Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MacGregor State High 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 no consensus, defaulting to keep. Can&#39;t sleep, clown will eat me 08:55, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

MacGregor State High School


Lack of notability, nothing in this page meets the parameters outlined in WP:SCHOOLS or WP:SCHOOLS3. Sufficient precedent has been set on this subject for the removal of school articles that do not meet these qualificiations. 'However', find something that sets this school apart enough to deem it notable and I will reverse my position. Trusilver 22:31, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Article is better than it originally was, although I still don't think it lives up to notability standards, I'm fairly open to any new information presented. Trusilver 03:18, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I have been stressing over this particular AfD since I nominated it. And the more I'm watching it and digging into web-based sources, the more I am leaning toward thinking this article should be kept. Primarily because I think that there is something notable here, not long after I nominated this article the original writer made an edit at 01:08, 20 November 2006. This edit concerned gang violence and was almost immediate removed by the writer stating "Taken out 'Gang Violence' Para, Staff requested removal." I am thinking that I would like to revert this article to the edit listed above, and give this article some more time to declare itself notable, time to dig into this subject a little bit more and research the gang violence problem this school has. That being said, I am changing my opinion on this article to a weak keep. Should research fail to pan out any useful claim to notability, there is plenty of time to revisit deletion later. Trusilver 07:48, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 20:13, 20 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep all schools. --Czj 20:40, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Why? &mdash; Haeleth Talk 22:56, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete: article makes no particular claim of notability and contains no information other than what one would expect to find in a directory or prospectus. This is an encyclopedia, not a directory or prospectus. &mdash; Haeleth Talk 22:56, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. I also doubt the claims that a school with 1800 pupils is one of the largest schools in Qld. Viridae Talk 23:53, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Too bad, because it is. But where did that come up in the artice. All we siad we were one the best schools in Queensland, not the biggest....or did I miss something? Tayuke 03:33, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * "one of the largest schools in Queensland" Viridae Talk 04:20, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per Haeleth. Also, how come everytime a high school is nominated someone votes keep and says that all schools are notable? TJ Spyke 00:36, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * When I used to comment reguarly on AfDs (before uni took over) that used to be the norm. It is refreshing to see that it is no longer the case. Viridae Talk 00:42, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, does not meet WP:SCHOOLS3. Lankiveil 00:58, 21 November 2006 (UTC).
 * Keep, contains information one would expect to find in an encyclopedia, like the history of the school. Saying we can't find out the history of a school because that would also be included in a prospectus is just bullshit bovine excrement. Kappa 01:43, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Calling arguments "bullshit" is both uncivil and not productive. JoshuaZ 04:19, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * OK I have revised my vote. Kappa 09:59, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep -- All schools are notable. I think it's highly arrogant to say otherwise.  -- Chisrule 01:51, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Why? Viridae Talk 01:54, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Schools educate, mold our youth, create memories, experiences and should be considered something more. I'm  Wiki newbie, but feel strongly about this, am I misunderstanding something??  -- Chisrule 01:59, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * That's an argument for schools being notable as a whole not an argument for schools being notable in the particular (there's some term for this fallacy but I don't remember it off the top of my head). Note also that school deletions have generally been highly controversial. JoshuaZ 04:19, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Possibly you might like to read WP:SCHOOLS3. Wikipedia doesnt work in blanket notability. Viridae Talk 02:02, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia doesn't do blanket notability, except for professional athletes, villages, colleges, albums, hit singles... Kappa 02:22, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * But doesnt their staus imply notability in itself. They also have multiple non-trivial works published about them. Most schools do not - and most people would not have heard of most schools. Viridae Talk 02:24, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * no not really actually most people have not heard of most villages and most schools have multiple non-trivial works about them Yuckfoo 02:30, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I think you might find that more people have heard of a village than the school in it... Viridae Talk 02:34, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * You might also find that more people have heard of MacGregor State High School than a typical village. Kappa 02:49, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Are you arguing that that means it passes the notability guidelines? Viridae Talk 02:54, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * And some people (such as myself) wouldn't object to revisiting the rules for villages and professional athletes. Just because we have a bad precedent on one thing doesn't justify it on others. JoshuaZ 