Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/High school No. 1637 (Moscow)


 * 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. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 03:45, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

High school No. 1637 (Moscow)

 * – ( View AfD View log  school No. 1637 (Moscow) )


 * The usual Moscow school, nothing remarkable.--RTY9099 (talk) 20:30, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2018 September 21.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 20:54, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:52, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:52, 21 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep per DGG. I forgot about the rule we tend to keep most high schools. --David Tornheim (talk) 04:41, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment doesn't appear notable, but open to other thoughts on what I found in Russia Wikipedia here. Please note that the Russian version has some WP:SECONDARY coverage:  "Nine schoolchildren are hospitalized in Moscow with corneal burns of the eye" (at No. 1637) and three other news articles about the eye burns, ,.
 * Please also note that the Russian article received two nominations for deletion 20132016. The first AfD (2013) came to be kept because "The article in the norm is, of course, an exaggeration. But since there is something in the local newspapers + the school for more than half a century, we will assume that the VP: OKZ is, left - Ghuron 18:45, March 2, 2014 (UTC)" [from Google translate].
 * The translation of the result of the second AfD (2016) is incomprehensible. Probably the equivalent of keep or no-consensus to delete.  --David Tornheim (talk)  [revised 04:41, 3 October 2018 (UTC)]

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:34, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. As I read the contriubtion timeline, the discussion on the ruWP indicates the afd was inclining towards deletion, until additional sources were added. If they were added here, it would meet our requirements also. Back 11 years ago when we debated every individual high schools, the presence of factors such as high standing on a list and teachers with particularly high qualification were considered relevant for keeping--as is the case here, and had an influence on the result--although the factor which actually had most influence on the results was how many of the editors on each side appeared for the discussion.   My guess then was that we did slightly better than random. We would to much better to maintain the continuing rule that we treat all highschools as notable to avoid the waste of effort in the discussions. It has never been decided that this was not a good argument for maintaining the practice. But even for those who do not agree, we should keep this one.  DGG ( talk ) 03:09, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep It would be stupid (yes a strong word) for Wikipedia to have any practice other than keeping all articles about high schools which grant degrees. One reason is promotional for sake of Wikipedia:  These are gateway articles for readers / prospective new editors.  It is pointless to debate them.  This has been said before, try wp:SCHOOLOUTCOMES. --Doncram (talk) 07:46, 6 October 2018 (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.