Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yung-Feng 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. Some cleanup is recommended, but is not an AfD issue. Shereth 21:56, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Yung-Feng High School

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

Delete for non-notability. There are many high schools within any given country. Wikipedia is not the Yellow Pages. The page itself sounds like an advertisement Arbiteroftruth (talk) 15:25, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - the consensus is that high schools are notable. We need to avoid systemic bias and give time for local sources to be found. We should be increasing our poor coverage of education in Taiwan and developing pages not deleting them. TerriersFan (talk) 16:03, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - Where is this consensus of which you speak? I can only find the failed proposal for schools which didn't achieve consensus. Ged UK (talk) 19:44, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * As far as I've observed in the last two years, for every high school article that was AfD'd consensus has kept them all. --Oakshade (talk) 20:20, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Doesn't matter, even if it were policy to keep high schools--COPYVIO trumps NOTABILITY (see Smith Jones's comment below)--Paul McDonald (talk) 20:24, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Agree with the COPYVIO stance. See comment below. --Oakshade (talk) 20:26, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Totally agree with the copyvio too. Don't at all agree that High schools are/should be automatically be notable, but that appears to be th e consensus


 * Speedy< Delete - this article is jsut a sleazy ripoff of another article here Yung-Feng High School and a website see below0, which also shoudl be deleted. This is not the Tiwanese government homepage; we dont need to advertise their servieces for them. Keep witout the copyvio, the article is a bit beter and should ntot be automatically delted. Smith Jones (talk) 16:36, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - this page does not meet any of the speedy criteria. However, I agree that it needs to be cleaned up and merged with Yung Feng High School. TerriersFan (talk) 18:24, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * my mistake - I didnt realize tha tiw as okay to have two copies of the exact same article on the Wiki. That seems pretty sily but if you say its okay then I wont question it. Smith Jones (talk) 19:11, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - Err, no its not okay to have two copies of the exact same article which is why they need to be merged, which I will do. TerriersFan (talk) 19:32, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment thanks mate i was afriad i would have to mes with this again Smith Jones (talk) 20:11, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

*Delete no assertion of notability. That said, there are a hell of a lot of school articles on here that I don't think are particularly more notable. We really need to get the notability guidelines/policy for schools sorted out quickly. Ged UK (talk) 19:37, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Now the copy vio has been removed, it's a stub. High schools are apparently notable automatically. Ged UK (talk) 20:48, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep and cleanup. We normally keep high schools as notable.  The article does need editing, for sure--but that's not a delete reason, that's a "so fix it" reason! SPEEDY DELETE per copyright violation--Paul McDonald (talk) 20:12, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * comment - its not really oiur job to clean up every artice that gets speedy-copypastad from other websites. at the bery least, this is probably a plagiarism issue and in which case we shouldnt leave it up for so long since i think that its unethical to just copy and paste stuff from government websites and call it an "article". Smith Jones (talk) 20:14, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * followup - seriously, this article was toslen from here, a site that was not even credited in this article. It is copied WORD FOR WORD from this site without any creditation. How can this be okay in the rules??? Smith Jones (talk) 20:16, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * woops... see above, copyvio--Paul McDonald (talk) 20:20, 22 August 2008 (UTC)


 * While the topic likely is notable, I would say Delete without prejudice as copyright violation for now and let it be recreated in a non-copyright violation form. --Oakshade (talk) 20:24, 22 August 2008 (UTC) COPYVIO has been removed. It does seem like a major high school.  Most websites about this school are in Chinese.  While I can't read Chinese characters, it's hard for me to find web articles about it.  But as consensus has kept high schools, deleting this one because of sources being in a foreign language would be a case of systemic bias.  Keep --Oakshade (talk) 01:52, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete with extreme prejudice as copyright violation. "About us" indeed. ~ Ningauble (talk) 20:34, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep since copyvio has been removed. I agree with consensus that high schools are notable. ('Am not nobody, I are a HS grad.') It is a meaningful threshold of significance. ~ Ningauble (talk) 00:51, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I've tagged this as a speedy in case an admin doesn't happen to stumble across our little discussion :) Ged UK (talk) 20:35, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - Contributer self identifies as sockpuppet of one blocked yesterday for numerous problematic contributions, but not for copyvio. ~ Ningauble (talk) 20:39, 22 August 2008 (UTC)


 * keep - the copyvios' is gone but now its jsust an unsourced, nonnotable stub that is still a duplciate of another article. an improvement, technically. Smith Jones (talk) 21:51, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - now that copy-vio problems are fixed. matt91486 (talk) 21:09, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:Notability (high schools).  Jerry  talk ¤ count/logs 02:36, 24 August 2008 (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.