On 1/26/07, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
Well, the good thing is that both those of us who would like to get rid of many of these articles and those of us who would like to keep them, agree that AfD isn't working :-)
Mark
On 26/01/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 26/01/07, Mark Wagner carnildo@gmail.com wrote:
On 1/26/07, J.L.W.S. The Special One hildanknight@gmail.com wrote:
What, if any, are the notability criteria for schools?
The word "school" appears somewhere in the article. Seriously. There was a VfD a couple years back that garnered a large number of "keep, schools are inherently notable" votes, even though the article was a hoax and the school in question did not actually exist. Another VfD from around that time resulted in a "keep" for the same reasons, when article was actually a vanity piece about a one-person business that happened to have "school" as part of its name.
Yeah. It's an unfortunate reaction to various concerted efforts to purge the school articles. This is part of why the structure of en:wp AFD is demonstrably problematic.
AFD illustrates a number of things, one of which is that there's no consensus on notability on a number of topics.
I detest having to follow AFD closely to see if someone's trying to try another "establish a new consensus by deleting a bunch of things" runs. I often forget to for a week and then find that something horrible happened while my attention was elsewhere.