Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Park School of Buffalo


 * 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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was NO CONSENSUS. Linuxbeak | Talk 23:35, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

The Park School of Buffalo
To me, this article looks like a disguised attempt of advertising, esp. since the school is a private school.

I am not from that region. This school might be a local institution, worth listing. In that case, however I think the article should be vastly expanded.

Eptalon 15:49, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
 * This afd nomination was orphaned. Listing now.  Keep schools. &mdash;Cryptic (talk) 09:01, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. NN private school, advertising. You're happy to list many orphan pages with a "no opinion" vote, but here you put in a Keep...just because it's a school? With no reference to article content at all? Did you even look at the linked website?--inksT 10:04, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, it's a very small private school. From 1993 to 1997, they only had one graduate a year. -- Kjkolb 10:59, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * That is because many students go there only for K-8, then go to a local high school. --CastAStone 21:37, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * They must have increased their number of graduates, since their graduates from 2001 to 2005 attended 84 different colleges, thus they must have averaged more than 16 graduates a year, and presumably more since every single one probably didn't go to a different college.  No vote. --Metropolitan90 03:31, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * That makes sense. I looked everywhere to find a number of students and all I found was the graduate list. -- Kjkolb 06:12, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, advertising. --Last Malthusian 11:38, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep 255 isn't a lot of students, but it's enough. It's uniqueness adds to it's worthieness as an article.  In its present state, it's not an advertisement.  I think generally the more independent a school is (e.g. private or charter), the more it warrants it's own article.   --rob 14:14, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete private schools, because (unlike public schools), I could found one tomorrow, and so could anyone. Xoloz 15:14, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * On average private schools are more notable than public schools. You appear to be arguing that Eton College should be deleted. You could also found a company tomorrow, indeed it would be a lot easier than founding a school, but try nominating Wal-Mart for deletion and seeing what happens! CalJW 16:36, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep as per Schools/Arguments. Private college prep schools are just as encyclopedic as public educational institutions.  Silensor 15:59, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep The idea that private schools should be singled out for deletion is absurd, and throws deletionist contentions about notability to the winds. CalJW 16:36, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep though the school is not a local institution per say as wondered by the nom (I live about 5 mi from it), it could be kept because its history and significance. It is Buffalo's only suburban private school, and its only non-Catholic private school. As to the arguement that this is an advertisement, I disagree. --CastAStone 21:37, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Vivian Darkbloom 21:40, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, established school. Kappa 23:04, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * keep please this is an important school we can include it Yuckfoo 00:10, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete nn school --JAranda &#124; yeah 00:29, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. School with a long enough history. --Vsion 09:31, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep &mdash; RJH 14:55, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Time is valuable. Diskspace is not. Hipocrite - &laquo; Talk &raquo; 15:12, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete nn school. Dottore So 19:19, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. 255 reasons to go ride a bicycle.--Nicodemus75 20:49, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, elementary School.Gateman1997 20:52, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The fact this school teaches up to and including grade 12 has been verified. This isn't another case of a school article making fictional claims of grades taught.  The fact it teaches elementary grades as well, doesn't make it less signficant.  --rob 21:08, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Noted. Doesn't change the fact that it is a poorly written article about a questionably deserving building.Gateman1997 21:32, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * It doesn't say anything about the building(s). Kappa 22:01, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * A school is by it's very nature a collection of one or more buildings. This set isn't special.Gateman1997 22:13, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * If that is so, your view regarding schools is a limited one, one which many here do not subscribe to. Silensor 22:15, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * It's also the view that about 50-60% of users DO ascribe too. Which is probably the basis for the neverending lack of consensus. Half of us see schools as building in which some education happens, others see them as some higher trancendent institution that is more then the sum of it's parts. I've seen too many schools close with no repercussions to accept that view.Gateman1997 22:30, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * A school is not a building, it uses a building. By the same token, a playground, computer network, school web site, are also not schools.  They're used by schools.  Sometimes two schools share one building (with entirely seperate administration, faculty, student bodies; and very occasionally even separate school boards).  Obviously, countless schools also have multiple buildings, often disconnected.  Often, schools move, or replace buildings, but the school goes on, and just one article for the school exists.  One should understand what something is before deleting it.  --rob 22:33, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Obviously we disagree on this point. If the Park School of Buffalo building were to burn down... that school would cease to exist. You cannot deny this. The students would be moved to other schools until the building was ressurected. And even then there is no guarentee that would happen. Or by the same token if a school were to close the institution would be gone, but the building would still be there (infact we have a few articles for just such school buildings). A school is a building nothing more. Sure there can be more then one group of students sharing the building, but if the building ceases to exist so does the school. Admittedly this tendency is more prevailent in public schools then private schools as private schools tend to have alumni and benefactors that are also interested in maintaining the institutional aspects.Gateman1997 22:39, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * You don't know what a school is, unfortunately. If the school burnt down, and they found other places to house them, and then rebuilt the structure, then the school would continue to exist.  The same article would apply to the school before and after.  In fact, there are a number of articles where a school has relocated, and one article applies to the same school, for the entire time period.  This is especially true of private schools, charter schools, and special program schools.  Now, some district schools would be shut-down in such a case, but that's not a universal rule.    --rob 22:48, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Please stop starting your responses by insulting me. We obviously disagree, that doesn't make either of us right. And yes it's possible they would relocate the school, but that's more likely in the case of a private school. As I said before if a public school closes its institiutional aspects are gone, finito, kaput, but the building remains and is still Such and Such School.Gateman1997 22:59, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * This is just patently false. This is a nonsensical argument created to support the absurd contention that schools are just buildings (and therefore unimportant). My Junior High School burned down when I was in grade 7 (about 70% of the original site was destroyed). The school district decided to rebuild the school while cleanup of the old site was still going on. They obtained land in a different community within the same city and rebuilt the school. I attended the school as soon as it opened the following winter, it had the same name, same staff, same students, same mascot, same colours, same school song, same motto, same programs, same curriculum, some awards had been salvaged from the old school- but it clearly had a different (AND BETTER, I might add) building. The old site, when cleaned up then was used by the district to construct a new elementary school, which made use of the 30% or so of the old building (including the gynmasium), which had a different staff, different name, taught a different level of schooling, etc. etc. Surely the newly constructed building was the same school (with the same name, etc.) that had been my Junior High School - not the 30% of old buildings that had been incorporated into the new elementary school. Clearly, the institutional structures of the school persisted, even though it's original building had been destroyed. What is more, while our classes were indeed taken inside other active school buildings, our classes were maintained, and we were taught by teachers from our school. There was no integration with the other schools whose buildings housed our classes while we were awaiting our new facilities (in fact, some students from my Junior High School took classes at a local YMCA, and some in a church basement during that year). We were still a school even though the buildings were gone, and the YMCA didn't become our school because it was the building. My solitary example illustrates how simplistic some of the approaches from "those who routinely vote to delete school articles" with respect to schools really are. I actually have two or three other examples that come to mind that disprove, but truly, one example is sufficient to debunk the idea that "A school is a building nothing more."--Nicodemus75 19:56, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I think the burned out junior high you mentioned sounds far more real to me, than that K-8 Clovis Oceanview.  I think its actually good we've got to the heart of the debate, which is about what a school is. --rob 09:42, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, notable private school. Christopher Parham (talk) 22:21, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Neutralitytalk 04:51, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete just a school -- red stucco 08:26, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Pilatus 09:46, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep per Silensor. -- DS1953 14:46, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep schools per Silensor and Cryptic.--Gaff talk 00:23, 15 October 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.