Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of schools for gifted children


 * 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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was delete. Pointing to the arguments section on WP:SCHOOL seems slightly irrelevant here, since the article was not about a school but a list of schools. Arguments for deletion have been based on the list's maintainability and outnumber the keep votes by more than 2:1. Sjakkalle (Check!)  08:47, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

List_of_schools_for_gifted_children
Just a list, can never be comprehensive, currently malformed 168.12.253.82 15:06, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete unmaintainable list. &mdash;Wahoofive (talk) 15:11, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, helps wikipedia users find information about schools for gifted children. No need to be comprehensive, and easily maintainable, as schools for gifted children don't stop being schools for gifted children very often. Kappa 15:46, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete The list is without criteria for inclusion (and this matters, since there are different ways of accrediting such schools), likely to cause confusion (what is the status of magnet schools regarding this list?), woefully short, and unlikely ever to be anything close to complete. Xoloz 16:37, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Since there are so few schools on the list, there is no need yet to refine criteria for inclusion. Why would it need to be complete to be useful? Kappa 16:45, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
 * With it 'this' short, it could be counter productive for anyone who was looking for gifted schools. And there will be school rivalries leading to 'gifted' vandalism :D --Spankthecrumpet 18:23, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Lists of schools.--Nicodemus75 20:24, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: you'd vote to keep any list of schools? How about Schools which suck or Schools with the prettiest girls? Or Schools whose third letter is C? The reason to have legit criteria for inclusion isn't to limit the length, as Kappa seems to think; it's to make it encyclopedic and verifiable. If there's no accepted definition of "gifted", there's no verifiability here.&mdash;Wahoofive (talk) 21:24, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep as per Kappa and Schools/Arguments. Silensor 20:47, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Impossible to maintain: public school gifted programs come and go all the time, as school board makeups change. --Carnildo 21:18, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as an ultimately unmaintainable list.Gateman1997 22:07, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
 * keep please this list of schools is verifiable and npov if we were to call something a list of schools that suck that would not really be npov so we probably could not do that wahoofive but this is just fine Yuckfoo 23:47, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, unmaintainable. Pilatus 23:54, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Unmaintainable, potentially infinite, impossible to make comprehensive or useful, no standards for inclusion or exclusion. Gamaliel 00:18, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment. Note that this list was started in December 2003 and until it was listed for deletion 22 months later had only two entries. It now has five. The entry ought to be put out of its misery. Pilatus 00:22, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, unmaintainable list of massive beadth that could be well-served by a category if such a thing were useful, which it's not, and not inherently POV, which it is. Lord Bob 01:26, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete unmaintainble most schools has gifted programs --JAranda &#124; yeah 02:21, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per Xoloz. Denni &#9775; 03:09, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per Gamaliel and Lord Bob - I would support keeping it if it were modified to include a notability bar E.g. "List of schools for gifted children top ranked by US Department of Education" or some such. --Johntex\talk 09:44, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, Either it's vague, because technically any mainstream school is 'for' gifted (or as we say in English, 'clever') children, since I doubt very many throw them out. Or it's umaintainable, if we narrow it down to those who operate special programmes, as those change from year to year. --Last Malthusian 10:15, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. most schools have gifted programs, and this sounds like a candidate for POV problems. Ryan Norton T 09:24, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete inherently POV.  Grue  12:37, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Education systems do designate some schools specifically for gifted children, who in those systems are described as gifted either as a result of assessment usually by an educational psychologist or by competitive examination.  There aren't many of them, and this list is thus highly maintainable and useful. --Tony Sidaway Talk  22:14, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * SOME educated systems designate these kind of schools, but most schools in the US are required to have gifted programs of one kind and the other kind comes and goes. Which illustrates the whole problem with this list, both the inherit double-meaning of "gifted" and the POV problems with saying one school is more able to handle gifted children then another. Ryan Norton T 22:52, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as Xoloz -- red stucco 08:38, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep useful list. Borisblue 19:10, 11 October 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.