Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Schools

Articles about schools are often the subject of contentious Articles for Deletion (AfD) disputes. I would like to suggest that we develop a consensus that can become a guideline.

Here are my own thoughts:

1. All schools of higher education (those awarding degrees, or of a comparable level in the educational systems of the countries in which they are located) are inherently notable and are reasonable subjects of articles. Stubs about schools of higher education should be retained for expansion. The usual rules on verifiability apply.
2. Well-written articles of at least 150 words (more than stub length) on secondary schools that pass the test of verifiability should not be deleted. Notability or importance should not be essential to retention of articles on secondary schools. Wikipedia is not paper and does not have size limitations.
3. Stubs on secondary schools should be candidates for speedy deletion unless they indicate why the school is notable. (In other words, if you think that an article should be written about a secondary school, either write it, or explain why it should be written.)
4. Articles on elementary schools should only be retained if the school is notable, typically for having received awards for quality, or being the leading example of an educational philosophy, or having been the subject of journalistic articles.
5. Stubs on elementary schools should be candidates for speedy deletion unless they indicate why the school is notable.

Those are my suggestions. Comments are welcome. Robert McClenon 15:56, 1 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This endeavor has been attempted before. See: Wikipedia:Schools. — Phil Welch 19:58, 1 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The above seems reasonable to me, and fairly balances the interests of Wikipedia with the interests of those who wish to use it as a reference. I would make one point, however, that any accredited college or university (whatever they are called in their native country) would and should fit into category 1, and that there must not be any discrimination based on the commercial, noncommercial, academic, vocational, public, or private nature of that institution, as long as it is accedited by a recognized regional or national accrediting body. -- BBlackmoor ^(talk) 18:09, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am tempted to not even bother commenting here, but since it might get some attention here goes:

1. This is an inherently anaemic attempt to resolve the problem. Concensus will clearly not be reached by RfC if Wikipedia:Schools has already failed (and miserably so).
2. Reject Robert McClenon's points 3, 4 and 5 with extreme prejudice. These points IMO are unworkable in the extreme (especially point 3 to speedy delete stubs) as they fly in the face of all the concensus established over the past 10 months at VfD/AfD to not delete school stubs, elementary schools, etc. Any attempt to hardwire notability as a valid criterion for school deletion will be violently opposed by a significant plurality of those interested in school articles. Not because they necessarily disagree, but because the threshold for what is and what is not notable in a school is so demonstrably subjective as the demands of deletionists with respect to notability are completely baffling to many of us who have tried to demonstrate the notability of schools.
3. All schools (of any level) that can be verified have a place on WP. Stubs and poorly written articles should be referred to a Project for clean-up instead of AfD.
4. Some administrative intervention is required to stop the campaigning to delete school articles. AfD is not a tool to force the cleanup of poorly written articles, nor as a tool to wage a war against school articles, nor as a method of making POINTS.

--Nicodemus75 18:23, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This is a point-by-point response to Robert McClenon's proposal:

1. (Higher education) I broadly agree with Robert. We may need to work something out about non-accredited institutions, but certainly institutions which grant accredited or widely-accepted degress are notable.
2. (Well-written articles on secondary schools) Again I broadly agree. An article that says something interesting about a high school should be kept.
3. (Stubs on secondary schools) I disagree with Robert. Stubs on secondary schools should not be speedily deleted. They should be merged into articles or lists on school districts or similar aggregates. For instance, if nothing interesting is said about Hayfield Secondary School in Fairfax County, Virginia, then it should be merged into Fairfax County Public Schools.
4. (Articles on elementary schools) I again agree; there are certainly criteria, such as the ones Robert gives, by which elementary schools can be worthy of their own encyclopedia articles.
5. (Stubs on elementary schools) I again disagree with Robert. Stubs on elementary schools should be merged to articles or lists on school districts or similar aggregates.

In short:

• Stubs or articles on higher education institutions -- keep.
• Articles saying something notable about an elementary or secondary school -- keep.
• Stubs about elementary or secondary schools -- merge.

How's that sound? --FOo 03:25, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

1. (Higher education) I agree, and this is largely undisputed. All universities, colleges, graduate schools, and comparable institutions deserve an article, as long as they are not degree mills. It's common practice to list in somebody's article where they earned their bachelor's, master's, PhD, MD, JD, etc.
2. (Secondary schools) I am a huge believer in notability as a requirement for the inclusion of an article. However, with high schools I tend not to apply this so swiftly. Regarding the notability of schools, I ask myself, "Does this school give most people the last dose of school-based education that they get before entering the real world?" This helps me determine, "Ok, if there are notable alumni here, will their articles list that they went to this school?" That is to say, their articles probably would list a secondary school (some actors, basketball players, and the like didn't attend a university, so a secondary school is the highest school they attended), but I doubt that it would list a primary school. If they went to your primary school, that's largely coincidental. Likewise for kindergartens, preschools, day care centers, etc. However, since many people count their high school as the place where they received their highest education, I would say keep the high schools after determining that their existence is verifiable.
3. (Speedy deletion of secondary school stubs) I disagree. See WP:CSD A1 for why: "Limited content is not in itself a reason to delete if there is enough context to allow expansion." I support merging them into articles on their school districts, per Foo.
4. (Elementary schools) Include them iff they are the subject of a national news story (or a news story in their country and surrounding countries, if their own country is not large in land area), i.e. if people outside their own city/county have heard of the school. I liken writing articles on individual elementary schools to writing articles on local McDonald's restaurants. Give elementary school its own article, but there is no need for articles on each specific elementary school in glorious detail. (I'd also say that this is the case for middle schools as well, but not high schools.) If a famous kid attends an elementary school, they will most likely go on to attend a secondary school; and saying in somebody's article what elementary school they attended is rather ridiculous. Not many people, when looking for a job, put which elementary school they attended on their resume or job application; they will probably put their high school if they did not attend a college/university.
5. (Elementary school stubs) Agree, for the same reasons I listed for elementary schools. However, I would also support merging them, if consensus is reached for keeping all elementary schools in some form or fashion.

One additional comment: Much thanks to Robert for starting this RfC. We definitely do need a consensus on which schools to keep and on which content should be included in a school article. Otherwise, "keep all schools" leads to "keep all teachers" (some school articles essentially list all of their teachers' resumes), "oh, my teacher is notable; can I have an article??", "why are these students included here? Can I have an article??", until we turn into the Grand Myspace Encyclopedia. Thankfully, we were able to build a consensus on bands, webcomics, and the like; I hope that we can hammer out something similar regarding schools. (I also have a discussion of schools on my Wikiphilosophies subpage, and I'm working on expanding that.) --Idont Havaname 17:21, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]