Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fairfield Area School District

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 speedy keep as no valid rationale for deletion has been given, and the outcome is fairly evident at this point. Shereth 14:30, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fairfield Area School District[edit]

this article should be deleted because the school district this article does not want people knowing about its policies in places other then its own website Evilmaster23 (talk) 02:30, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Wikipedia isn't censored for anyone's benefit, not even the school's. The school district can contact OTRS if they want to contest the material, but an AfD nom on that premise is fatally flawed. -Jeremy ^{(v^_^v Tear him for his bad verses!)} 03:59, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is not a valid reason for deletion. We will write about notable things, whether or not they want to be written about. If the board does not want to be written about, they can contact info-en-q@wikimedia.org, though they will probably be told that unless there is blatant libel or copyright violation, the article will remain intact. Firestorm ^Talk 04:03, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The nominator is the article's creator. I first noticed this mentioned at WT:AFD and wondered if the article would qualify for speedy deletion under CSD G7. However, now since there are 2 "keep" !votes, that ship has sailed. However, I see no problem with stubbing the article down. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 04:07, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There's no reason to stub it down, just because the school district doesn't like it (which we haven't even verified through OTRS or anything). It does need to be trimmed down to reduce unencyclopaedic content, but no need to stub it. It is no different from any other school district article. Firestorm ^Talk 04:24, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep School districts are inherently notable per longstanding consensus. Issues regarding policies the district "does not want people knowing about" should be addressed based on sourcing; Keep if sourced, delete controversial issues if unsourced, without need for deletion of the entire article. Alansohn (talk) 04:49, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: In this edit, the article was aggressively rewritten for tone and to remove clearly unencyclopedic content and some universal content (for example, essentially all high schools have sports and music programs - those that don't deserve mention). While I personally believe that a two-school district should be below Wikipedia's inclusion standards, that is not the current consensus. Rossami (talk) 06:15, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It needs to be sourced and accurate, but school districts are notable.--Cube lurker (talk) 17:27, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep - school districts, as government organisations, have long been accepted as notable. However, this should be speedy kept since no valid deletion grounds have been specified. It is not uncommon for schools/boards to request deletion of their pages and such requests are invariably rejected. TerriersFan (talk) 17:30, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. —TerriersFan (talk) 17:35, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep The purpose of an encyclopedia is to reveal information, not to conceal it. KevinOKeeffe (talk) 18:16, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think that certain people are misreading the nomination. The basis of the nomination is that the school district would rather have its own authoritative website, not that there are policies that the school district "does not want people knowing about." The verbal skills of the nominator/article creator may be the core of this controversy. Racepacket (talk) 19:12, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Wikipedia isn't censored and we are not here to be either an alternate website for a district nor as cheerleader for it. The district has the right to have its website, and so do we. School districts are generally notable, except for very small or new ones. Bearian (talk) 23:26, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep Wikipedia isn't censored not even for School Districts and many other things,and we don't hide information if we are an encyclopedia, and we are an encyclopedia!!!!4DJONG talk
Speedy keep no valid assertion with basis in policy has been made to suggest that deletion is appropriate. Public agencies do not normally have a policy of secrecy and/or suppression of media coverage, and Wikipedia does not have any obligation to honor any such alleged policy. Any legal complaint of inappropriate content or violation of copyright or whatnot could certainly be dealt with without deleting the article. Jerry delusional ¤ kangaroo 02:01, 29 July 2009 (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.