Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs) m Archiving 2 discussion(s) to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Schools/Archive 28) (bot |
Sam at Megaputer (talk | contribs) m →RADAR: formatting |
||
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 47: | Line 47: | ||
Dear all, there is a discussion at [[:Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion#Category:High schools and secondary schools by country]] which is about whether the terminology be standardized across countries to high schools or secondary schools. [[User:TSventon|TSventon]] ([[User talk:TSventon|talk]]) 17:19, 26 March 2021 (UTC). |
Dear all, there is a discussion at [[:Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion#Category:High schools and secondary schools by country]] which is about whether the terminology be standardized across countries to high schools or secondary schools. [[User:TSventon|TSventon]] ([[User talk:TSventon|talk]]) 17:19, 26 March 2021 (UTC). |
||
== RADAR == |
|||
Members of this WikiProject may be interested in my new tool which can detect promotion in articles about schools. |
|||
* Click [https://reports.polyanalyst.com:5043/polyanalyst/static/paclient/publication-view.html?reportUUID=580b26d1-e024-435d-87b3-ae1bab159db4&guest=1 here] to try it out (link will begin working shortly). Select the "School" under the subject filter to see only articles about schools. |
|||
* Click [https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLSvizcZfU8dQaE0sI1dKWz9WC6nc9y9kR here] for instructional videos. |
Revision as of 18:46, 6 April 2021
Schools Project‑class | |||||||
|
Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/WikiProject used
Tiftarea Academy
Could other editors review the discussion at Tiftarea Academy#Edit warring? — BillHPike (talk, contribs)
FAR nomination of Baltimore City College
I have nominated Baltimore City College for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 (talk) 21:29, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
Is the article I created notable?
Today I created the article for Rejoice Christian School. I assumed that it is notable because it received a lot of significant coverage at the national level. However, the reviewer tagged it because he thought WP:PERSISTENCE applied. Everything in the article is reliably sourced. What does everyone here think of this? Doesn't WP:NGO apply? Scorpions13256 (talk) 22:10, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
- I have put my thoughts on the article's talk page, as a reply to Talk:Rejoice Christian School § I feel the page was tagged in error davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 22:28, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Should Winfield Independent School District be de-merged from Winfield, Texas?
See Talk:Winfield, Texas on the question of whether Winfield Independent School District be de-merged from Winfield, Texas. WhisperToMe (talk) 00:00, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
Curie Metropolitan High School#Musicality
I'm wondering what some others think about Curie Metropolitan High School#Musicality. It's unsourced (which is a problem, but probably not insurmountable) for starters, but it also seem to be a bit UNDUE and perhaps a bit of Namechecking. Maybe this would fit better in a larger section about extra-curricular activities, but a stand-alone section seems a bit of a stretch (at least it does to me). There's also the fact that the section was added as the first and only edit of MusicalityVocal, a SPA that has been soft blocked for a username violation. — Marchjuly (talk) 15:13, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
- the first job to do is the WP:RS(or. There are three sections with none. Ideally it will be independant of the school. Now we can join in and help. Internationalise, go through and explain what some of the acronyms and jargon means in a Chicago context. In the UK we want to know about the kids in the intake, levels of deprivation, academic outcomes. Music occurs in the curriculum and as an extra curricular activity. (or co-curriculum ) I found Musicality fine- though as the article develops it may become ===Musicality===. This is now on my watchlist, so go ahead and edit- and I'll come in and change any accidents. But do Google the school first for sources.ClemRutter (talk) 19:09, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
- I stumbled upon the article while looking up something else and then noticed the "Musciality" section. I was going to just remove it outright, but decided to see what some others thought first. I did a brief Google search and did find some sources that could possible be used like this and this, but then I also found this and this (which aren't as pleasent types of coverage). Many schools have non-athletic clubs or activities that competitions and win awards; I'm not sure, however, whether they need their own separate sections or whether they would be better as part of a larger more general section. It seems obvious (at least to me) that the account which added the info back in 2016 probably was connected to the group in some way, and some might argue that the content should be removed for just that reason alone. If, however, there's a way to clean it up and incorporate it into the article because it's deemed encyclopedically relevant to the reader's understanding of the school (and not just a mini COATRACK addition), then I'm all for that. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:39, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
- Sorry I was so patronising! I have followed the links and it is gratifying to see how similar US schools are to ones I worked in the UK. I had a brilliant headteacher who disappeared overnight and we were told not to attempt to contact him. I had a head of music who didn even know what other subjects were taught. Concerts and trips all over the place- her family took away her personal credit card as they didn't trust her with money. All this stuff is very important to the ethos of the school so can be done done in detail. In the UK, where parents have a degree of choice, a murder will depress the intake, a musical reputation will increase the intake and skew the demographic to the more advantaged. We can easily integrate it when we written the material- or it can go in twice- firstly in a ==co-curriculum== section, and then in a ==tragedy== section at the bottom.ClemRutter (talk) 10:01, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
- The question was specific to this one section, not the article in general, and why should an article about an American school be "internationalised?
