Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gracey (Leontine) Elementary School

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 (no consensus). I came to 16 deletes and 12 keeps. Sjakkalle (Check!) 07:59, 30 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Gracey (Leontine) Elementary School

Badly formatted substub on a non-encylopaedic topic. Primary school with no assertion of notability, inherent or otherwise. Delete. Proto t c 13:23, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Why would an article about a school assert it's inherent notability?--Nicodemus75 11:00, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you feel the burning need to query everyone whose opinion differs from your own? Many people believe schools are inherently notable, and vote 'keep', irrespective of the quality of the article, the potential for improvement, or the possibility of that improvement. Coversely, many people (I am one of them) believe a school is four walls and a roof, actually take note of WP:NOT, which suggests a school (particularly a ratty little stub) not encyclopaedic in itself. Proto t c 12:24, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Which part of WP:NOT says that? Kappa 00:51, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Parts, actually. Mainly, in this case, Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. The fact that some kids get free lunch is hardly an encyclopaedic fact. Nor is that for three weeks, some classes were held in a nearby fairground. And without those two 'facts', the article is one sentence and three external links, which leads to Wikipedia is not a directory. And Wikipedia is not Everything2. Proto t c 11:37, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information does not directly relate to this stub. It does not specify anything relating to this article. Secondly, "Wikipedia is not a directory" isn't expressly in WP:NOT. Should there not be some reason for why this article should be deleted? There are numerous articles about grade schools specifically (i.e. Kathy Caraway Elementary School, Freetown Elementary School, Massachusetts, and many many more), why should this one be discriminated fromt he rest? Define what makes Wikipedia a directory and what makes it an encyclopedia. This decision seems pretty arbitrary considering the number of schools listed on Wikipedia with no inherent notability whatsoever. This article is, granted, liable for deletion as it is only a stub, but this is the only reason thus far. Steven Kippel 14:45, 26 September 2005 (PST)

Being a stub is not actually a criterion for deletion, unless the deletionists have held yet another poll to make it one and I missed it. Grace Note 01:17, 28 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Jwissick 13:56, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete cruft. Dunc|☺ 16:33, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
keep please this subject is encyclopedic based on the definition of the word so why should we erase this Yuckfoo 18:56, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete doesn't even provide the info most other school articles include. And I do not agree with Yuckfoo. Schools are often named after famous people, but that doesn't have anything with the school as an institution itself. I don't particularly like school stubs, but if this is to be kept it should at the very least include enrollment info, ethicity of students, and any historically important aspects like the other schools we've got. As it stands now it doesn't even provide the most basic of information a good "definition" would have. - Mgm|^(talk) 21:11, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, this is a verifiable, public, institution, that actually exists.... but it's not encyclopedic.Gateman1997 21:36, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Article fails to establish notability, and almost fails to establish existance. --Carnildo 23:35, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I am in the process of expanding this article. Bahn Mi 01:06, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Wikipedia:Schools/Arguments#Keep and allow for continued improvement. Kappa 01:16, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The fact that 87% of students have free or reduced lunch seems a particularly significant fact that deserves mention in a comprehensive encyclopedia. Kappa 01:19, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. per m:eventualism, please accept it. --Vsion 02:30, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Yet another verifiable permanent public institution to keep. --Gene_poole 03:24, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the usual reasons. Constant nominations for school articles discourages any serious work at improving articles, since nobody wants to invest serious time, knowing it will probably be wasted. This article has *not* been made instead of another more worthy article. It has been made in *addition* to other articles. This AFD nomination has been *instead* of making more worthwhile productive contributions to wikipedia. --rob 04:15, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- At the same time, constant, uncritical "keep" votes on school articles discourages people from nominating them for deletion, even when they are unverifiable hoaxes. --Carnildo 04:49, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  - Well actually I did vote against the last unverifiable school here. Take a look at who created that article, and you'll see it's not the "blanket keepers" who create unverified school articles. Now, for this school, I see different mentions of it in different places like this article, which mentions a former principal, who died in a car accident. It specifically named the school and the district. If this is a hoax, it's well done, involving multiple web sites, and a false death report. --rob 05:28, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  - It would be a good thing if people were discouraged from nominating verifiable public institutions for deletion. Grace Note 07:06, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Vegaswikian 05:47, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. All verifiable public institutions are encyclopaedic. Why not spend your time creating rather than wasting yours and ours trying to destroy? Grace Note 07:06, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and go ride a bike. —RaD Man (talk) 07:27, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I would like all those that vote keep on schools so they can get expanded to take a break from creating stubs and actually do some expansion of the schools that survived AFD. I would also like to see less of an US bias. Voting keep and expand and subsequently leave it lying around doesn't improve my trust that someone will ever expand them past stub level. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:45, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I probably should take the phrase, "those that vote keep on schools" to be a personal attack. Why make the assumption that it is "those that vote keep on schools" who are responsible for stub creation? Lately, "those who vote delete on schools" have been creating stub articles, including hoax schools to try to make a point. As to an article "lying" [sic] around - give articles some time to grow, just because I believe a school article should be kept for later expansion, doesn't mean I have time to edit and change it right now. The call for immediate re-write is counter-productive.--Nicodemus75 11:00, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, time doesn't allow it. Too busy voting to keep them to have the time to fix them. Perhaps you'll join me in working on school articles instead of trying to rid us of them? Grace Note 00:29, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Maybe I'll expand this article some time next year.--Nicodemus75 11:00, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete crap. Dunc|☺ 12:18, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Fix crap. Grace Note 00:29, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Many are trying to, by deleting it. Proto t c 11:33, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I hope the garage doesn't take the same approach to my car tomorrow! Grace Note 11:37, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Yellow Pages. Pilatus 12:20, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and stop with the school nominations this is getting out of hand. --Aranda56 22:34, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete If the single most noteworthy point is that 75% of its students qualify for a free lunch program, then what about this school makes it worth including here? Denni ☯ 02:34, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
It's a school. The single most noteworthy point about it is that it's a school. Glad I could clear that up for you.Grace Note 01:21, 28 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, notable. Christopher Parham (talk) 23:39, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Neutrality^talk 01:43, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. *drew 08:04, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep schools (see Wikipedia:Schools/Arguments#Keep). ··gracefool |☺ 07:28, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete --redstucco 09:23, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I note that you are the fourth or fifth person to add nothing to this discussion except to say "delete". Do you really think it's constructive to do that? I'm not saying you shouldn't do it. I'm just wondering whether you actually do think you're contributing to the encyclopaedia by doing it. Grace Note 01:21, 28 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep A superior stub, well up to encyclopedic standards. --Tony Sidaway ^Talk 17:21, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Wikipedia:Schools/Arguments#Keep. Well written, formatted and referenced stub. We should be encouraging this type of participation. Un focused 21:50, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all public schools. Gazpacho 23:59, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
And keep all private ones? At least you're not pretending to have a neutral point of view ;-) Grace Note 01:21, 28 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Just another little known school. Dudtz 9/29/05 7:10

Every encyclopedia in the world is full of little known bits of information, but that doesn't make it more or less equal as far as encyclopedic information is concerned. I thought encyclopedias were meant to learn about things, not to read about what everyone already knows about. By the way, nobody cares. glocks out

Update

A major update on this article was just accomplished minutes ago. Review the article and resubmit your votes. --glocks out 00:30, 27 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nice expansion glocks, definitely a solid article now, thanks for proving it can be done. Kappa 01:47, 28 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Very nice indeed. Lots of items of interest there now, including why Leontine Gracey has a school named after her. Thank you very much. Un focused 03:39, 28 September 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.