Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Science Park High School (Newark, New Jersey)


 * 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 keep. &mdash; Nearly Headless Nick   {C}  16:35, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Science Park High School (Newark, New Jersey)

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This page has been created without authorization from the school that it represents. It has been discovered that a lot of the information is false and could be overall inaccurate. As the original creator of the page I have been requested by the administration to delete the page. KB. Sciencepark 01:41, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I'm not really sure which way to vote. As for "authorization from the school that it represents" - except for the logo they don't have to authorize it. It doesn't appear to be a copyright violation. What do they mean by authoriztion? I make make a decision if I can see what the inaccuracies are. Mr.Z-man  talk ¢ Review! 02:01, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I could see COI based on your username, but there has been so much editing since you created it, this should be negated by now. I really can't see a reason to delete this besides "its unauthorized" (most articles here aren't authorized by their subject), so I am provisionally voting Keep unless I see a real reason. Mr.Z-man  talk ¢ Review! 02:06, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Reply To Comment I never was authorized to make it, I only made an original one in my spare time and served as a "moderator" as others expanded it. However it has been seen by the administration and supposedly people out of the school who contacted the administration as true. As the person who has admitted to being the "moderator" for the page, I do not want to held accountable for any inaccuracies that I make accidentally, or any that anyone else makes that I cannot prove or disprove. The school has requested that it be removed and though it has gone beyond my direct power at this point, I am still being indirectly held responsible for it. Sciencepark 02:15, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia pages don't have moderators. I hope the school can understand that you have no control over, or responsibility for, the page. While all pages here should aim for accuracy, the wise reader will be cautious about how far s/he trusts them, especially if sources aren't given. Vicki Rosenzweig 02:20, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I know that there aren't moderators, however I always have looked back to the page to ensure that things aren't going too far in the wrong direction and I always expected this to happen eventually now that Wikipedia is quite popular in the school.Sciencepark 02:25, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletions.   -- Noroton 02:56, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep I couldn't care less what your school administrators think. They have absolutely no authority over Wikipedia. WE decide whether to keep or junk the article. I see nothing wrong with the article, so I don't want to delete it. If there is a copyright problem with anything, and you know about it, please change it -- that is, exact wording that may have been taken from the school Web site or some school document. If the pictures in the article belong to the school itself, please take those off. If you know of anything inaccurate, please change it. If the school administration knows of anything inaccurate, someone on the staff should change it. Otherwise, with all due respect and trying to be as civil as possible, your school administration may go to hell. We are independent of them. Noroton 03:04, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep for now. I have to agree with Norton that your school administration has no authority to demand that an article on them be deleted. If anything whatsoever in the article is untrue or inaccurate, they of course have the right to remove or change it, but aside from that (and copyright issues), they have no say in the matter as far as Wikipedia is concerned. Would they really punish you just for creating the article? That would be absolutely ridiculous of them. --Miskwito 03:33, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll also note that doing things like this is completely unacceptable, but I'll assume good faith and presume that you weren't aware of that at the time. --Miskwito 03:40, 7 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Strong keep: What a joke. Wikipedia now needs "authorization" to create articles? And you all of a sudden jump in with a "request" from the school to remove the article? I laughed when I read that. As it stands, the article contains a wealth of information that asserts its notability and has some damn nice images to accompany it. It needs sources, however, but that should not be hard to find for such a prominent school.  Seicer  (talk) (contribs) 03:35, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment While I am in 100% agreement with the above editors who assert that this school's administrators have no authority over Wikipedia, I do have hesitations over how this article is sourced and if this school is notable enough to warrant an article. As it stands now most of info is unsourced, while the article looks ok and seems to be pretty NPOV it remains a problem.  Still this is no reason to summarily delete a decent article.  --Daniel J. Leivick 03:45, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, I do agree with your concerns over the article's content (though not notability itself), but those are cleanup issues, not deletion ones. I'll tag it for cleanup right now since somebody else agrees though.  FrozenPurpleCube 03:51, 7 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep Your school has no ability to determine what articles Wikipedia has, and as High Schools in general are found to be notable, so there is no reason to delete it, since it is a real school. . The content of the page is borderline, as I do think there's plenty of unsourced material that needs cleanup, but inherently, there's nothing wrong with it. Now as regards the school administration's actions, I assume you are a student there? Well, I do think your user name might be worth changing, but I don't see that many edits to the page from you. Did you edit under a different name? Doesn't matter anyway, if your school administration is pressuring you, your best bet is to see an attorney or your local ACLU. FrozenPurpleCube 03:51, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep The article will greatly benefit from a thorough cleanup. No one owns this article, and I will certainly volunteer my efforts to improving it and ensuring that no one is "blamed" for its content. Alansohn 03:57, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * CommentThe School is not necessarily punishing me or pressuring but when the content was discovered, I was asked and I explained how I created the page and occasionally made edits. Therefore, being the only in school source so far of the page, I was asked to just delete it all for the time being. In terms of username, this was created today due to the fact that the NPS IP address is blocked at my school from edits so I have edits from various IP's from wherever I worked on it at that moment. I will suggest that someone of authority in the school revise it such as a teacher or administrator however my instruction was to have it deleted. If this is rejected by you to be deleted I don't think that I am at fault because I did what was asked, but I must follow through with my order to avoid any problems. Sciencepark 04:01, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, okay. Well then, you can always point them to this page as proof that you tried to do what they asked, but the Wikipedia community refused. --Miskwito 04:07, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep but cleanup immediately. Marginally notable high school. Sciencepark is probably under attack by dim-witted school administrators that don't understand what Wikipedia is and think they're being H4X0R3D...that is if high school administrations and their comprehension of technology hasn't changed any since I was in high school. Thunderbunny 04:18, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep and close. The article seems okay to me. For the nominator- Wikipedia is independent of other organizations. Unless the article in question is a black project, it cannot be simply told what to do. Also, factuality is not an adeqaute argument when nominating an article. Flaws can always be removed- that's why we use a wiki! Possible bad-faith nom. I concur with the elaborate argument placed by Noroton as well. Sr13 (T|C) 04:21, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep but... I suggest making sure it is thoroughly sourced with reliable sources like local newspapers. Anything that is not or can't be sourced should be removed from the article. --Aude (talk) 04:35, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep and cleanup including sourcing. A good chunk of the article is unencyclopedic "insider" detail that can be discarded, which removes most of the WP:ATT challenges. The basic information about the school should be easily verified. As has released his edits under the GFDL, they are now "ours", not his/hers, so the administration should be aware of this. Not sure if they think this is like a MySpace group or what, but we don't need their permission to write about them. -- Dhartung | Talk 04:52, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Note Since it seems that this will not be deleted, I did as said by Dhartung and cleared anything I believe to be insider information. I am hoping that this will not be considered as clearing the page since the majority has been removed, however I will suggest that someone with more knowledge of the school post to make a newer article if this does not delete (which seems to be the likely scenario here). Sciencepark 05:09, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Article looks much better now. That's the way to do things, if material is unencyclopedic, poorly sourced, dubious, etc.  Though some things, like ethnicity statistics, should also have sources.  See Stuyvesant High School and Plano Senior High School for examples of how sourcing should ideally be done.  But, the article is vastly better now. --Aude (talk) 05:18, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

If an initial impressionof our school comes from an article on a site which appears to be a blog for anyone wishing to discuss the school then  it can in our view  be harmful to our students. There are other forums on the Internet for this and students may say what they choose there. Ihave read enough of the commentary to know that this isnot about what may be good for our school but hype about rights and censure and anything else one wants to say about our motivation. What is good for Wikipedia is an issue here and quite frankly the responsibility  to act responsibly for this school is not yours.
