Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Markville Secondary School

Markville Secondary School

Markville Secondary School (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

I searched google books, scholar, news, and newspaper but no results came up. Considering that its not a particularly old school, only 30 years old, I would not expect coverage about it (very mundane subject). Put it here because my BLAR was reverted and I don't like when PRODs are removed on the 6th day. I advocate for a redirect to YRDSB and am only listing this at AfD for a larger and quicker consensus. Sahib-e-Qiran, EasternShah 21:45, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

I don't want to bludgeon the discussion by engaging in arguments that go nowhere, but I encourage the closer to look at policy-based arguments rather than votes. Sahib-e-Qiran, EasternShah 23:51, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

• Speedy keep - The nominator writes: "I searched google books, scholar, news, and newspaper but no results came up." It took me 10 seconds to learn that this school ranked second out of 739 schools in Ontario. There is a plethora of sources supporting the notability of this school. Magnolia677 (talk) 21:55, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

  Any of those that you can list for us? I found things that wouldn't meet WP:SIGCOV, they only talk about things that are tangentially related to the school and not the school itself. Sahib-e-Qiran, EasternShah 21:58, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

• Keep The school itself is definitely notable. The sources used seem fine. Romeo J (talk) 22:05, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

  You seem new to Wikipedia so I will respectfully explain why the current sources don't show that the article meets WP:GNG. Firstly, GNG requires sources to be WP:INDEPENDENT so automatically all sources published by the Canadian government are out. GNG also requires WP:SIGCOV, so the pdf by fraser institute cannot be used, it only mentions MSS twice, both in a data table. This is also why the article from Markham Economist & Sun, which only mentions MSS twice, cannot be used to prove notability. Sahib-e-Qiran, EasternShah 22:13, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

  I apologize, but I do believe this article is notable. Yes, it could use improvement but the school itself has very notable people. Deeper research reveals Adrienne Chong & Mark Melnyk are 2 candidates that have received the 2004 Governor General's Award for Excellence in Teaching Canadian History. Yes, I am new to Wikipedia, but I stand by my view. I believe this topic is notable, the article just needs work. A delete is not needed. Romeo J (talk) 15:16, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

  These people do not even have articles themselves, and a school cannot become notable by association with notable people. I checked some people listed at Category:Governor General's Award winners and I could not find anyone who won the award for teaching Canadian history. Note that we do not have an article for the Canadian history award by itself, but we do have articles for some of the other awards, suggesting that this award itself isn't notable. You should try to prove notability by proving that the topic meets WP:GNG, as simply stating that something is notable is an argument that is discounted by deletion closers. Sahib-e-Qiran, EasternShah 16:16, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

EasternShah, please assume good faith and not be condescending to other editors by stating "You seem new to Wikipedia" so let me explain this to you. See WP:XFD#CONDUCT for details. Magnolia677 (talk) 16:56, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

I am assuming good faith. To assume good faith is to think that the other person is a good actor. Since I patiently explained to them, I obviously do not think that they are a bad actor. As for civility, I did not insult them. Sahib-e-Qiran, EasternShah 18:21, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

I apologize if my arguments are weak, or if they don't make sense. I am trying to follow stated rules. With this in mind, I still stand by my view. This article should not be deleted. I've found quite a few websites that list this school. It has sources available. I still do not believe a delete is needed. The article needs more work, with more reliable sources. But we should fix, not delete it. (WP:PRESERVE). Romeo J (talk) 19:18, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Yeah I also saw that one, and I would say it does go towards establishing notability but just 1 source isn't enough. Generally, WP:THREE is enough. I searched other databases too, like outontario.ca but I couldn't find anything (search results: , , ) Sahib-e-Qiran, EasternShah 21:45, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Are the sources in the article not good enough? There's 7. Romeo J (talk) 22:06, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Refer to my initial response Sahib-e-Qiran, EasternShah 22:59, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Here are some sources: 1 2 3. I believe these prove WP:SIGCOV, although not certain. Romeo J (talk) 14:41, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

in the CBC article, there MSS is only mentioned once, the York region news is very short, and the real estate one only mentions it twice, I don't think the last one is reliable either. Sahib-e-Qiran, EasternShah 15:51, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

