This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further 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 keep. Eugene van der Pijll 17:54, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate of item in List of schools in Wadsworth, Illinois --Tim Pope 20:58, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Well as Tony has gone ahead and deleted the list, which by the way had had two other schools added to it, thus showing why the list was a better article as it actually got expanded, the reason now is, In my opinion, this article falls foul of Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. --Tim Pope 21:39, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, it's still the same article. I've simply reverted it to the version you listed for deletion and moved it over the license-busting clone that I deleted. Visviva's additions are still present, both in the history and in the two articles I created. --Tony Sidaway^Talk 23:50, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Keep A good article. I will remove the problem by converting the entry in the list into a link to this article. Osomec 21:07, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not do that until the outcome of this VFD. --Tim Pope 21:11, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You created the one item "list" as a precursor to trying to get this deleted. I believe it is the list that should be up for deletion. Osomec 21:39, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Rather than hurl accusations, list that article for deletion then. --Tim Pope 21:45, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Which will get a lot of votes to Keep and Expand. Vegaswikian 05:34, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Shouldn't the list be removed? It's not even a list. Kushboy 21:25, August 7, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. It was only a "duplicate of item in List of schools in Wadsworth, Illinois" because it was moved there by User:Tim Pope, who now appears to be denying this, perhaps he could clarify Kappa 22:55, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The list, if anything should be removed. -- BMIComp (talk, HOWS MY DRIVING) 23:19, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, notability not established. Gateman1997 23:24, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete non-notable school. Before attacking me regarding the alledged inherent notabililty of schools, please see User:Soltak/Views#Schools. -Soltak 23:40, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Good school stub. Pburka 00:41, August 8, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. If you want build consensus for a merge, do it at the talk page. Christopher Parham (talk) 01:23, 2005 August 8 (UTC)
• Delete - see User:ESkog/Schools. ESkog 03:27, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, doesn't indicate notability. Gazpacho 05:03, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to school district and Delete. Vegaswikian 05:32, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Probably not compatible with the GFDL. --Tony Sidaway^Talk 21:43, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment probably is. There is nothing unique about the content. If another editor does the five minutes work required to type it in themselves after confirming it themselves, there is no problem with GFDL. - brenneman^(t)(c) 01:51, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment Yes, if they were crazy enough to want to paraphrase text rather than copy edit it, they could do that. Why would a sysop want to do that when it results in lost copy and the creation of a duplicate? And then of course someone will come along and recreate the link from the school name, and pretty soon when someone has more information to add they'll break out the article and overwrite the redirect, and you're back to square one except for some deleted content. All because of this doomed obsession with deleting, stamping out, and expunging school articles from Wikipedia. --Tony Sidaway^Talk 13:45, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • Ok, just so we're clear, you agree your comment "Probably not compatible with the GFDL" was incorrect? Can we further agree that you'll no longer use this as an oft- repeated argument against delete and merge? I'll interpret no response as "yes" and "yes". - brenneman^(t)(c) 00:46, 12 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • No, I do not agree with that. The process you describe is a deletion followed by a kind of rewrite. If someone wants that done, rather than a merge, they should probably say so. --Tony Sidaway^Talk 03:30, 12 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, schoolcruft.
• Keep — RJH 15:17, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. A vote that's only symbolic, since this debate will end in a keep or no consensus. A good article? C'mon. Who cares what the mascot of this school and anothero ne about to be built is? --Scimitar ^parley 17:43, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • I care. Factitious 07:40, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Obvously needs a lot of work. This article was moved to List of schools in Wadsworth, Illinois and then cloned by someone else, and Tim Pope listed the clone for deletion. I have moved the original article back to where it belongs and killed the clone to conform with the requirements of the GFDL license. I would ask editors *please* not to adopt this "musical chairs" approach to merging because it is incredibly disruptive. --Tony Sidaway^Talk 21:33, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete it's a bleeding primary school for Pete's sake! Dunc|☺ 00:11, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. Wikipedia has discussed the deletion of about two dozen primary schools over the past three months. All were kept. --Tony Sidaway^Talk 00:52, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. All schools are notable enough for a truly great encyclopaedia. —RaD Man (talk) 01:00, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• We keep railway stations. We keep suburbs. We keep bridges. We keep highways. We keep schools. --Gene_poole 01:29, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:Schools/Arguments to Delete. - brenneman^(t)(c) 01:51, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Notable, verifiable, encyclopedic. Factitious 07:40, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Worthwhile. - grubber 12:26, 2005 August 9 (UTC)
• Keep. While i do think that comment about students living in nearby towns is a bit too much. Beta m (talk)
• Keep. Not exactly Nobel Prize for Literature material, but worth keeping anyway. Unfocused 15:01, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:Schools/Arguments to Delete. It is a very rare elementary school that would be notable, IMO, and this isn't it. DES ^(talk) 23:43, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: not notable. No Account 00:27, 12 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, per Wikipedia:Schools/Arguments#Delete. Of course, this one is headed to no consensus land anyway, as with all of the minor school VFDs. - A Man In Black (Talk | Contribs) 07:30, 14 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep real place --malathion ^talk 07:03, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, verifiable != encyclopaedic Proto t c 09:49, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

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.