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. Michig (talk) 08:27, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sterling Heights High School[edit]

Sterling Heights High School (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

I am both the creator of this article and a graduate of the school. I actually graduated in the same class as the current principal, and had multiple classes with him while in high school (at least two, and possible more). I was on the school's quiz bowl team, the last year that the first quiz bowl coach was coaching, and know that one time the Macomb Daily ran an article showcasing ethnic and religious diversity in Macomb County by mentioning that Sterling Heights High School had Mormon and Messianic Jewish students. I was among the 5 Mormons at the time, and I could name at least one of the Messianic Jews. However after having read the debate on the notability of schools that ran at RfC recently, I have become convinced that high schools are not default notable. When the High School Website (that I helped create a former iteration of) and the school district website are the only sources listed, it is hard to see this as much more than a directory. My search for additional sources didnt show up much more than sports coverage, and the occasional story about criminal violence done or threatened by a student. I am sure if the Macomb Daily's archives were more easily searchable I would have come across a student of the week article or two about the school. OK, the 2017 prom in photos was published by the Macomb Daily. Well, OK, here [1] is an article from earlier this year about Sterling Heights High School being one of 54 in Michigan recognized as an academic state champ. This is in a state with about 500 school districts, each one required to have at least one high school. I work for Detroit Public Schools Community District, which has 21 high schools, admitedly the most in the state, but by no means the only case of a multi high school district. This is without counting all the charter and private high schools in Michigan, or the many defunct high schools in the state. I have to admit it does not help that I have seen many high school articles abused as magnets for blatant vandalism, but at least in the balance of the American education system, it has traditionally been colleges and universities where academic policy is derived from, not high schools. I don't think Sterling Heights High School, or lots of other high schools in the US for that matter, pass notability guidelines. My deep connections make this probably an easy article to start with, but I have a suspicion that lots and lots of high schools we have articles on do not pass notability. John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:53, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I reviewed the history, and realized that I did not in fact create this article. I think I was confused because I considered creating the article at one point, but found it already existed. I still stand by all my other points in the nomination.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:57, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The nominator is misrepresenting the results of the recent RfC and the nomination is, in my opinion, contaminated by their personal involvement. Who cares whether the nominator was in the quiz bowl, or who their classmates were? Normally, people are biased in favor of keeping an article because of personal connections. This contrarian nominator is now biased against this article because of his personal involvement. Biased nominations should be rejected. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:51, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• The OP's personal links with the school are not in question but are not relevant to this discussion either. Unless there is a very strong and better argument, I'm !voting keep JMWt (talk) 10:08, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep And as a comment to the nominator. As a general rule all high schools are considered notable and are kept in an AfD situation with the exception of it they fail actual verifiability. Just want to save you some time of going through a lot of high school articles and nominating them when they'll end up getting kept. See Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Common_outcomes#Education and Wikipedia:Notability_(high_schools). Canterbury Tail talk 12:35, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment  This article was created here, by User:Amel586.  The creator of this article has not received notification of this AfD on their talk page.  Unscintillating (talk) 14:18, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment  As per the school web site, the school is "Ranked #1 High School in Macomb County by U.S.NEWS & World Report".  With WP:BEFORE D1 for Google news I found: "The Battle of the Bands winner in 2016 America's Thanksgiving Day Parade is ...Congratulations to the Marching Stallions from Sterling Heights High School, By Dustin Block, Posted: 3:30 PM, November 28, 2016 Updated: 10:42 AM, November 29, 2016, [2] .  See America's Thanksgiving Parade which shows that the parade has some national coverage.  Also, the school's band performances are recorded on the web.  There is also news about terrorism at the school.  People in the central U.S. know that public high schools attract attention for every football and basketball game that they play.  Newspapers mention the school without explanation, which means they consider the school to be an object of familiarity.  This list of issues to be found in Google books goes on.  Further, the nominator does not make any attempt to defend the alleged absence of notability as worthy of policy-based deletion that overcomes WP:Deletion policy#Alternatives to deletion, and at another AfD the nominator documents that his vision is to merge the article to the school district.  I am not making a !vote now because WP:V and WP:BLP are core content policies, and there appear to be issues that need resolution.  Unscintillating (talk) 14:57, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I do not think people understood why I disclosed my conflict of interest connections. I have added some links to mentions found on google books. I have also added the US News and World Report profile to the article. I am not sure if the google books mentions can be incorporated into the text.John Pack Lambert (talk) 22:10, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Question I have seen a schools RfC mentioned several times recently. Could someone provide a link? Thanks! Jacona (talk) 01:02, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• There is related discussion at WP:Articles for deletion/Busan Foreign School, which should also link to the RfC.  Unscintillating (talk) 01:15, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 06:25, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 06:25, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. This is why WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES is helpful – not because it is an argument one way or another, but that it is a strong indicator to consider alternatives rather than bringing a high school to AfD. This school certainly passes WP:GNG. WP is broad enough to include most high schools, which as a matter of course gather notability as high school history and activities are usually well-documented. Time and effort is better spent improving articles when there is clearly plenty of source material (I wouldn't be surprised if there is an entire book). What's likely to happen here? The outcome here will probably be a "keep," the second most likely outcome is "merge," and there is no third likely outcome, so why not either improve the article or WP:MERGE rather than launching a long discussion? Jack N. Stock (talk) 14:03, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as a secondary school per longstanding precedent and consensus. The highly controversial RfC close even specified that this should not lead to a flood of AfDs! -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:51, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per long standing consensus. If a school passes WP:V then it is presumed notable and of local interest, see WP:LOCAL.Egaoblai (talk) 03:33, 23 November 2017 (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.