Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gardendale 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.--Wizardman 02:52, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gardendale High School

There could not be a more inferior article for AFD, one sentence article proves non-notable cruft. Know pedia 04:15, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:V and WP:ORG. No sources, article just says the city the school is in and thus isn't even merge worthy. TJ Spyke 04:29, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I could support a merge into the city article. TJ Spyke 20:53, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep try to expand --Miamite 04:43, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep ~~or Merge~~ — Changed my vote to keep. The article is now improved greatly. Good work! ~~I think it either needs a lot of expansion, or just merge it as the single sentence it is into Gardendale, Alabama.~~ --RazorICE 05:53, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Do either of you have an actual reason to keep? There are zero reasons to keep the article right now since it fails several policies and guidelines, and there is nothing to merge. TJ Spyke 06:16, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The only reason I'd say keep is if it was expanded. Other than that, I said merge. --Razor ICE 06:26, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- No... If merging is the answer, merge into school districts. Districts and municipalities don't always share boundaries and are entirely different entities with different missions. ccwaters 19:59, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for lack of content ("Gardendale High School is in Gardendale, Alabama" is really empty). I'm almost tempted to call this an A3 speedy. Sjakkalle (Check!) 14:13, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep the expanded version. Sjakkalle (Check!) 05:58, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to the article about the city. A little research in the local newspaper's files and the local historical society could probably produce enough references about the history and importance of the school to make an adequate article, since high schools are important to their communities, and consolidation, mergers, the expense of their construction, controversies about policies, problems and achievements, athletic prowess, notable alumni are usually topics of news articles. If someone ever cares to do the work, perhaps a stand-alone article could be created in the future. Many high schools have been the subject of multiple stories in reliable publications with nontrivial content sufficient to satisfy WP:N, Edison 14:42, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:V utterly. Keep: Notability now quite well sourced. Good work. RGTraynor 16:15, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete. I'm familiar with the rationale stub articles but surely there should be something to read? BTLizard 16:57, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Much improved. BTLizard 08:32, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I added some references. It would have been helpful if the nominator had done a search on Google before nominating this article. --Eastmain 19:06, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did a search on Google before nominating this article. So Delete. --Know pedia 20:38, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FYI: the burden of proof is not on the nominator. ccwaters 20:49, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Unless there something extraordinarily notable about this school, its mention in it school district's (Jefferson County Board of Education) article is sufficient enough (as well as any other individual school). ccwaters 19:40, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge — It takes a couple of minutes to merge these small-town school articles, and it's a better and less cynical solution than yet another school deletion rehash. — RJH (talk) 19:53, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: re: Eastmain's new reference ... it's pretty close; a proposed merger written up in the city paper is a good ref. But this article is about one notable issue away at present. RGTraynor 20:16, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Another article where ample reliable and verifiable sources were available and added to establish a strong claim of notability. I strongly encourage those who voted based on the original "one sentence article" cited in the original nomination, and to look at the substantial changes made since the article was put up for AfD. Furthermore, any AfD nomination that uses the word "cruft" (or any form thereof) is worthy of retention in my book. Alansohn 22:41, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Much improved article now establishes notability easily. Davewild 15:49, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep All high schools are notable. Postlebury 20:45, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
keep this expanded article please it shows notability now and has sources too yuckfoo 01:07, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the above, and I disagree, some but not all of the burden does fall upon the nominator. It doesn't hurt to do a minimal amount of research before verifying whether or not an article should be improved rather than deleted. Burntsauce 20:00, 24 April 2007 (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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.