04:19, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * We all all know that public schools, especially high schools, receieve regular independent coverage in local media. Pretending otherwise is nonsense. Kappa 08:12, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, the get regular coverage, i.e. routine and and trivial coverage with minimal editorial oversight or anything else. Indeed, it is often difficult to tell when such coverage is even independent and even when it is its very regular nature makes it trivial. We don't have articles about every single murderer even if the local papers will cover each one in depth. JoshuaZ 18:54, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * If you think this is about whether the school has an article or not you are abusing the deletion system and wasting our time, something I am very bitter about. You may equate "routine" with "trivial" but there is not particular reason anyone else should; yes many trivial events are covered but so are important ones. It adds up to proof that the school is important in the community and that there is potential for separate article if enough research is done. A one-off murder is usually a news event, not a enduring institution. Kappa 03:02, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions.   -- Longhair\talk 02:00, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete on the grounds of duplicated information ONLY. The notable aspects are already covered at Macgregor, Queensland. There's no need for duplication in two articles. Delete - the article is not notable enough to have its own article. The notable aspects, including the destruction of the school by the tornado, are covered at Macgregor, Queensland. However, I'm very tempted to ask for a keep. Just because the subject requests deletion should not mean that it should be deleted. Wikipedia needs to make a strong case against this sort of thing happening. Keep - as per Capitalistroadster, the school appears to have students that excel in multiple fields in outside activities, and may present a borderline notability case to fulfil criteria 2, 3 or 4 of WP:SCHOOLS3. I have 2 provisos, get rid of any copyrighted information from the School's website (or cite it properly) (to keep our friend below happy), and slap a cleanup tag on the article to get it fixed up. JROBBO 07:21, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Duplicated information is not a grounds for deletion. Kappa 02:22, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Changed wording to make it clearer - my deletion is for non-notability. JROBBO 02:56, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Where does the subject request deletion? Viridae Talk 02:15, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * See the talk page of the article at the bottom; an unsigned user has claimed the school doesn't want the article any more. JROBBO 02:56, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks, though I dodnt think it has any bearing on this afd. Viridae Talk  02:58, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia doesn't create or delete articles based on the wishes or expectations of the subject. Trusilver 18:45, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * What if they own the information themselves, under copyright law? Then what is Wiki going to do? Tayuke 02:15, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * You cannot own facts. You can own the writing in which they were written however. The copyvio would obviously be removed. Viridae Talk 02:48, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * So I'm the owner of thsi writting, as i did create the actile in the first place, ight? So i say, remove the actile, as requested by MSHS Tayuke 05:06, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * By submitting your contributions you agree to licence them under the GDFL. Read the line directly under the edit field. Viridae Talk 05:16, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * And to be honest, were your school not so eager to see this article go away, I probably would have not given a second thought to it's deletion. It's because of this unusual reaction that I want to give it some more time and research the subject. Trusilver 07:53, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Seriously, go ahead and try ad get this page up to the standards. But, as far as the subject is concerned, we will be watching this page carefully, and will be taking away stuff, that the subject believes to be…inapporite.. Tayuke 00:15, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * If by inappropriate, you mean non-factual and unverified, this is of course acceptable. If by inappropriate you mean information that is factual and verified but makes the subject look bad, removal of such material is vandalism (see Wikipedia policy WP:VAND) and will be dealt with as such. Trusilver 01:18, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * See, thats the point. No one has a source from YouTube.com, or any other website about the "Gang Volince" Para. Sure, we do have fights, just like every single other high school in the world, (serioulsy, name one school who hasn't had a fight in the last month, and I'll take that back). But were not as bad as other school in the area, such as Runcorn State High School. If I made an actile on them, it would all be..bad Tayuke 03:16, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete: As per request of the staff of MSHS. I would myself, being a student of MSHS, would love to see thsi page kept up. But, the owners of the information, MSHS, or if you want to acll them, the subject, don't seem to think it is Noteable enough to be in wiki, although MSHS is one of the best high Schools in Queensland. i could a list of acivments that MSHS have done, over the last few years, and many schools would not be able to start making a list bigger than ours.....ut still, the subject here doensn't want anything to do with Wiki, at thsi current time. Tayuke 03:13, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * that actually is not a reason in our policies for erasing articles Yuckfoo 03:15, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * True, but why do you guys then think we should keep it open. I am not going to be