Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blake Elementary 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 no consensus. to delete. Redirecting doesn't require an AfD, and there are issues in a bulk nomination. No reasom not to merge elementary and middle schools if they are not otherwise notable. Suggest use of talk pages for consensus as there's no consensus to delete. StarM 22:46, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blake Elementary School

Non-notable elementary school in Louisville, Kentucky. Fails to pass WP:N with reliable sources

Also nominating:

Grsz¹¹ 02:47, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect all to Jefferson County Public Schools. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 03:36, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all based on the inherent notability of schools, including the stubs. KhalfaniKhaldun 05:38, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I also think it's inappropriate to consider all of these articles in the same AfD discussion as some are stubs, some are not, and grouping them all together encourages editors not to do research into each article and make an individual judgment based on each article's individual merit, but to make one judgment on all at the same time. Khalfani Khaldun 05:38, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I understand what you are saying, but none return any results other than those that any other school would - those review websites, school databases, etc. Grsz¹¹ 05:40, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's why I argue their inherent notability. Also, I think it's worth pointing out that almost all of the sources for the Highland MS (which was removed from this AfD discussion presumably because of its numerous references) are from the local newspaper in Louisville, which only supports my inherent notability argument further. (See the schools section of the essay.) At least some of those schools have been covered significantly in that same newspaper in the past, to be sure, but since obtaining those articles online is not free (the free archive only lasts 60 days, I believe) it is impossible to judge each school's noteworthiness, unless someone is going to volunteer to purchase access to those archives. Khalfani Khaldun 05:59, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. —Cunard (talk) 06:25, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
High schools are notable, elementary and middle schools aren't. Redirect all per Blanchardb. JuJube (talk) 08:42, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Here's an elementary school that would survive any AFD. For every would-be rule there's an exception. --Movingday29 (talk) 00:44, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge all. This is the default treatment , and can be done without coming to AfD. Except for Blue Ribbon Schools, almost no other elementary or middle schools have succeeded in establishing individual articles. . Such should be the default way to deal with these, and it does not take AfD. DGG (talk) 09:35, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think I could prove a lot of these have been the subject of non-trivial coverage by multiple sources... Audubon Elementary School, for example, was destroyed by the Super Outbreak tornado and this was quite well documented at the time. Meyzeek and Noe Middle schools are probably the top two academically in the state, and have been for some time, and thus also have gotten a lot of coverage. I don't really know about the others for sure though. This is the problem with mass nominations. Keep Meyzeek, Noe and Weak keep on Audubon. Meyzeek gets 300+ results in a search of the Courier-Journal news stories back to just 1999, and the school's been around since well before then. --Movingday29 (talk) 14:01, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all as out of process nomination. Schools do not meet the criteria for bulk nomination. Each school has different sources and varying claims to notability and should be considered separately. Better, as DGG suggests, these should be dealt with through the proposed merges procedure. TerriersFan (talk) 04:03, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per WP:BEFORE; although, according to WP:BEFORE obvious redirects do not need to be brought to an already-crowded AFD. So, !voting redirect seems a little redundant. Neier (talk) 12:43, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect all per, what as far as I know, is established policy in these situations, unless individual notability can be proven. As an aside, can someone do something about this AFD's multiple appearences on the AFD page? Thanks. I would, but I have no idea how to do it.Umbralcorax (talk) 17:10, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all Multiple AfD doesn't allow for conversations in depth about the notability of each article. Nobody should be guilty by association (or deleted by association). My suggestion is to relist individually, so a proper discussion can begin. --J.Mundo (talk) 19:44, 21 February 2009 (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.