Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/East Cobb Middle 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   redirect to Cobb County School District. (non-admin closure) Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talk about my edits? 16:49, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

East Cobb Middle School

 * – ( View AfD View log )


 * Delete. Ordinary middle school with nothing to recommend it for notability out of the ordinary. (Disclosure - I just deleted material that if cited, might give it some notability, but not really that confident that it was important.) Totally lacks footnotes. Only reference is to the school website. Student7 (talk) 14:42, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Redirect, per prior consensus, to Cobb County School District. Yunshui 雲&zwj;水 14:44, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Redirect per Yunshui and protect. I don't think what the nom removed from the article indicates notability. postdlf (talk) 16:44, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Georgia (U.S. state)-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 18:32, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 18:32, 1 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Redirect As per the usual with elementary schools. Nwlaw63 (talk) 20:36, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete since it does not appear to satisfy WP:ORG. No redirect is required by that guideline.Edison (talk) 02:47, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * "No redirect is required by that guideline." I'm not sure I know what that's even supposed to mean, but regardless, notability guidelines such as WP:ORG are completely irrelevant to the creation of redirects. See instead WP:REDIRECT. postdlf (talk) 04:14, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete or redirect. Convention with schools such as this one is, as I understand it, that they do not generally warrant a stand-alone article. Appears to be non-notable.--Epeefleche (talk) 07:09, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Redirect as usual. The real guidelines here are  what we do, and that's what we do. No argument against a redirect has been raised, except the statement that we do not have to do it, which is a variant on IWANTTODOITMYWAY.  DGG ( talk ) 08:42, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Organizations, corporations, people, and the like are deleted every day at wikipedia that could conceivably be redirected. This isn't called "Articles for Redirection", which makes me suspect that there are people on both sides of the aisle who would like to have it their way.  I myself don't think either side is clearly wrong -- or clearly correct.--Epeefleche (talk) 08:44, 4 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Redirect per WP:Schools/compromise, "In general, even when a merger is non-optimal, it is preferable to make redirects out of small stubs and not delete the history, rather than to delete the articles.", and WP:Articles_for_deletion/Common_outcomes, "Schools that don't meet the standard typically get merged or redirected to the school district that operates them (North America) or the lowest level locality (elsewhere) rather than being completely removed from the encyclopedia." - Dravecky (talk) 00:42, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I can see that the second is an essay.  But can't make out what the first is?  As to the issue, there seem to be different views on it from what I can tell, both from looking at !votes, closes of schools, and closes of other organizations across the Project.--Epeefleche (talk) 01:41, 5 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment. Would prefer to delete in order not to establish a precedent or encourage nn redirects which turn up in a search. Let's maintain usual encyclopedic standards. Student7 (talk) 20:14, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
 * If somebody is searching for more information about this middle school, isn't it better if they're redirected to the school district's article than if they hit an artificial dead-end? The common outcome for articles like this one is already a redirect so there's no intent to "establish a precedent" merely to follow the consensus. - Dravecky (talk) 06:30, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
 * It is not clear to me what the benefit of a redirect would be here. There are hundreds of thousands of schools.  If we were to redirect all of them to pages such as the indicated one, would that be a good thing?  I'm not sure, at this point.  In this case -- though admittedly things could differ -- all people would see would be ... the name of the school.  As well as the names of other schools, but that is not what they are searching for.  What is the benefit of leading the reader, rather than to a dead end, to  ... the name of the search term he entered?  As best I can tell, not much.  I'm guessing that is why we do not redirect non-notable corporations, partnerships, organizations, and people as a general rule.  If that were in fact the general rule, we would likely term this exercise "Articles for Redirection".  Still, I have an open mind on the subject, because while I see the benefit as quite small, it may be that the cost is quite small as well.--Epeefleche (talk) 06:46, 6 February 2012 (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.