making anymore additions ton the MSHS page, because of the request. And I serioulsy don't think anyone could find some information on us, via. Google, Yahoo ect. Tayuke 03:20, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Tayuke, you can't "own" facts as you claim that the school does, and wants to have the information deleted. Sure, we can't just copy the information from the school's website, but that hasn't been done here. All the article is is just a factual information article on a school. The school has no rights over the information at all, and where the information is copyrighted, it would be easily covered by a fair use or fair dealing provision under Copyright law - it is for research purposes. JROBBO 01:18, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Too bad. MSHS seems to belive that they do own the information, that has been given on thsi Wiki page. I could even get copyright laws, here in australia, proving that MSHS does own these bits of inofrmation, and that they do have rights. I should know, I spent a whole term learning about copyright, and thsi legal stuff, last year. Tayuke 02:11, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * No, it's not "too bad"... it doesn't matter what your school told you about copyright, but you need to realise that we will remove copyright violations, but we will not delete articles just because you ask. You should know something hopefully about fair dealing provisions under Copyright law, which exist in Australia and are even broader under US Law as far as I know. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and there are clearly allowed exceptions for fair dealing where a small amount of the work is used and cited properly for the purposes of research or study law as well (see s. 40 of the Copyright Act 1968 in Australia). While your school may "own" the work, unless there is wholesale copying of the text (which I don't think there is), I doubt this would ever constitute a copyright violation, either under Australian or US Law, which is more applicable. And despite the school's objections, there's still nothing to stop us putting up things like "Macgregor State High School is a high school in the suburb of Macgregor, Queensland." That's a fact- it's not owned by anyone. Wikipedia does not delete articles because someone asks for them to be deleted. If you want to edit here you have to follow the policy, of which that is a part. JROBBO 07:15, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * MSHS do not own the information. They own the content of their own website, but much of it would itself be derivative. As for lists of achievements and so forth - they need to be verifiable in order to be included in an encyclopaedia. Orderinchaos78 07:35, 22 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, let’s say MSHS have realized that I have broken copyright. What if I got a letter, signe by the principal herself, telling you all, that I did the wrong thing, and although I was intending to do the right thing, by making a page for MSHS on the school itself, and its awards, its achievements, and that this whole page should be removed. Yes, there are few things that that can’t be copyrighted, but I sure we can take away the History of the school, which at the moment is th only major part of the Page. Tayuke 00:15, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge with Macgregor, Queensland. A Google News Archive shows a number of references for this school so worthy of retention for mine. Capitalistroadster 03:17, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * What do you know..we do make it into the Web :D. Still, my opion hasnt changed Tayuke 03:23, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak delete It has many news sources that mention it but I see no evidence of non-triviality in the news sources. However, some students have acheived high level honors    if evidence can be shown of more non-trivial sources or other claims of notability (such as substantion of the claim that it is one of the best schools in queenland) I would be  willing to change my opinion. JoshuaZ 04:23, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as non-notable, though I'm willing to revisit if a verifiable claim of notability can be made. Also recommend that "keep all schools!" entries without comment on this particular school be discounted as an attempt at "voting" instead of contributing to the discussion of this particular case. Certainly an entry which just said "Delete all schools!" would be discounted at once! Seraphimblade 04:37, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per Haeleth. Appears to fail WP:SCHOOLS3 notability standards.  A few students seem to have done quite well, per JoshuaZ, but aside from the hurricane and a murder case (where it's mentioned in passing in both cases), I don't find any sources that would allow for further expansion.  Perhaps someone in Australia could point to something in print? Shimeru 06:13, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * What, you mean the awards we have won as a school, that havn't been published on the web? Just wondering, still not adding Tayuke 20:59, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. This once again brings up the old all schools are notable: fact or fiction? debate which I find to be quite pointless. There is no official WP:SCHOOL and it would just be easier if we just kept all school articles. Also, this has to be one of the biggest schools in the country, it has to be notable. Atlantis Hawk  09:58, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * What is easier is not necessarily what is right or what is in line with consensus. Yes, it is large - but there is no reference for the pupil numbers and I doubt that it would be one of the biggest in the country. I'm sure you will find schools in melbourne or sydney or even brisbane itself that will fill that criteria. Viridae Talk 10:09, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * It only brings it up because you do so. WP:SCHOOL is there, and applying its criteria focuses the debate upon sources instead of upon the old "stuck record" arguments.  