 * Delete and caution those voting to keep to ensure that the vote is simply not knee-jerk to the demands of a school administration. Let's make sure the article is thoroughtly sourced and attributed.  /Blaxthos 05:26, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * So, why are you saying that this article should be deleted exactly? Sourcing this article is a trivial matter, and in any case, not a reason to delete it.  The content is not significantly objectionable in any way that I can see.  Also, I think you'll find that the vast majority of high schools are kept, without regard to any actions by the administration.  I do think that's a boneheaded thing to do, but it's got nothing to do with this subject.  Finally, I think you should be advised, AfD is not a vote, it is a discussion.  Numbers don't matter.  Ideas and arguments do.  FrozenPurpleCube 06:24, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notable magnet school, and one of the top schools in the state.  Find a new hobby.  Silensor 05:27, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep; should be sourced, but certainly not deleted. Ral315 » 07:35, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Mister Manticore, but please everybody, be civil! Telling school administrators to "go to hell" is unworthy of the Wikipedia community. ...  disco spinster   talk  16:45, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep wholly invalid reason for nomination. Almost Speedy Keep as it's essentially a bad faith nom by proxy (i.e. bad faith on the school's part, not the actual nominator). WilyD 18:21, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Neutral: While I'm a strong opponent on the notability of secondary schools, I must chime in with the rest in defense of the principle that the subjects of articles get veto power neither over the content nor the existence of related articles.  I have no doubt that the high school's administration would have collective apoplexy over the notion that their social studies or English textbooks were subject to censorship by anyone named therein.  Heck, if I was feeling bloodyminded enough, I'd forward a link to this AfD to the Newark media and see what they had to say over it.  RGTraynor 19:08, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * comment A lot of people here seem to be reacting to the circumstances of this nomination, specifically the suggestion that someone other than Wikipedia might have authority over what articles can be written. I understand where this sentiment comes from but there are cases where AFD does not have the final say—a salient example is WP:LIVING. If an organization makes a request to have an article removed because they believe it to be defamatory, we ought to take that request seriously (for both legal and perceptual reasons); we need to either source any potentially defamatory material carefully or remove the material (perhaps reducing the article to a substub in the process). However, in this case it's hard to see how this article could be construed as defamatory at this point. I think we should keep it and tag it as unreferenced, or at the worst reduce it to a stub. &mdash; brighterorange  (talk) 19:47, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, as far as it goes, if the High School had some concerns about the content of the article, I would support their bringing them up on the talk page, or if it's non-controversial, editing it themselves. I don't imagine anybody else would feel different.  But as you say, there's nothing in this article that seems defamatory to me.  Of course, we don't know what the school administration really said either, so it's a non-issue as far as I'm concerned.  FrozenPurpleCube 20:18, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Naturally! I think the main thing I'm saying is that we shouldn't expect outsiders to understand the proper Wikipedia way to accomplish certain things, and shouldn't knee-jerk just because something isn't done the Wikipedia way. Some things (like protecting Wikipedia from lawsuits or very bad publicity) are in fact more important than our customs. &mdash; brighterorange  (talk) 21:21, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Eh, I just figured that people were venting steam, and as far as that goes, it's not as bad as the Daniel Brandt discussion. Now there's a mess.  FrozenPurpleCube 03:50, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. There's simply nothing distinguishing this school entry from others. Precedent says keep.  Christopher Jost 00:36, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. High schools may or may not be notable, but this one appears to pass notability (and there is a precedent). A school is not a living being so WP:LIVING doesn't apply to the basic premise of having an article. The principal or other administrators would be advised to review the page on a regular basis to ensure nothing actionable has been written, but they are somewhat naive if they believe they have the right to control this page. -- Charlene 07:14, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * From School Administrator: The comments made by some individuals within these responses are attempts to indicate tha we are asking for censure or to control this page, no one is naive and this  is not the case. We just moved to this new location and have expeienced several issues. Individuals looking atthis schooland that included parents  have called to ask about certain issues posted on this site which are student versions with misinformation of events or conditions here. We do not have a Web master who can spend time editing this page. We are working on our own new Webpage and must comply with district guidelines for posting and this takes time.
