Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yarmouth Schools (Maine)


 * 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.  Ar ky an  &#149; (talk) 20:29, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Yarmouth Schools (Maine)

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

No notability asserted, article was created a second time after first article was speedy delete due to copyvio Seinfreak37 13:40, 6 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletions.  -- Noroton 16:32, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Neutral Notability is a ridiculous concept for school districts. If either the (encyclopedic) information on the district is too large for the locality article or the locality article needs to be pruned back, then creating a school district article is the way to go. Although Yarmouth, Maine isn't too long and this school district article wouldn't yet overhelm it, the school district article was created only days ago, so it's premature to nominate for deletion when the creator may be ready to add plenty of encyclopedic information. If much more information is going to be added, I'd want to keep; if not, I'd want to redirect. Noroton 18:57, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep School districts are inherently notable and this article makes explicit claims of notability above and beyond that. That the article was recreated after a copyvio speedy is irrelevant, unless copycio issues are being raised again. This article should be the poster child for creating school articles: use the school district article as a shell for information about the district; create individual school articles once they have been expanded and can demonstrate independent notability. This AfD is entirely counterproductive. Alansohn 20:38, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep School districts are inherently notable as government bodies and as discussed countless times. TerriersFan 01:25, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, based on the same logic that causes us to keep even unsourced articles on tiny little villages (whatever logic that is). --Butseriouslyfolks 03:51, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep This sort of article seems the practical way to handle the problems with articles on individual schools: aggregate to the appropriate extent, depending on the material available. I see a number of people with different views on school notability seem agreed on this as a compromise. DGG 08:22, 7 April 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.