Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trinity High School (Washington, Pennsylvania)

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 keep.--Fuhghettaboutit 13:42, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Trinity High School (Washington, Pennsylvania)

No assertion of notability. Oli Filth 23:04, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, incorporates school building associated with former U.S. President. Per WP:OUTCOMES high schools are generally kept. --Dhartung | Talk 23:32, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Ah yes, in dealing with the recent vandalism, I didn't notice that point about the president. Oli Filth 23:38, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep At a first glance, its unique architecture, longevity, and usage by President Grant grants it significant notability.--Kylohk 00:51, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep High Schools ok w/o notability, middle or elementary need more notability. Pharmboy 01:40, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per President Grant. The infobox makes the article look like a phone book entry, though. --Idont Havaname (Talk) 02:24, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletions. —TerriersFan 04:30, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep History of the school's core building and its historic connections are supported with reliable and verifiable material to satisfy the Wikipedia:Notability guideline. Alansohn 05:13, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Has a notable alumnus and is sourced. T Rex | talk 05:43, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Note that Grant was a frequent visitor, not an alumnus. Alansohn 06:20, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep notable high school with historical structure. -- DS1953 ^talk 05:52, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep because high schools are inherently notable as I argue here although some ~~jerk~~ closing administrator utterly attentive to the fine points of Wikipedia policy and carefully protective of administrator powers will likely ignore my comments. Noroton 12:31, 1 August 2007 (UTC) (edited with due regard for the tender sensitivities of our saintly administrators Noroton 13:05, 1 August 2007 (UTC))[reply]

In fact, with near unanimous keeps, it looks like consensus is for deletion, following the ~~screwed up~~ finely tuned philosophies of some closing admins. Noroton 12:34, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is that comment really appropriate, Noroton? Leebo ^T/C 12:41, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More than appropriate. Verging on necessary.Noroton 12:42, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Combative comments are almost never appropriate, let alone necessary, in a community such as Wikipedia. It sounds like you're trying to start a conflict. Leebo ^T/C 12:58, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On further reflection, administrators are perfect and fully deserving of the high regard they have for themselves personally and of the protectiveness they extend to other administrators. How foolish of me. Actually, I for one welcome our new administrator overlords. Noroton 13:05, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this straw man requires a reply. Leebo ^T/C 13:11, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - the building is listed on the National Register of Historic Places, and was designed by the notable architectural firm of McKim, Mead, and White. (Or maybe they designed an addition -- the date of 1857 looks too early for McKim, Mead, and White's era.) --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 18:14, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep' - notable school with clear historical significance. Noroton's adolescent attacks should be simply ignored. Eusebeus 20:34, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The article has been vastly improved in the last day or so, with plenty of sources to establish that it's a notable school. Leebo ^T/C 20:41, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - important, historic school. TerriersFan 23:41, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per almost all of the above, that while not all high schools are per se notable, this one is a National Landmark with ties to a past US President. Don't feed the trolls trying to make a point. Bearian 19:07, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find a source to support the National Landmark claim. DeeKenn 19:59, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My bad. I found it. DeeKenn 19:59, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Trinity's historical past is indeed notable. As noted above, it is a registered National Landmark for its Italianate architecture alone.DeeKenn 19:58, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - First of all the this high school is not on the National Register; Trinity Hall is, one is not equal to the other. Second, just because the high school years are the stuff of nostalgia does not mean that every high school in the US is notable. To be notable there must be something worthy or distinguished about the topic; high schools in general do not meet that critieria. --Storm Rider ^(talk) 08:37, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't recall anyone saying anything like "because high school years are the stuff of nostalgia, all high schools are notable." Can you clarify whose argument you are rebutting? Leebo ^T/C 13:22, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

just to clarify, schools occupying historic buildings have been considered notable on that basis many times.DGG (talk) 03:06, 4 August 2007 (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.