Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bishop Eustace Preparatory School
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 of the debate was keep (no consensus). Vote count, for those interested is 12d-8k. But has anyone considered merging this somewhere? The article looks really stubby. Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:12, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable schoolcruft. Apart from the table, the article's empty, so apparently even the author doesn't think it's all that notable. --Aurochs
- keep please the author probably thinks it is notable too or else they would not make the article Yuckfoo 23:15, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete please. nn. Dottore So 23:36, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Please come comment on the compromise proposed in WP:SCH. In the meantime, this isn't an article; it isn't even a stub. As Wikipedia is still not a directory, delete this. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 01:42, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Contains useful information, and the fact that it is presented in a table doesn't change that. CalJW 02:46, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Please join us at Wikipedia Talk:Schools and take part in setting future policy for school articles. Denni ☯ 05:43, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Wikipedia is not the yellow pages. Vegaswikian 06:24, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Wikipedia is not the yellow pages or the phone directory. - Andre Engels 09:22, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. The table on the right hand side is grey, not yellow. —RaD Man (talk) 09:57, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- And people wonder why deletionists continue to oppose identical school articles when the arguments are so heavily stacked against them ;-). Delete, Wikipedia is not the yellow pages or the grey pages or any other kind of listing of ordinary businesses or public services. --Last Malthusian 10:10, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Nn Catchpole 11:56, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per WP:NOT. Nandesuka 12:58, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep all schools. Hipocrite - «Talk» 13:47, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Could you please write an article about this, then? I don't think it's too high a standard to require some prose. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 13:54, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm too busy hitting refresh on AFD to expand on the school articles right now. I'll get back to you later. Hipocrite - «Talk» 13:55, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- I thought that's what Wikipedia:Watch/Schoolwatch was for. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 13:59, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm too busy hitting refresh on AFD to expand on the school articles right now. I'll get back to you later. Hipocrite - «Talk» 13:55, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Could you please write an article about this, then? I don't think it's too high a standard to require some prose. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 13:54, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep as per Wikipedia:Schools/Arguments#Keep. Wikipedia is not a lot of things, and this article is not a YP advert. Silensor 17:40, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- It's not a stub or an article either. - Mgm|(talk) 19:06, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: There are 52 faculty members serving 797 students, 8% of whom are of color.
- So if I understand things correctly, the students have 52 servants and 92% of the students are see-through because they don't have a color. And on top of all that, there's no date attached to that statement (which is very time-sensitive). Please fix if you want any changce of me voting to keep this thing. - Mgm|(talk) 19:06, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- {sofixit}. "Of color" is standard english. Hipocrite - «Talk» 19:35, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- I would if I knew which color they had. - Mgm|(talk) 08:44, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- "of color" is an anachronism—it's 1950's clueless bigotry IMHO BlankVerse 16:31, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- No, that's colored. Of color is current. Hipocrite - «Talk» 20:13, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually, many "gentlemen of colour" would disagree there. It's an outdated euphemism used in the name of political correctness by people who are too scared to say "black". Chris talk back 20:34, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- "People of color" is not an euphemism for black. It includes all individuals of non-european background. Please see [1], for one of many syle guides that discuss this. Further discussion on my talk page at your request. Hipocrite - «Talk» 21:02, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Isn't that rather missing the point that the statement is itself indicative of racial bias? I have absolutely no idea how many kids in my children's schools are white, brown, pink or green because as far as I can tell it makes no appreciable difference to their attainment or behaviour. - Just zis Guy, you know? [T]/[C] (W) AfD? 13:41, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- "People of color" is not an euphemism for black. It includes all individuals of non-european background. Please see [1], for one of many syle guides that discuss this. Further discussion on my talk page at your request. Hipocrite - «Talk» 21:02, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually, many "gentlemen of colour" would disagree there. It's an outdated euphemism used in the name of political correctness by people who are too scared to say "black". Chris talk back 20:34, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- No, that's colored. Of color is current. Hipocrite - «Talk» 20:13, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- "of color" is an anachronism—it's 1950's clueless bigotry IMHO BlankVerse 16:31, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- I would if I knew which color they had. - Mgm|(talk) 08:44, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- {sofixit}. "Of color" is standard english. Hipocrite - «Talk» 19:35, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- So if I understand things correctly, the students have 52 servants and 92% of the students are see-through because they don't have a color. And on top of all that, there's no date attached to that statement (which is very time-sensitive). Please fix if you want any changce of me voting to keep this thing. - Mgm|(talk) 19:06, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per wikipedia:Schools/Arguments#Keep. This article contains some of the knowledge we promise to every human being whether it's in the form of a table or prose, and AFD is not cleanup. Kappa 16:32, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Which knowledge would that be? I'm not seeing any of it. Chris talk back 19:18, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete useless. Grue 18:40, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete No indication that this article will ever contribute anything to the aggregate "sum of human knowledge". Also per WP:NOT, WP:NOR, WP:V, WP:RS, various bits of WP:DP and a little common sense. Chris talk back 19:26, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. per Wikipedia:Schools/Arguments#Keep --Vsion 22:29, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per Wikipedia:Schools/Arguments#Keep. -- DS1953 03:00, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- This article does convey information specific to this school including: (1) when the school was founded; (2) that it was founded by a particular Catholic order (as opposed to being a diocesan school); (3) that it is co-ed; and (4) its size. All of these facts vary significantly bewteen schools and can be useful to someone who wants to know.
- Maybe, but who wants to know? Remember, Wikipedia is not a tool for helping you choose a school for your child, nor is it a directory of schools. Chris talk back 14:12, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- This article does convey information specific to this school including: (1) when the school was founded; (2) that it was founded by a particular Catholic order (as opposed to being a diocesan school); (3) that it is co-ed; and (4) its size. All of these facts vary significantly bewteen schools and can be useful to someone who wants to know.
- delete no claim of notability Pete.Hurd 18:40, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- delete schoolcruft. — Dunc|☺ 23:09, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per AMiB Just zis Guy, you know? [T]/[C] (W) AfD? 13:43, 22 November 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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.