Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cedarview Middle School (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Liz Read! Talk! 07:32, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

Cedarview Middle School
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Unnotable middle school. In Wikipedia:All high schools can be notable, it says that 'Elementary and middle schools do not merit their own article unless they have an exceptional claim to notability.'. This middle school has no exceptional claim to notability, even though they set the largest simultaneous yo-yo, but that doesn't make them notable. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NSCHOOL. The last deletion request for this happened in 2008, but that was when notability guidelines were not as strict. `~HelpingWorld~` (👽🛸) 22:19, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools,  and Canada.  `~HelpingWorld~` (👽🛸) 22:19, 24 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep - It's comparatively well written and the yo-yo information could be considered borderline notable as it is a world record. That said I agree Wikipedia doesn't need to be a compendium of every school in the world and their accompanying number of classroom VCRs. BogLogs (talk) 22:32, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:17, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment. The largest simultaneous yo-yo record is not currently held by this school per the Guinessworldrecords website. Rupples (talk) 22:19, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment. WP:NTEMP, it needn't currently hold the record to be notable. Having held it in the past would still contribute to notability. &mdash; Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 01:11, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Redirect - to Ottawa-Carleton District School Board, per ATD and the longstanding precident outlined at SCHOOLOUTCOMES. 174.212.228.83 (talk) 01:42, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep - Found a number of sources including: 1, |A354062304&v=2.1&it=r&sid=ebsco 2, 3. This, along with the sources in the article, should be sufficient. ProofRobust  23:04, 1
 *  Delete Keep It would be inconsistent to have this entry included while at the same time lacking entries for thousands of middle schools Flibbertigibbets (talk) 00:49, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
 * @ProofRobust, they are pretty much the same thing about bullying in that middle school, one is a newspaper about the bullying, another is a essay and the last one is another newspaper, which all of them don't really pass GNG in reliability. `~HelpingWorld~` (👽🛸) 05:24, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Why do you say that? I think that specifically number 2 and 3 can be seen as reliable sources. They seem to be from reputable publishers: Toronto Star Newspapers Limited, and Metro International. ProofRobust  18:46, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
 * All articles should be evaluated on their own merits, the fact that other middle schools do not have articles is irrelevant, see WP:OTHERSTUFFDOESNTEXIST. Jumpytoo Talk 18:50, 3 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep as per sources provided. User:Flibbertigibbets seems to fundamentally not understand the AFD policy, if their delete argument is that other middle schools aren't notable! Nfitz (talk) 22:33, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
 * For clarification, Looking at WP:NSCHOOL. "This middle school has no exceptional claim to notability; and no clear claim to notability - agreed per the nominator's justification; in that context -It would be inconsistent to have this entry included while at the same time lacking entries for thousands of middle schools - 'unless notability could be established to build an article that can stand on its own merits. "In support of User:HelpingWorld perceptions that content within the articles found must speak to notability.  Attribution, or the necessity to attribute sometime in the future, being a core content policy whereby secondary sources can actually be quoted to build an article that meets guidelines.  Flibbertigibbets (talk) 02:55, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Changed to "keep" to support what I see as the consensus built here, and in light of prior afd discussion which outline the exact same issues. Flibbertigibbets (talk) 05:03, 4 December 2022 (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.