Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Washington Metropolitan Association of Chinese Schools


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 01:44, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Washington Metropolitan Association of Chinese Schools

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This article has been tagged for notability since June 2007. I could not find any evidence of significant coverage in reliable sources or anything that would satisfy WP:ORG. This is a procedural nomination and I have no strong opinion on the fate of the article. Skomorokh 16:25, 31 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep - associations of schools are generally notable as are school districts. Pages such as this also provide a convenient repository for information on those schools that are not individually notable. TerriersFan (talk) 17:50, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.   —TerriersFan (talk) 17:52, 31 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete Per nom. According to the website links which work (most of the links in the article seem to be dead) these aren't actually 'schools', but are part-time after-school activities, and it seems that most only conduct classes for one afternoon per week. Nick-D (talk) 22:17, 31 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete The article does not satisfy WP:ORG. My experience with looking for sources yielded nothing that pointed to notability. --Stormbay (talk) 04:07, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —  Aitias   // discussion 00:01, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

"If someone wants to write an article about their high school, we should relax and accomodate them, even if we wish they wouldn't do it. And that's true *even if* we should react differently if someone comes in and starts mass-adding articles on every high school in the world. Let me make this more concrete.  Let's say I start writing an article about my high school, Randolph School, of Huntsville, Alabama.  I could write a decent 2 page article about it, citing information that can easily be verified by anyone who visits their website.  Then I think people should relax and accomodate me.  It isn't hurting anything.  It'd be a good article, I'm a good contributor, and so cutting me some slack is a very reasonable thing to do." travb (talk) 03:48, 5 January 2009 (UTC)"
 * Strong keep as Mr. Jim Wales said during the bitter 2004-2005 school debate:
 * This article is not about a high school. Skomorokh  03:51, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Jimmy Wales was taking about how editors should "should relax and accomodate" others. This same argument can be made for all schools, even non-highschools. Notability (schools) is a failed policy. travb (talk) 03:55, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * No one is citing that proposal, and the article is not about a school. Skomorokh  21:33, 5 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment Notability shouldn't be questioned here. The nominator is questioning the article's verifiability. - Mgm|(talk) 09:43, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * To question one is, ultimately, to question the other; see WP:GNG. Skomorokh  21:33, 5 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep I do not see how V can be questioned--the web site source supplies the descriptive data, at least the part about the member schools the only part in English--though I can not read Chinese,  I assume the events part is similarly supported by the site, and neither would be the least controversial.  --although not third party, its enough information to support notability in this case.  DGG (talk) 06:06, 6 January 2009 (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.