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. Despite the fact that the nominator has been blocked indefinite for abusing multiple accounts, the "keep" arguments make sense. The close as "keep" is not because of the sockpuppetry.
(non-admin closure) ─
The Aafī(talk)17:08, 14 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete Whatever the case is about the existence of promotional material or not, there clearly isn't the needed sourcing for this to pass
WP:NORG, because news stories about a schools regulating buses and cutting down on junk food just don't. I'm not seeing anything else that does either. So, based on that the article should be deleted. Unless someone can provide three good, non-trivial references. --
Adamant1 (
talk)
04:29, 28 February 2021 (UTC)reply
Speedy keep erroneous nomination by an outed sock puppet. If we discover it in time, I don't think socks should have standing to start AfDs.
SportingFlyerT·C22:44, 2 March 2021 (UTC)reply
If it's kept just because of the sockpuppeting I'll probably re-nominate it. So it's a mostly a matter of do we want to evaluate ot on the merits now or later. Also, I'm pretty sure sockputting doesn't make any other type of edits null and void. Like if a sockpuppet adds a good paragraph to an article that has a solid reference it doesn't automatically get reverted and wiped from Wikipedia. The punishment is banning someone for doing it. Not setting Wikipedia back. So I don't see why AfDs should be any different. Otherwise, it's punishing the quality of the platform. Not the person who did it. --
Adamant1 (
talk)
01:44, 3 March 2021 (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.
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. Despite the fact that the nominator has been blocked indefinite for abusing multiple accounts, the "keep" arguments make sense. The close as "keep" is not because of the sockpuppetry.
(non-admin closure) ─
The Aafī(talk)17:08, 14 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete Whatever the case is about the existence of promotional material or not, there clearly isn't the needed sourcing for this to pass
WP:NORG, because news stories about a schools regulating buses and cutting down on junk food just don't. I'm not seeing anything else that does either. So, based on that the article should be deleted. Unless someone can provide three good, non-trivial references. --
Adamant1 (
talk)
04:29, 28 February 2021 (UTC)reply
Speedy keep erroneous nomination by an outed sock puppet. If we discover it in time, I don't think socks should have standing to start AfDs.
SportingFlyerT·C22:44, 2 March 2021 (UTC)reply
If it's kept just because of the sockpuppeting I'll probably re-nominate it. So it's a mostly a matter of do we want to evaluate ot on the merits now or later. Also, I'm pretty sure sockputting doesn't make any other type of edits null and void. Like if a sockpuppet adds a good paragraph to an article that has a solid reference it doesn't automatically get reverted and wiped from Wikipedia. The punishment is banning someone for doing it. Not setting Wikipedia back. So I don't see why AfDs should be any different. Otherwise, it's punishing the quality of the platform. Not the person who did it. --
Adamant1 (
talk)
01:44, 3 March 2021 (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.