While the CBC coverage focuses on a specific student achievement, it serves as a high quality, independent secondary source that verifies the school's existence and academic environment. In the context of [[WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES]], which generally favors keeping verifiable secondary schools, this national coverage, combined with regional sources, demonstrates that the school is a subject of public record beyond routine directory listings. We should follow [[WP:PRESERVE]] and improve the article's context rather than deleting it. Romeo J (talk) 17:43, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

• Keep. Sufficient sources in the article and elsewhere availableto meet [WP:GNG]].Jacona (talk) 01:01, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:08, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

• Redirect to York Region District School Board. While the school exists, and we have sources showing that, there are no independent sources covering the school in enough detail to establish notability. A school is not in itself notable. While most universities will tend to get a Wikipedia article, and most primary school will not, with secondary schools we do prefer there to be some reason for a stand alone article, otherwise the school can just be mentioned as part of a parent article, such as one on the local area, and the local school board. The closest the school appears to come to notability is the people who have been there. And I don't think they are notable enough, nor enough of them to count. SilkTork (talk) 18:27, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
• Keep - highly ranked school, passes WP:NSCHOOL. The burden of proof is on the nomination, and it gets an 'F' from this teacher. I'm concerned about this becoming a precedent for deleting all high schools. We've already deleted almost all primary schools, most middle schools, most junior high schools, many colleges in Asia, and all but one or two school superintendents. I'm not saying that all schools are notable – in fact just today, I proposed deletion of a junior high school – but this is getting unreasonable. Education matters. Bearian (talk) 16:34, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

  As far as I'm aware, the consensus following the RfC on secondary school notability is that secondary schools are not inherently notable, and that WP:NSCHOOL says that "All schools ... must satisfy either the notability guidelines for organizations (WP:ORG) ... or the general notability guideline." And the criteria for WP:ORG says the organisation is notable "if it has been the subject of significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject." And that "These criteria, generally, follow the general notability guideline with a stronger emphasis on quality of the sources." (My bolding). The sources here do not meet the requirement. If you feel that education matters (and as a retired teacher I agree with you), the appropriate way to uphold the general notability of schools is to start a new RfC to assess where consensus is today on what makes a school notable. And if you feel this school is notable enough to meet the requirements of WP:NSCHOOL, then find some "reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject" which provides "significant coverage", and put them in the article. SilkTork (talk) 01:15, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

• Keep The school had at least four notable alumni, so the page serves a navigational purpose. Kelob2678 (talk) 10:36, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

  A list of four isn't a very good list at all and doesn't meet WP:NLIST. These notable alumni can be merged into the YRDSB page where they can be added as a column of the table Sahib-e-Qiran, EasternShah 13:29, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Nowhere at WP:WPSCH/AG#OS does it state "A list of four isn't a very good list at all". I checked...twice. Magnolia677 (talk) 14:18, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

It does at WP:UCS. Sahib-e-Qiran, EasternShah 14:51, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

I think the four notable alumi is the main talking point for if this article is acceptable as a standalone article. What rubs against it is WP:NOTINHERITED. However we can make exceptions per WP:IAR if we feel that the encyclopedia would in general be improved by having this and other organisation articles regarded as notable if a significant number of notable people (such as four) are associated. It was the point that caught my attention when I first considered this AfD nomination. What tilted me against those four making the article notable was the overall sense that they were not notable enough to use WP:IAR, and that we don't have an independent source commenting on this organisation as a school which had educated four notable people. Per WP:NLIST "a list topic is considered notable if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable source". On the whole the guiding principle on Wikipedia is that "we" don't decide what is notable, we note what reliable sources regard as note worthy, and we then sum up that noteworthiness in a short article. So, even if we do decide that X number of notable people associated with an organisation makes the organisation notable, we would still want a reliable source pointing it out. SilkTork (talk) 18:58, 16 March 2026 (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.