 * In my honest opinion, what the students think about the school (besides the immature "Thiz skool suks" comments) should be a concern for the administration and interested parents. If I were a parent, looking for a school for my child, I would rather hear honest student opinions than what the school or school board says. This is similar to buying a product. The reviews of actual buyers are much more helpful and relevant to whether I, as the consumer, should buy the product than what the manufacturer says. I can't imagine the school posting controversies and problems with the school on the school website, but parents need to know those kinds of things. This is just an example, I'm not implying anything about the school being discussed: If a school has a problem with violence, parents need to know. Are they going to read zbout that on a school website though? Not likely. Mr.Z-man  talk ¢ Review! 21:07, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment For my part, were I a parent in that district, I'd be deeply concerned (although not in the least degree surprised) about a so-called educator with such a mediocre command of grammar, spelling and punctuation. I'd be extraordinarily concerned about any such so-called "administrator" who believes the Bill of Rights to be "hype."  If the school was genuinely concerned about acting responsibly (provided this is really an administrator speaking), they would bust this yahoo back to janitor and take a good, hard look at the quality of their teaching.  That aside, he's right in one thing and one thing only:  our motivation is sure not about what's good for his school.  Nor should it be.  RGTraynor 21:19, 8 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment Wow! From this can we take it that "reverse psychology' really works, and that the best way in the future to keep a high school article is to say that the administration wants it removed? Edison 18:33, 8 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I am the student who suggested this for deletion And I do not understand what reasoning you have to not delete it. I, unlike my administrators, am a supporter of the wikipedia project and I often spend time on the site learning about various things going link to link and having faith that hat I read is true. But after meeting with my administrator today for them to post the statement, I agree with reasoning that she expressed with me today; anyone can change the page with little moderation (someone in this forum said that there are no moderators), and the only changes that seem to be looked at are the deletion of mass information. For some time, there was a line in there that I did not read that attempted to compare Science to technology by boasting Technology HS's networking class against our computer training. There was one edit that I never even saw until looking back today that says "Pro's of Science High: None this school is a!!" that had lasted for a while. I do understand that what I submitted 2 years ago becomes your property, however I do not feel it is right for you to hold on to it if no one wants it. I am offended myself because with my simple request to ask you to delete it as per my administrator, you have twisted everything into a battle against free speech and the rights of Wikipedia. Someone before said that this could be related to a living person, and I agree. This is a school in existence that is having untrue, and inappropriate statements written about it (see history) and that is nothing suitable to publish by a public site. I am sure that someone monitors the "Wikipedia" entry here regularly and could afford to clean it up when someone tries to put anything bad on it, but I, as a senior, do not have the time anymore to deal with this as more people are becoming attracted to the page recently, and neither does anyone else in the school. So since we must be technical, I shall bring up the deletion policy issues with the article
 * Conflict of Interest: I started this article with an organization I am involved with and it has been edited by those involved with it and in competition with it in inappropriate ways.
 * Vandalism: This article is subject of constant vandalism with untrue information.
