Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cramlington Community High School

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was no concensus. - Mailer Diablo 11:59, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Cramlington Community High School[edit]

  • delete. notability. Mikkalai 00:41, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep I think all Wikipedia community members need to rethink the policy of notability and refrain from frivolous application. In the matter of high schools there are institutions of public record, and therefore pass the notability test. Notability should only be used in conjunction with an objection over verifiability, or not at all. Sniffandgrowl
  • Delete. This was apparently never listed on vfd, so I'm putting it on today's page. While I don't usually vote on these foundlings, this is a textbook vanity page. —Korath (Talk) 00:57, Apr 2, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Agree totally with Sniffandgrowl.--Centauri 01:41, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. From looking at this, and comparing it to the BEEFSTEW checklist, I think it only gets 2 points (A,B). Zscout370 02:31, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep This article is both verifiable,notable and of public record. Let's allow a process of organic growth. Klonimus 02:33, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Nothing encyclopedic here. Gamaliel 02:34, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Achieving Beacon School status as an example to other schools in the UK makes it notable in my opinion. Capitalistroadster 02:42, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, agreeing with Sniffandgrowl. Kappa 02:48, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Does not pass the BEEFSTEW test. Zzyzx11 03:12, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • On second thought, after reading about the Beacon schools programme, that status is notable enough to supersede the BEEFSTEW test. KEEP. Zzyzx11 03:59, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete What we NEED to do is try again to find a consensus. In the meantime, high schools aren't notable simply because they exist, just like weathermen aren't notable just because they're on tv. --InShaneee 06:51, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • I'm on local radio and I probably don't exist.  :^P Existential (and probably ecclesiastical) questions aside, this seems to be a fairly functional stub that establishes at least a degree of notability. I'm unfamilar with the Beacon School status, but I'm going to trust Capitalistroadster on this and vote to keep. - Lucky 6.9 08:41, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. School vanity, not notable. Jonathunder 08:42, 2005 Apr 2 (UTC)
  • Delete. High schools are inherently nonencyclopedic. --Angr/(comhrá) 09:06, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Municipal wastewater treatment plants and landfills are in the public record. Should we include all of them? Remember that virtually all high schools are notable only for people who attended them. IMO this qualifies them as vanity pages. Elementary schools are next! --Smithfarm
    • High schools are notable not only to people who attended them, but to a substantial number of Vfd voters. I think this particular school is also notable for anyone who's interested in how they get above-average exam results from an average mixed-ability intake, possibly something to do with their "accelerated learning" program, which appears to be one of the most notable of its type in England [1]. Kappa 10:22, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • Municipal wastewater treatment plants and landfills are in the public record and definatly notable. All major public works are an expression of our civilization and thus worthy of being in a truely great enecyclopedia Klonimus 18:08, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
      • The property boundary between my garden and the public footpath next to it is in the public record, and is an expression of civilization (especially when it is gaily adorned with wind-blown junk food wrappers). Moreover, the overwhelming majority of schools are not major public works. Uncle G 17:49, 2005 Apr 4 (UTC)
  • Keep per the usual. - SimonP 18:22, Apr 2, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Does pass the Renner, South Dakota test (it's a real place) Ejrrjs | What? 00:45, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep --JuntungWu 10:40, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Neutralitytalk 02:49, Apr 4, 2005 (UTC)
  • keep' Yuckfoo 02:50, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete secondary schools are not notable. Grue 07:19, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge into Cramlington and delete - Skysmith 07:49, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Has potential to become encyclopedic. --Andylkl (talk) 08:28, Apr 4, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, has no potential to become encyclopedic. Radiant!Radiant_* 12:00, Apr 4, 2005 (UTC)
  • User:Dr Zen/keepschools —RaD Man (talk) 00:32, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. No potential to become encyclopedic. Jayjg (talk) 01:55, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep and expand.--BaronLarf 02:02, Apr 5, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep — Instantnood 07:03, Apr 5, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep - As with all schools, I vote to keep. --Irishpunktom\talk 11:24, Apr 5, 2005 (UTC)
  • very, very,very, very weak keep. The fact that this is an award-winning school gives it just enough notability to be worth recording. -- Dcfleck 01:38, 2005 Apr 7 (UTC)
  • Keep, needs expansion. -- Lochaber 16:36, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Wikipedia is not paper. As long as Granbull exists, so should this. brian0918™ 02:20, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Non-notable. Noisy | Talk 10:34, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Cramlington_Community_High_School&oldid=1137741390"