Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dodd Middle School

Been a bit since I've nominated something. Anyway, we have a well-written and wikified article about a totally unnotable middle school in Connecticut. Take away the name and you're left with John Q. Middleschool. - Lucky 6.9 18:40, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Note: For the previous deletion debate for this article see Votes for deletion/Dodd middle school -- Graham &#9786; | Talk 20:57, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Uh...I went to John Q. Middleschool, and what a fine institution of learning it was! ;-P  Terrapin 19:45, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect into Cheshire, Connecticut under an "Education" or perhaps "Public schools" heading. Leave redirect to discourage re-creation after the move. -- Netoholic @ 19:56, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * I can live with that. RickK 20:16, Sep 7, 2004 (UTC)
 * Previously deleted, I believe. I certainly remember the scarring debate over it.  However, the talk page on the article is empty.  That either means that someone did make it a redirect, only to have someone else recreate it or the VfD debate isn't in the record.  At any rate, do not redirect.  Is there but one Dodd Middle School?  Should everyone looking for that term be redirected to this one town?  Shouldn't they actually get a blank, to indicate that we do not have such an article?  If there is a notable Dodd Middle School, we should have an article on it, so I do not want its creation blocked.  Delete.  I know Netoholic believes that it is improving articles to make them into redirects, but I don't yet understand how. Geogre 20:34, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * On the other hand, I have nothing whatever against someone creating an "Education" subsection of Cheshire, Connecticut and typing in the name of this school. That would be very helpful, and it might well be what we want to do with all future non-notable primary and middle schools.  It's just that I don't think that a redirect does anyone any service here. Geogre 20:36, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * If there are multiple "Dodd Middle School"s, then a disambig page is appropriate. That can be created now, or later, but a redirect can always be turned into a disambig. -- Netoholic @ 20:42, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Guanaco 20:40, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Comment: I removed this article from vfd in July and I must have deleted it because I said so on the talk page (which I've helpfully listed at the top of this one). I can't remember if it was undeleted through the correct process but that is the only way it could have reappeared because the edit history for this one we're debating on now also includes the addition of the vfd boilerplate when it was added in July. -- Graham  &#9786; | Talk 20:57, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * The edit history was undeleted by Guanaco after the page was recreated: 20:39, 7 Sep 2004 Guanaco restored "Dodd_Middle_School". Can we have an explanation for why this was done against democratic process (i.e. not through votes for undeletion)? In any case this is the recreation of an article that has been deleted through the vfd process and should therefore be automatically deleted.  As such I have speedily deleted it. -- Graham  &#9786; | Talk 21:08, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Wow, sure would have liked to copy some relavent text into the city page. Are we sure it was the same school? Same text? Could have been re-created under the same name, but that doesn't mean its the same article it was in July. -- Netoholic @ 21:31, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Us sysops have access to the deleted edit histories of articles that have been deleted. Trust me it was the same wording and paragraph structure. -- Graham  &#9786; | Talk 21:36, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Valid speedy. I'm happy to send the history or text to anyone who wants it, just ask on my talk page. Andrewa 14:11, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)