Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/JJ Daniell 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 Cobb County School District. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 15:24, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

JJ Daniell Middle School

JJ Daniell Middle School (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

• Delete. Seems like an ordinary middle school. Performance slightly above average on Iowa tests, but nothing to recommend it for notability. Material is cited but only two are from non-local sources (Atlanta-Constitution) and those were about slightly above average Iowa performance. Student7 (talk) 14:37, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Georgia (U.S. state)-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:28, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:30, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

• Delete Or redirect to local school district as per usual. Nwlaw63 (talk) 20:39, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Delete When I skim over this article, it reads as if it were an advertisement or promotion of this school if you look at it. Redirect to school district Cobb County School District as Nwlaw63 said would be a wise consensus. ---Michaelzeng7 (talk - contribs) 22:24, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
• Delete Refs in article do not satisfy WP:ORG, which does not require a redirect for non-notable subjects. Edison (talk) 02:49, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

I think you meant redirect, not delete, as the summary in bold.. DGG ( talk ) 04:09, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Actually, I read the text of his comment as being consistent with his intention not being to !vote redirect. I'm not sure how you read it otherwise.--Epeefleche (talk) 05:03, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

• Redirect as usual. I think Nwlaw's and Michaelzeng's comments above were redirect, not delete, also. No argument against a redirect given, probably because there isn't really any. Edison's statement that we don't require a redirect is no reason why we shouldn't have one. DGG ( talk ) 04:09, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
• Comment. Would prefer deletion to redirect because school is not notable and would encourage "redirect" additions for no good reason. IMO. Student7 (talk) 20:10, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
• Redirect per WP:Articles_for_deletion/Common_outcomes#Education, "Schools that don't meet the standard typically get merged or redirected to the school district that operates them (North America) or the lowest level locality (elsewhere) rather than being completely removed from the encyclopedia.", and WP:Schools/compromise, "In general, even when a merger is non-optimal, it is preferable to make redirects out of small stubs and not delete the history, rather than to delete the articles." - Dravecky (talk) 06:36, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

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.