Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Owen Sound Collegiate and Vocational Institute


 * 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 delete as non-notable and not verifiable. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjo e  04:44, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Owen Sound Collegiate and Vocational Institute

 * — (View AfD)

Non-notable school, no assertion of notability except for existing for 150 years. The only verifiable this I could find on Google was that the school exists. Contested prod. MER-C 04:12, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notable alumni, such as Norman Bethune and Agnes Macphail. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 04:28, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
 * comment - do notable alumni confer notability by contact?--Dmz5 04:58, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
 * weak keep: there are a tremendous amount of high schools with entries in wikipedia already. while i realize that commonplaceness (that's my neologism!) is not really a good benchmark for notability, it will be tremendously time-consuming to clean out all the nn schools here and keep them out in the face of millions of seniors looking to score 'spirit points' for boosting their alma mater on wp! frymaster 07:21, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete First, alumni alone do not confer notbility. Second, there's little that's notable about this school, and what is notable is not verified. If what is notable is unverifiable, then there's no discussion to be had; if it is verifiable, I would still !vote to delete the article. -- Kicking222 17:50, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep unless we witch hunt each and every school this is a keep. Existance is notibility. Plenty of small towns etc which have no notibility besides existing are in here along with schools. Wiki's not paper as long as the article is factual and NPOV keep it.--Xiahou 00:21, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Existence is not notability. A weak claim of notability is made, but it is unsourced, as is in fact the entire article.  Sources are not optional.  Additionally, little information is provided beyond a directory entry.  Do not oppose merge/redirect to Owen Sound, Ontario or some other suitable destination, if the inclusionists prefer. Shimeru 06:39, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep I don't think that existence constitutes notability, yet the article makes explicit claims of notability. Expansion and better sourcing will go a long way to making this a better article than it already is. Alansohn 06:47, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Without multiple non-trivial reliable published sources independent of the subject, it should be deleted. —Centrx→talk &bull; 10:05, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete: nothing in the article or in the 67 distinct Google hits indicate any independently verified notability. I don't see any indication of the school being discussed wrt the notable alumni (did their time at this school have any profound influence on their later careers, as discussed in biographical articles or some such?). Fram 12:50, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
 * feel free to contact the wikischool project and witch hunt them all down unless they meet this mysterious "notability" and google searches of course for a school are not going to turn up a whole lot. The internet is not the be all end of of information (yet) so unless something newsworthy was published about a school online besides the schools page what else could there be. So unless there is a major news event or serious "notable" alumni are we to delete each and every school on wiki?--Xiahou 01:28, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * It's not a witchhunt, I don't care about the project (it's not because there is a project that any article is free from scrutiny and possibly deletion), and notabiulity is not so "mysterious" at all, only subjective. As for the Google search: it indicates that I have tried to find reliable, verifiable sources (per WP:V) with the means available to me. Many schools have much much more independent exposure on the Internet, and many newspapers and magazines have their articles (or intros) available through Google. What this Google search means is that, as far as I can see, this school is not notable, and unless someone else provides other sources (offline or online), there is no notability for this school and it fails WP:V beyond the fact of its existence (which is not disputed). This is a perfectly acceptable method of discussing the merits of an article, and is the normal way to check if the article should be kept or deleted according to WIkipedia policies. Fram 09:01, 12 December 2006 (UTC)


 * delete, and I actually found a verifiable reason. Ontario ranks its schools every few years, and the results are at . The current ranking of this school is 5.6 points out of 10; in the previous round, it  was 5.7, so it isn't improving. Let's look at all the Ontario schools. Numbers are numbers. (smile)DGG 05:25, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Not notable, except for the 150 years of history, the commemorated notable alumni, notable speakers, meeting the proposed WP:SCHOOLS guideline - oh wait, I guess it is notable after all.  Silensor 05:41, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * No, it isn't, since it has not received any press coverage, a necessity for all criteria in WP:SCHOOL (no matter how inclusionist that proposed guideline still is). The article as it stands fails WP:V, and that is all we need to delete it. Fram 09:01, 12 December 2006 (UTC)


 * UHM DUH KEEP sure we all know there are a lot of schools, and not all of them are notable... but i would argue ARE YOU FUCKING CRAZY... maybe 1 out of 500 schools is more than 100 years old... this one is 150yrs old for christs sake... this is an obvious duh keep, 150 years makes it notable... nuff said.  ALKIVAR &trade; &#x2622; 06:35, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Perhaps in Canada and the US: there are many schools older than 100 years in Europe. Anyway, why would longevity imply notability, apart from some extreme examples? Has it received any major WP:V coverage for being over 150 years old? If this fact isn't notable enough for books, national newspapers, TV, ..., then why would it be notable enough for Wikipedia? Fram 09:01, 12 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment: You don't think a 150-year-old television show would be notable? JDoorj a m    Talk 22:01, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Reply: ;-) I meant that "if this fact isn't important enough to be commented upon by books, newspapers, TV stations...". I hope it's clearer now! Fram 22:08, 15 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete. Barely notable per claims, but claims are unverifiable.  Scholarly search via LexisNexis reveals nothing. Mus Musculus 16:07, 14 December 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.