This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I'm pretty sure that this article, as it currently stands, does not meet the notability criteria - as it doesn't have third-party Reliable Sources saying why the school itself (rather than some of its graduates) are of note. I've left a message on the creator's talkpage about this as they've done a lot of work on this over a couple of iterations in collaboration with other editors. Please don't "speedy delete" right away, let's give it a couple of days to see if the author - who's clearly available and willing to receive feedback - can resurrect it. Witty lama 03:58, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
It is true that notability guidelines doesn't say that you have to prove "why" the subject is notable, but given that so many of the sources that are being used to justify the notability here are so very "tenuous" (for wont of a better word), the article remains very thinly justified IMHO. Here's an analysis of the first 25 footnotes in the article as it stands currently:
So... It's taken to the 25th footnote to get to the first thing which could be used to potentially argue that Y&T "has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" (as per WP:GNG). So you see why I'm skeptical about this article... on first appearances it looks like it has lots of references, but when you dig a little there's very little substance to justify Notability, at least at present. I wish to reiterate that I'm not trying to denigrate the good work or social value of this school - nor of the good-faith contributions made by the Wikipedian who has created and nurtured this article. I hope I'm not coming across as hostile but rather I'm hoping to see this article improved.
[I should add as a side-note that there's been some conversation about the notability of this article going on over at the talkpage of the primary editor here.] -- Witty lama 15:58, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi Wittylama, Thank you so much for the work you've done to tighten up the article!!! I will continue to work on it to improve it and add relible sources where needed. Once again a BIG THANK YOU!!!!!!! Warmest regards, Andreea. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andreea Teia ( talk • contribs) 20:03, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I'm pretty sure that this article, as it currently stands, does not meet the notability criteria - as it doesn't have third-party Reliable Sources saying why the school itself (rather than some of its graduates) are of note. I've left a message on the creator's talkpage about this as they've done a lot of work on this over a couple of iterations in collaboration with other editors. Please don't "speedy delete" right away, let's give it a couple of days to see if the author - who's clearly available and willing to receive feedback - can resurrect it. Witty lama 03:58, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
It is true that notability guidelines doesn't say that you have to prove "why" the subject is notable, but given that so many of the sources that are being used to justify the notability here are so very "tenuous" (for wont of a better word), the article remains very thinly justified IMHO. Here's an analysis of the first 25 footnotes in the article as it stands currently:
So... It's taken to the 25th footnote to get to the first thing which could be used to potentially argue that Y&T "has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" (as per WP:GNG). So you see why I'm skeptical about this article... on first appearances it looks like it has lots of references, but when you dig a little there's very little substance to justify Notability, at least at present. I wish to reiterate that I'm not trying to denigrate the good work or social value of this school - nor of the good-faith contributions made by the Wikipedian who has created and nurtured this article. I hope I'm not coming across as hostile but rather I'm hoping to see this article improved.
[I should add as a side-note that there's been some conversation about the notability of this article going on over at the talkpage of the primary editor here.] -- Witty lama 15:58, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi Wittylama, Thank you so much for the work you've done to tighten up the article!!! I will continue to work on it to improve it and add relible sources where needed. Once again a BIG THANK YOU!!!!!!! Warmest regards, Andreea. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andreea Teia ( talk • contribs) 20:03, 27 March 2015 (UTC)