Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ponderosa Elementary School (South San Francisco)


 * 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 01:24, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Ponderosa Elementary School (South San Francisco)

 * - (View AfD) (View log)

I am also nominating the following related pages because they are mere redirect pages:

Delete. This article seems to have been voted for deletion once already (Articles_for_deletion/Ponderosa_Elementary_School) but has been recreated. – sgeureka t•c 10:11, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 12:59, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment The previously deleted Ponderosa Elementary School was not this school--it was the one in the Spring Independent School District. [This comment posted moments ago by --Hjal 08:03, 20 March 2007 (UTC)]
 * Comment. I was unaware of that. Still, Special:Whatlinkshere/Ponderosa_Elementary_School_%28South_San_Francisco%29 and Special:Whatlinkshere/Pondarosa_Elementary_School don't show any inter-wiki-linking except for the redirect pages mentioned above. At the moment, all references/external links are either statistical, non-independant or trivial. The school is non-notable except for being "the 2nd most attended elementary school in South San Francisco", which might still not be notable enough. – sgeureka t•c 19:49, 20 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete non-notable school. Carlossuarez46 19:08, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Possible speedy as G4, else delete, all sources are primary, no indication of notability. Seraphimblade Talk to me 20:03, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge/Redirect to South San Francisco, California. Inadequate demonstration of notability at this point in time. Alansohn 03:01, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep as currently redeveloped. There are now multiple non-trivial third party sources to support this article.  RFerreira 03:04, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I was looking to see if I should change position, but I see no secondary sources? There is the school's website (primary), its parent district's website (primary), a government report (government reports on a government organization are primary), a list of statistics (raw statistics are primary and also trivial), and another report which was produced by the school and district (primary). Seraphimblade Talk to me 07:58, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
 * To describe a government report about a school as a "primary source" in this context is, well, bullshit. RFerreira 17:16, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep references exist in current article, no valid deletion criteria given for AFD listing.  ALKIVAR &trade; &#x2622; 03:08, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete There is no consensus that schools are or are not inherently notable. As such, notability has to be asserted and attributed in the article, and that is lacking here.  --Butseriouslyfolks 03:31, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep This is already at Start class for the Schools project and it fulfills the Policies. There is  no consensus on school notability, although you could visti the AfD for the other Ponderosa Elementary School and learn that "no schools are notable."--Hjal 07:52, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Soft keep -- This recurses (again) to the issue of whether Wiki includes schools per se, if so, which levels of schools are (and are not) deemed notable, and whether schools outside these criteria should be included when they have independent notability -- issues which, properly, need policy rather than endless discussion -- Simon Cursitor 11:06, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 'Delete. This is a good example of what is not sufficient for notability. The entire information is trivial list type data: locate, date of building, the number of playing fields, the scores on standardized tests, the 100% standardized "vision statement" the racial breakdown, the class schedule--that one keeps showing up & it still startles me--what can possibly be notable about the time that any school says the pledge of allegiance? At least it won't need as much upkeep as some, for it doesn't include the names of each teacher & the class presidents.
 * What would be the equivalent for a business organization? the size of the building and the parking lot, the names of the manager, the working hours, that they intend to make money, & when they were founded? - hopeful businesses keep writing such articles, and they all get speedied.
 * So what would be sufficient for a school? Really distinctive program or building or founders--famous alumni--test site for important eduational research--major news story for one reason or another. (If we were to accept the first school in each state as N, we might get a total of 100 US elementary schools.) Just the same criteria as for every organization.  So why do we have these schools without anything to say? do we need a rule that WP is notaclassroomexercise?


 * and, there are no independent non-trivial sources. Their website and the one for the district. The profile on Greatschools.net, which is about as distinctive as myspace, and references to where they found the test scores, the demographics, and the vision statement. Every one of these are trivial, non-indpenendent, or both. Even for those who think most or all elementary schools notable, there's still this problem about RS. The distinction for N is not which level school, but the individual school. This and below are the ones that fail. DGG 03:32, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. This article fulfills attribution requirements and the subject itself appears notable enough for an electronic encyclopedia. Burntsauce 17:36, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. South City High and El Camino High are in the same districts as Pondo, and they have the same format, but they're listed for deletion. Derrty2033 23:46, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * comment I think you meant not listed, but they're every bit as formulaic as this, and just as deserving. Still I think it better to go one at a time, because some will be notable. DGG 04:33, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. The article does not meet the criteria in the proposed WP:SCHOOLS. There are no good references.  The fact that there are two high schools with articles is of no importance in this discussion. Previous consensus decisions in this area tend to keep high schools and delete other schools unless they show some significant notability.  If the consensus is leaning to keep, then I would say Strong Merge rather then keeping as an independent article.. Vegaswikian 02:50, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Alkivar, etc. --Myles Long 18:35, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Alkivar, schools are usualy notable enough. bbx 01:19, 26 March 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.