Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Strongsville 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 keep.  Singu larity  08:31, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Strongsville High School

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

For a couple of months I've defended this page against vandalism and solicited (on the talk page) people who want this article to remain to help provide references and make this a true encyclopedia article. However, no one has come to help. The article is basically unreferenced, and one reference failed to confirm the article's dubious hold on notability. As things stand, there is no evidence of notability, and even simple things—such as the school's age—cannot credibly be defended from potential vandalism due to the lack of references.

It's better for Wikipedia to not have an article on something rather than to have bogus information on it; therefore, I think it's time for this article to be deleted. Mumia-w-18 (talk) 16:18, 20 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep The 2006 Div 1 Baseball Championship (referenced by secondary source) would even meet notability using the strict version of the new school notability proposal as I read it. My opinion deleting notable articles because it's too much work to keep the vandals away is a very dangerous path to tread.--Cube lurker (talk) 16:33, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
 * See the talk page. I checked that reference—it failed.—Mumia-w-18 (talk) 16:41, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Looks like that pdf is for div 3. They're in the div 1 section --Cube lurker (talk) 17:01, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The Division I link is now fixed. • Gene93k (talk) 18:04, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you.--Mumia-w-18 (talk) 00:53, 21 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletions.   —Camaron1 | Chris (talk) 17:07, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, unsourced WP:OR, and per the nom. Cirt (talk) 17:29, 20 December 2007 (UTC).
 * Keep - large high school, significant institution in the community, notability additionally established by multiple state championships. Vandalism is never a reason for deletion. TerriersFan (talk) 17:30, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Their Marching Mustangs tour the country and do presidential innaugurations and Macy's parades. They also won a state baseball title mentioned above. • Gene93k (talk) 18:04, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - Sources and research suggest, like nearly all high schools, that this school can pass WP:N. The article should not be deleted due to vandalism; if vandalism is an issue please report vandals to WP:AIV, and if vandalism becomes very heavy request page protection at WP:RFPP. If help on improving the article is needed, feel free to contact WP:SCH and assistance is usually given. Camaron1 | Chris (talk) 18:36, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - I go for the "all high schools are notable" point of view. The amount of vandalism is an argument for protection, (even if it's nice to have some honeypots around...), the lack of info is a serious problem, but has to be solved otherwise. Greswik (talk) 18:46, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep: Parts of it being unreferenced is not a reason for deletion. The high school championships themselves establish plenty of notability. Plus, vandalism if definitely not a reason for deletion at all. Basically per everyone else, but it's certainly a speedy I think. Wizardman  19:03, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Greswik. STORMTRACKER   94  22:38, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Rescind. The article has much improved over the last few hours, and although I still don't know for certain when the school was founded, I rescind my nomination.--Mumia-w-18 (talk) 00:53, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep all high schoools are inherantly notable. None should ever be deleted for notability, regardless of the quality or sourcing of the article ATM.  JERRY talk contribs 02:00, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep The sources show this one is notable. Lawrence Cohen  07:02, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep as above, the sources provided demonstrate notability. (jarbarf) (talk) 00:52, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I accidentally cleared out some comments left by others a few hours ago, I'm not sure how that happened but I do apologize. (jarbarf) (talk) 04:57, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - (Changed from above.) -- Enough sources given at this point that I can agree with the other "Keep" comments, from above. Cirt (talk) 18:44, 24 December 2007 (UTC).
 * Keep - (Changed from above.) -- Enough sources given at this point that I can agree with the other "Keep" comments, from above. Cirt (talk) 18:44, 24 December 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.