- As it stands this is unsourced content about a seemingly non-notable group. Short, sourced mention in a larger section (Arts or Activities) should be OK, but we probably don't even need a subheader, and if we do "Musicality" is terrible. One has to read the section to find that it is a musical group, rather than a flowery description of some quality of the school.
- We don't mention teacher's names.
- RE the grant: What was it for, and why the name dropping for Gina Rodriguez? It appears she has no connection to the school and she does not need to be mentioned. I can't tell if this grant is worth mentioning without more info. Ordinary grants are nothing special, but this sounds like it could be something more, given who gave it. Meters (talk) 20:26, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
- Entire section now removed by IP [1]. I have no objection to the removal. Meters (talk) 01:13, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
- I can see we are not going to agree, but a few points. I am continually reminding editors that this is not a GA review, at this stage it is more helpful to either fix it, or leave a comment. Wikipedia is read internationally so should be written to be understandable outside our own patch. I object on principle to IPs doing large deletions particularly when they have a good understanding of wiki principles- the correct procedure is for them to take it to the talk page- similarly I refrain from editing US articles unless severely goaded. It is wiki style not to mention individual teachers- but there is a fine line as to when a teacher becomes a criminal, and we often use a ==controversy== section. But remember WP:BLP. A better way forward is obviously to improve the whole article.ClemRutter (talk) 10:32, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
- FWIW, I didn't find your initial reply to my question patronizing in any way. I also understand what you're saying about Wikipedia being read by people from around the world, but I'm not sure how much can be done to make an article about a US high school more internationalized. I also don't think there's anything wrong with an IP being WP:BOLD. IPs aren't required to pre-discuss any edits they feel need to be made any more than a registered account is. I'll agree that sometimes it's better to be WP:CAUTIOUS, particularly regarding a major change, but it's not required and it isn't automatically incorrect when it's not done. If you disagree with the removal and want to take a shot at improving the section, you can be BOLD and try to do so. Personally, I tend to agree with what Meters posted above about the section being a bit UNDUE and was, to be honest, tempted to remove it outright by myself, especially after figuring out it was likely added by a COI editor. If, however, a better way can be figure out how to incorporate the content, then that's OK with me. My original question was actually about this one particular section, but of course improving the article overall would be a good thing. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:49, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- I can see we are not going to agree, but a few points. I am continually reminding editors that this is not a GA review, at this stage it is more helpful to either fix it, or leave a comment. Wikipedia is read internationally so should be written to be understandable outside our own patch. I object on principle to IPs doing large deletions particularly when they have a good understanding of wiki principles- the correct procedure is for them to take it to the talk page- similarly I refrain from editing US articles unless severely goaded. It is wiki style not to mention individual teachers- but there is a fine line as to when a teacher becomes a criminal, and we often use a ==controversy== section. But remember WP:BLP. A better way forward is obviously to improve the whole article.ClemRutter (talk) 10:32, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
- Entire section now removed by IP [1]. I have no objection to the removal. Meters (talk) 01:13, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
- Sorry I was so patronising! I have followed the links and it is gratifying to see how similar US schools are to ones I worked in the UK. I had a brilliant headteacher who disappeared overnight and we were told not to attempt to contact him. I had a head of music who didn even know what other subjects were taught. Concerts and trips all over the place- her family took away her personal credit card as they didn't trust her with money. All this stuff is very important to the ethos of the school so can be done done in detail. In the UK, where parents have a degree of choice, a murder will depress the intake, a musical reputation will increase the intake and skew the demographic to the more advantaged. We can easily integrate it when we written the material- or it can go in twice- firstly in a ==co-curriculum== section, and then in a ==tragedy== section at the bottom.ClemRutter (talk) 10:01, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
- I stumbled upon the article while looking up something else and then noticed the "Musciality" section. I was going to just remove it outright, but decided to see what some others thought first. I did a brief Google search and did find some sources that could possible be used like this and this, but then I also found this and this (which aren't as pleasent types of coverage). Many schools have non-athletic clubs or activities that competitions and win awards; I'm not sure, however, whether they need their own separate sections or whether they would be better as part of a larger more general section. It seems obvious (at least to me) that the account which added the info back in 2016 probably was connected to the group in some way, and some might argue that the content should be removed for just that reason alone. If, however, there's a way to clean it up and incorporate it into the article because it's deemed encyclopedically relevant to the reader's understanding of the school (and not just a mini COATRACK addition), then I'm all for that. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:39, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
Dear all, there is a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion#Category:High schools and secondary schools by country which is about whether the terminology be standardized across countries to high schools or secondary schools. TSventon (talk) 17:19, 26 March 2021 (UTC).
RADAR
Members of this WikiProject may be interested in my new tool which can detect promotion in articles about schools.
- Click here to try it out (link will begin working shortly). Select the "School" under the subject filter to see only articles about schools.
- Click here for instructional videos.