Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of high schools in Victoria


 * 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 No consensus --Haemo 00:49, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

List of high schools in Victoria

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This list is already covered by List of schools in Victoria. Twenty Years 11:51, 12 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions.   -- Twenty Years 11:51, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 13:32, 12 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. Unencyclopaedic list which seems to be an indiscriminate collection of information. Both this and List of schools in Victoria are (very) incomplete yet neither have any exclusion criteria.  &mdash;Moondyne 14:01, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - per WP:NOT and also the fact that "high schools" is merely a breakdown subset of "schools" and has no level of separate interest that could not be accommodated with a heading in the parent article. Orderinchaos 03:39, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Redirect to List of schools in Victoria. Capitalistroadster 03:52, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletions.   -- John Vandenberg 05:35, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong KEEP (1) the lists are meant to be USEFUL to readers of this encyclopedia who are looking for articles, and they are just as useful for editors, in figuring out what high schools may exist in a particular place and whether or not Wikipedia has an article on that school, a function that neither a category or any other type of Wikipedia page can perform. A red link is the best way for readers and editors to figure out quickly whether we have an article on a particular school or set of schools, and may be helpful in various kinds of research or even in comparing articles or schools. Usefulness may not be a good argument for articles, but it has always been and always will be an excellent defense for a LIST.
 * (2) Calling a list "unencyclopedic" is just as problematic: the purpose of a list is somewhat different than the purpose of an article and always must be. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia with lists (partly because an online encyclopedia works better with lists that have links) and longstanding practice has been to keep lists unless there arises some other reason to delete. Get over it.


 * (3) Moondyne calls the list "indiscriminate" and "incomplete". Incompleteness is a fault, not a reason to delete. The article has clear boundaries: The boundaries of the State of Victoria and the definition of an Australian high school. There's nothing indiscriminate at all about those boundaries and we have similar lists for every state in the U.S., every province of Canada and, I'm sure, every other state in Australia.
 * Additional comment: As the article Education in Australia states in its very first sentence: Education in Australia is primarily regulated by the individual state governments. The state of Victoria has its own Department of Education, which sets standards for schools and curricula that are independent of other schools in Australia (and of every other place on the face of the earth). See Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority, and see Victorian Certificate of Education (VCE) and the Victorian Certificate of Applied Learning (VCAL). If Victoria students, parents, teachers or researchers are interested in learning more about how various Victoria education programs are actually working in the high schools of Victoria, wouldn't it be potentially useful to have this list? I'm not trying to prove that it definitely would be useful &mdash; I just want to show that the existence of specific characteristics of education in the State of Victoria mean that it will likely be useful for readers to be able to know what articles we have on Victoria high schools and what articles we don't, and then immediately jump to particular articles. Perhaps readers will simply want to use the external links to go to school Web sites, but however they compare these articles, we should be helping them by providing the easiest navigation possible. Noroton 16:32, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


 * (4) Orderinchaos asserts that there is no good reason to separate the high school list from the general list of schools in Victoria. Actually, readers and editors are often more interested in high schools (for which we have a growing de facto standard of inherent notability) than in other schools. Readers and editors may well want to compare the same types of schools and school articles, as I mention in (1) above. Noroton 16:07, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


 * To the closing administrator For some reason, unlike the other deletion discussions that have just come up for lists of schools in Australia, this one hasn't attracted much participation. I doubt that the reason is that the editors who commented on the other articles are just not as interested in this strongly related topic. Please either extend the time for discussion by doing nothing for a bit longer or relist for more discussion. I'm adding comments to the other discussions to suggest editors participate here. Noroton 18:15, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, information is a duplicate of that at List of schools in Victoria. That article even has a sub-heading for high schools!  This list adds no extra value to the information.  Lankiveil 05:16, 22 September 2007 (UTC).
 * Keep and improve. I would rather see List of schools in Victoria become a list of smaller lists like this one that are more manageable, and have room to improve separately.  The list of all schools is already 30 kilobytes with very little additional "value-added" information for each entry. John Vandenberg 13:00, 22 September 2007 (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.