 * Notability: Schools in general are not notable. This one does have some significance, however there is no accurate history yet of the school on the page that explains the notability so there is no reason to keep it. The only thing on the page now is that it was in an old building and got a new one. There is more to it and until someone provides a history showing this, it should be removed because I am not the one who will write it. KMB Sciencepark 03:12, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * And in addition, I found it horribly wrong when I looked later in the day and saw that you referred to my administrator as a Yahoo because she was typing fast because I was becoming late to class meeting with her and helping to post it. The school does value education and what is being said on this page is "hype" about freedom of speech because you certainly would not want someone writing something malicious for the public to see regarding Wikipedia. KB Sciencepark 03:16, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. Many editors in this debate seem to have allowed their indignation at the perceived hubris of these school administrators to overcome their reasoned, rational, natural civility.  On behalf of all the Wikipedians who may not have time to return to this discussion and reconsider their hasty remarks, I apologize to the school administrators and anyone else who may have been offended by the remarks of these editors. However, I must point out that all contributions to Wikipedia are licensed under the GDFL and are therefore no longer the property of the contributors, and that the nature of wiki is such that vandalism occurs, but over a statistically-significant period, the actions of trolls are usually corrected by the gnomes or vandalism patrollers.  Anyone who wishes to ensure the accuracy of any specific article is free to edit it at any time, and by creating a user account, can track contributions to that page to help combat vandalism.  Alternatively, if vandalism is frequent, semi-protection or protection of the page by a Wikipedia administrator can be requested.  —Carolfrog 04:20, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Reply to comment: Well if that service is available and suggest that you either have that protection available to the page or do as requested by me and remove it. I will talk to my administrator tomorrow because the major issue is that students or maybe not even students but someone is posting things that even I know is not true. We have had incidents but ... well just read the history, the things that have been written on the page are not nearly a representation of the issues here. I'd think that there were people carrying guns around the school perimeter waiting on corners for people and trying to target students. I will not sit here on a regular basis with my mind just wondering "What is on that page" because in general you need more safeguards in the wikipedia. When I started using it, I do not think there were many users particularly in my community. Now there are alot more and not all of them have good intentions when using this site and I predict that you will sooner or later see that with more people placing opinions this site will become very inaccurate. I strongly advise all people who continue to vote in favor of keeping to review the school history. Me and someone else whom we have not tracked down are consistently fixing the page, and I am done with it after tomorrow. But this is my last day commenting on behalf of the school so I strongly suggest a thorough look at the quality of maintnance and protection on this page as well as others. KMB Sciencepark 04:31, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete It's only apparent claim to fame is being in the top 20% of high schools according to one magazine?   Not notable.  (Though I personally think all high schools should be listed, that ain't the policy at this time.) --Hobit 02:50, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Further comment on my part Well, while certainly referring to someone as a Yahoo or anything else is a question of civility, the lack of professionalism in trying to hurry and type a reply is itself a problem. If you don't have the time to send a thoughtful, considered response, then the wise thing to do would be to refrain from responding. It's basically an extension of the 10-second rule when you're angry.  If your alleged school administrator wanted to convince people, it would behoove them to do a better job of responding effectively.  Sure, anybody can make a typo, or forget to zip up their fly, accidents happen, pobody's nerfect, but there's still a responsibility to be professional.  As to your claims of a reason to delete this article, they are not convincing. The COI problem in this case is minimal.  If you can't make edits to it without bias, that is your problem, not the articles.  The same goes with Vandalism.  It happens all over Wikipedia, every day in thousands of articles.  So far, it hasn't destroyed the world yet, and I doubt it ever will.  But it will likely remain an ongoing problem, not just for this subject, though high schools with the typical immaturity of teenagers do attract a lot of problems, but for almost any of them.  If your school administration thinks there is a problem with its students though, perhaps it might be worthwhile to consider instructing the students as to the value of integrity, honesty, and not making vandal edits to Wikipedia.  This could be a great educational opportunity, teaching responsibility, not just complaining about a problem.  Notability is still in discussion, but High schools are generally accepted as being notable.  FrozenPurpleCube
 * Quite. Vandalism is a pervasive problem, but that's not a Wikipedia problem; it's one of society at large, and there are more sensible, reasoned responses than forbidding people from saying anything because you're afraid that they'll say something you don't like.  Following that, given the bent of this school's administration -- provided their stance is, indeed, being accurately reported -- they do seem to define "inaccurate" as meaning "information which makes us look bad."  Are they really trying to tell us that an inner-city high school in New Jersey is free of violence? RGTraynor 14:21, 12 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.