Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Selma Middle 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 of the debate was no consensus, defaulting to keep. If anyone objects, revert me and re-open the discussion. —RaD Man (talk) 06:46, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Selma Middle School

NN, D. ComCat 03:51, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Keep article on important subject. --rob 05:41, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, I tend to find schools notable and even though the links are dead for the bulk of that article some of the information I could find here. gren グレン 05:54, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per Wikipedia:Schools/Arguments#Keep. It is odd how some of the more eye catching headlines cited in this article still garner over 1500 hits on Google yet every single last one of them, blog mirrors excepted, turn up dead. In many cases even the Google cache is expired and archive.org didn't get a chance to mirror them. This is an example of how Wikipedia can provide interesting information long after the media has moved on to the next news sensation. For the links which have not expired, what are the legalities of mirroring these on Wikisource before they too disappear? Silensor 06:25, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Forget about Wikisource, since we can assume the coypright holder won't approve. The stories can be listed in "References" without links, if it's a publication likely be archived in libraries, and you have sufficient details (publication, date, page, article title). I'll do that for older stories I find in my local library's web site, which has the full contents on-line, but not accessible to non-members (so I can't post urls). --rob 07:04, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, informative about the behavior of school principals in Selma, Indiana. Kappa 07:44, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't know what's sillier, this reasoning or the fact that I've ended up agreeing with it. - A Man In Black (conspire | past ops) 08:49, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep - There's an assertion of notability here. - A Man In Black (conspire | past ops) 08:49, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. I usually lean towards inclusion when it comes to school, but this article gives me a feeling (more like smacks it in my face) that it was only created to insult the school's principal. — JIP | Talk 08:54, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
No vote, but if the only notable thing about this school is the incident with the principal, maybe we should have an article on the principal or the incident, instead of the school. flowersofnight 13:18, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep What a waste of our time. Why nominate schools? Hipocrite - «Talk» 15:24, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Wikipedia:Schools/Arguments#Keep. Because of the whole principal thing, we may have to keep an eye on it so it doesn't violate NPOV, but hey, we don't kick out abortion on that reasoning either, because that reasoning isn't valid. --Jacquelyn Marie 16:17, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Factual, verifiable and neutral. Please stop AFD SPAM. Trollderella 16:40, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
keep please the article looks neutral to me it is based on facts not opinions Yuckfoo 17:11, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for all the usual reasons. Additionally, the principal is a fox.--Nicodemus75 18:37, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete nn school --JAranda | watz sup 20:49, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete not inherently notable blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Lord Bob 21:44, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Article fails to establish notability. --Carnildo 22:39, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The entire sum of information presented about this school is only half the length of the description of the "short shorts" incident, demonstrating either how non-notable this school is, or how unmotivated the author was to provide more than a bare-bones stub, or both. Denni ☯ 01:59, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and stop nominating schools until there is consensus on them --Ryan Delaney ^talk 03:34, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep See my argument at this page. Xoloz 03:38, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
K, N. Christopher Parham (talk) 03:40, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. notable my arse. Dunc|☺ 10:18, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete nn school. Dottore So 13:41, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, notable 'event' took place at school. Evil Eye 16:17, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, no notable events or people associtated with this building.Gateman1997 17:39, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Nomination does not comply with Wikipedia deletion criteria.--Centauri 02:56, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This topic is nonethless, somewhat noteworthy my its prominence.Voice of All ^{@|Esperanza|E M} 02:57, 22 October 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.