway, I will have to let this go now, but since I learned something I took the trouble to archive some of my thoughts on all the world's whatever.---CH  (talk) 00:35, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I am not sure that I implied that you are lying, but rather that the objective in the discussion is most likely futile. Your idea is fine but I seriously doubt that it will make a difference being that the problem isn't whether or not there is a project or a header or anything of the kind. Those who oppose the inclusion of school articles on Wikipedia will undoubtedly see a massive school-writing project as ipso facto illegitimate and "non-notable". I actually think that your suggestion *might* be helpful, but many, many of the AfD nominations (not ALL) for school articles are nominations by the "usual suspects". That is to say, that those who oppose what they consider to be "non-notable" schools generally, intentionally list exeptionally poorly written school articles or school stubs for VfD/AfD hoping to get them deleted (and, I believe, as a way of continuing to try to fight a war of attrition against school articles). They do this with some, minority success (see deletion of Articles for deletion/York Hill Elementary School for a recent example) but generally what occurs, is editors clean up the articles in question and the school survives the AfD process. Templates and Projects are really not the crux of the problem - the problem is whether or not one believes the articles should exist in the first place. Everything else on top of that fundamental question is nothing more than grist for the mill. Now, those who oppose the inclusion of school articles have mounted the mill-grist so high, that they object to being referred to as "deletionist" (those who wish to delete) and have the audacity to co-relate the word to Nigger. Tell me that doesn't clearly demonstrate that the acceptance or concensus you are trying to achieve is beyond Templates and Projects!  By way of disclosure, we "usual suspects" of the "inclusionist" camp are at the point now, where very little debate such as this is felt to be necessary.  How often do I have to repeat schools are inherently notable as my philosophy before it is pointless to just keep repeating it? The sad truth is, that it all boils down to whether or not schools are notable enough to have articles on/in Wikipedia - I believe that they are. More explanation than that, is to a large extent, facile. --Nicodemus75 01:58, 14 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete. Stub started as a joke and never went beyond shallow vanity. Non-notable. Jonathunder 22:55, 2005 September 11 (UTC)
 * Keep A whole month!? And we only have one more month left before all Wikipedians die if every article in Wikipedia isn't 100% finished. CalJW 00:33, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
 * LOL CalJW.  &mdash;RaD Man (talk) 05:56, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, people. It can and should contain well-written, factual articles on every subject of potential interest throughout recorded history - no matter how allegedly mundane - to satisfy the informational needs of any person who is ever likely to access Wikipedia for the purpose of researching it.--Gene_poole 02:42, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Some people can be so shallow.   &mdash;RaD Man (talk) 05:56, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per User:Soltak/Views, User:Idont havaname, and Schools/Arguments... the usual reasons. --Idont Havaname 19:38, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Fine stub that improves Wikipedia by its presence.  Un  focused  02:37, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
 * 'Delete crap. Dunc|&#9786; 19:42, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. The article is a bit slim, but calling something "crap" is uncalled for. Silensor 19:54, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not notable. WMMartin 21:23, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and stop nominating schools until consensus is reached. --Ryan Delaney talk 23:03, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep this article. Christopher Parham (talk) 07:37, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
 * KeepLevKamensky
 * Keep --Mysidia (talk) 21:43, 18 September 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.