Please stop using the "stuck record" arguments and instead focus on finding, citing, reading, and evaluating sources, by applying WP:SCHOOL. Uncle G 11:09, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Found a ref for the pupil numbers, however the number the article stated was 200 off. The official enrollment number is 1617 - so it was off by 200 or so (previously said approximately 1800) or more than 10%. Viridae Talk 10:12, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete or Merge, no notability, even by the extremely generous and controversial WP:SCHOOL criteria, no reliable secondary sources, no non-trivial press coverage in the article or raised so far in the AfD, some concerns about WP:V, looks like just more schoolcruft. Wikipedia is not an directory or indiscriminate list.  However, I'm generally in favor of merging school articles if an appropriate place for the merge (school district article or city/region article) can be found.  Xtifr tälk 12:08, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Unremarkable school. Catchpole 14:02, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Whats so "Unremarkable" about it? You havn't even got a full acrtice in front of you. Tayuke 20:59, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of schools and school programs-related deletions.   --Czj 23:13, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per Capitalistroadster, meets WP:SCHOOLS with multiple news articles. Yamaguchi先生 03:40, 22 November 2006
 * Keep per Capitalistroadster.  ALKIVAR &trade; &#x2622; 03:48, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per Capitalistroadster. Should be cleaned up though.  Makgraf 03:53, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. With some work, this could be a very good article. The school is notable (believe it or not, 1600-1800 is very large for a year 8-12 school population in Australia!) Concerns the school may have about content which is what I would call non-encyclopaedic in nature is easy to maintain by simply insisting that every reference made has a source. EDIT: Have found two awards the school has won in the last two years, in art and science (the latter a BHP Billiton award) Orderinchaos78 07:35, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * See, all you forinegers. Gah, why does every single Euopean and American I meet online, seem to think that Australia is one of the "Small Nations". Tayuke 03:16, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * keep for all the above keep reasons; the article is better than the one on my old high school; improvemenets always needed Hmains 01:07, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep on the condition that information is kept relevant to an encyclopedia...and that the editors learn to spell before making additions (it's not like WP's seriously running out of space) --Danlibbo 08:14, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. WMMartin 16:48, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Um... the nominator now wants to keep the article - surely you read the rest of the page apart from the first paragraph? JROBBO 21:57, 24 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete Per the argument that schools are inherently unnotable and unencyclopedic. Eusebeus 20:00, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * The criteria at WP:SCHOOLS state that MOST schools are notable in some ways and are "frequently important to their communities"- whether an individual school should have its own article is another matter, but your reason really isn't one for deletion. This is a policy argument that doesn't have a place in this AfD and belongs in the talk page on WP:SCHOOLS or a similar policy proposal. JROBBO 21:57, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * yea, well as you may recall from the lengthy debate about schools way back when, there are plenty of us who simply disagree in toto with the School "policy," which I take to be a proposal anyway. We can disagree, but citing faux-statute like this will not change my mind and editors like myself who generally favor deletion have advanced every argument under the sun in explication, so consult the archives if you need further elucidation. I might note that very few school AfDs ended in keep; they ended in no consensus b/c the divisions were so deep. Eusebeus 00:34, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep or delete all school articles. Clean up tho' Albatross2147 22:04, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Do you have some justification or logic for this harsh dichotomy? JoshuaZ 01:59, 25 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep, 1600 students is a lot, the article already have some interesting information, let it grow. bbx 08:53, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep I have video evidence of students engaging in fights, however I will not post these videos up without permission of those involved, this will provide hard evidence of the "Gang Violence" Paragraph. You can also contact Garden City Management on what some students at Macgregor State High School have done. Also there has been posts of youtube.com which showed evidence of students punching and kicking other students in the "Alley Way". The principal of Macgregor State high School found out about this and ordered students that posted up the videos remove them or face suspension. Contact the principal herself for confirmation of my accusation, there are plenty of people which would back what I have accused. There was a whole assembly over the issue of youtube.com and myspace.com pictures/videos being posted up. IiThaitanium 14:36, 26 November 2006 (UTC) — IiThaitanium (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Wikipedia is not a place for original research. If some reliable source has published comments about the gang matter than that matters. Otherwise, it isn't relevant. JoshuaZ 15:09, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I have found a link which can be seen here. This should be a reliable source. IiThaitanium 15:47, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment. You may wish to look at what is considered a reliable source, especially the section regarding self-publication. Youtube would be considered to be self-publication. Seraphimblade 18:41, 26 November 2006 (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.