Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harry B. Flood 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 was redirect to Stratford, Connecticut#Public_education. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:14, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Harry B. Flood Middle School

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

My attempts at redirecting to a more appropriate article were reverted, and discussion with the original poster were not productive. I tried to explain that standards for schools below the high school level is that they must meet notability criteria, or they would be redirected. He refused to listen and made personal attacks against me. I told him I'd give him until today to find something notable about the school, and I see nothing there that indicates notability. I would prefer a redirect, but as that won't happen unless it's decided by an AfD, we have to go here. Everard Proudfoot (talk) 18:27, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Zealotry is also unproductive. I've worked to improve this (NEW) article, but it's not the only thing I'm working on. I'll also point out that while high schools are automatically notable, there is nothing anywhere to say that Junior Highs/Middle Schools are automatically UNnotable. Wikipedia:Schools/Arguments bears this out particularly in Keep points 3c, 5, 6, 8, 9 & 10.

Also, I made no personal attack. I only commented that there are too many "Deletion Nazis" on Wikipedia (in my talk, here): User talk:Markvs88. If User:Everard Proudfoot considers himself a "Deletion Nazi" it's not my problem. He also fails to note his riposte re: my editing skills. Had User:Everard Proudfoot been reasonable (as I asked him to be) and put a normal deletion tag so the thing could have been discussed, there would not have been any need for this AfD. Note that the article is cited, and a lot better than most other school articles on Wikipedia. Markvs88 (talk) 18:43, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Connecticut-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:54, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:54, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Stratford, Connecticut#Public_education In the past middle schools have without exception been redirected to their parent school district/city article, and this is no exception. Same decision should be made for David Wooster Middle School, although also acceptable is a completely new article for the Stratford Public Schools which folds in content from both of these articles and other SPS articles I see in the Stratford category. Nate • (chatter) 19:23, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"without exception" is incorrect. See, e.g., Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Henry Munro Middle School. Abby Kelleyite (talk) 19:49, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

- I apologize; I meant to phrase it as 'a few select exceptions' rather than 'without exception'. Nate • (chatter) 01:25, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect, protect if necessary. Longstanding precedent to redirect articles on schools under high school level. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 19:28, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Stratford, Connecticut#Public_education. Merge in some additional information if so desired. Schools below the level of High School need to have particular notability for inclusion. Carrite (talk) 20:48, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/redirect to Stratford, Connecticut#Public_education as a sensible and normal course of action. TerriersFan (talk) 21:27, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per school standards currently used on wikipedia. Unless this school has received significant media coverage, it is not notable. Elementary and middle schools are not inherently notable. HeartSWild (talk) 10:42, 2 September 2010 (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.