Talk:Newfound Regional High School

This article is part of Project New Hampshire; an effort to create, expand, and improve New Hampshire-related articles to a feature-quality standard.

{{

As part of the series of wikipages of New Hampshire schools Nick2crosby (talk) 01:50, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

As part of List of high schools in New Hampshire. Should not be considered for deletion. Any questions or comments, and you can comment on my (talk) page. Nick2crosby (talk) 02:12, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

I will do more work to improve this wikipage Nick2crosby (talk) 14:22, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

To do list

• ☑ Add a sub-topic under the Athletic list naming "Basketball"
• ☑ Add 1000 point scorer table (both boy's and girls)
• ✅ Cleaning up Communities and Academics
• ☑ Add a subtopic named "Drama" under Community, and go in depth.

Updated by Nick2crosby (talk) 16:15, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Newfound Regional High School/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: SuperHamster (talk · contribs) 03:09, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

I'll be happy to take a look at this. Will update in due time. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 03:09, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Checklist

1. Well-written:

   • Clear and concise:
     • Some information isn't clear, as detailed in comments.
   • No copyright problems:
   • Spelling and grammar are correct:
     • Nothing major, but small errors and wording problems throughout.
   • Complies with the manual of style guidelines (lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation):
     • Lead is fine, but can be improved (especially as the article is hopefully improved). Biggest issue is that the motto should be taken out (see comments).

1. Verifiable with no original research:

   • Contains a list of all references, in accordance with the styling guidelines:
   • All in-line citations are from reliable sources:
     • No major reliability issues, but as covered in the comments below, there are other sourcing problems.
   • Citations done correctly for living persons or science-based articles (when applicable):
     • Not particularly applicable, but there is information about living persons that is unreferenced.
   • Contains no original research:
     • Everything seems to have come from a source of some sort - however, a lot of information isn't verified.

1. Broad in its coverage:

   • Addresses the main aspects of the topic:
     • More information should be provided, particularly with on the school's history.
   • Stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail:
     • Excess details on the school district, school board, athletics, classes, and grading, among other things (see comments).

1. Neutral:

   • Represents viewpoints fairly with due weight and without bias:
     • Nothing sticks out as a major NPOV problem. But I'm not seeing many independent or varied sources in the first place, so I'm leaving this unmarked. Make sure to representatively cover all significant views that have been published by reliable sources on the high school, and as stated above, coverage is excess in some areas and lacking in others.

1. Stable:

   • Does not change significantly from day-to-day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

1. Illustrations:

   • Images are adequate and relevant to represent the topic, and have suitable captions:
   • Images are appropriately tagged with their copyright status and, if applicable, fair use rationales for non-free content:

1. Overall:

   • Pass/Fail:

Comments

The article is a great start, but there are a variety of problems. WikiProject Schools' Article Guidelines are definitely worth a look at. Here are the biggest issues I noticed while reading through the article, following Wikipedia's policies, guidelines, and the previously mentioned WikiProject guidelines. These issues will also expand on why I failed several criteria in the checklist above:

• A lot of the article isn't verified through sources. I'm looking for in-line citations that verify all information provided in the article. Some sources, namely TTCC, don't really verify the sentence that cites it.
• Of the references provided, a lot of them are from the school itself. If possible, identify independent reliable sources to both verify and add new content to the article.
• I see there's an unfinished to-do item left in the to-do list above; for future reference, I recommend nominating an article as good only after you've finished up your plans.
• I'd take the motto out of the lead; it's already in the infobox, and having it in the prose isn't significant (if anything, promotional).
• If information is available, there should be a history section, detailing the founding of the school and its following history.
• An entire section devoted to the school district is excessive, especially the list of other schools within the district. You should mention what school district the high school is in, but going into details about the school district itself is off topic.
  • Likewise, the school board section is excessive, as it has less to do with the high school and more to do with the district.
• "#SAU 4" - it's not clear what this is. If anything, looks like another Twitter #hashtag to me :)
• For athletics, I'd expect to see information on teams that win state or national championships. Runner-ups aren't particularly significant enough to be included, along with individual names and champions (unless particularly worth noting through extensive coverage in reliable, independent sources). This would mean cutting down or completely removing many of the tables provided for the athletics section.
• Avoid information that is useful only for people attending or working at the school. In this case, detailing grade weighting and scale is excessive.
• The 'Academics' section (which, based on its content, may be better titled 'Curriculum') shouldn't list all the courses offered. Instead, it should provide a broad overview (is the curriculum following state or national standards, or its own gig?). Anything particular about its curriculum that makes it unique, especially in the area?
• A lot of the article can be worded or organized better. Some particular examples:
  • "The other nominee was Christopher Lord. He was nominated to become the principal." → The second sentence is unnecessary; in context, it's clear that he was nominated for principal. In the end, a failed nominee isn't particularly worth noting anyway.
  • The 'Student activities' section is a bit of a run-on, with grammar/wording errors. It could be better organized, such as listing generic clubs first, then discussing athletics in a separate paragraph.
• Regarding images:
  • The current image of the school appears to be a copyright violation and is up for deletion.
  • If there is a school logo, crest, or emblem, it can be added to the article (most likely under our non-free image policy).

I know I've written a lot of stuff - I don't mean to be discouraging, but rather, I hope it serves as a good starting point for continuing to improve the article! I like to point towards Arlington Senior High School or duPont Manual High School as good examples to work towards. I know good article reviewers sometimes let the article be improved during the duration of the nomination, but in this case, I think an extensive re-look at the article is in order, and a new nomination in the distant future would be better. Thanks, and good luck! ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 04:16, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Newfound Regional High School/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: EricEnfermero (talk · contribs) 02:14, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Will review this. Will leave some initial feedback shortly. EricEnfermero (Talk) 02:14, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Initial checks

• In the GA Toolbox inside this review, the Disambig links tool shows a disambiguation link to Cross country. It should be changed to cross country running.
• The database connection to the External Links tool isn't working for me, but I don't see any dead links.
• All of the images in the article look like copyright violations and are subject to deletion. We should remove them or clarify why they are not subject to copyright.
• I don't detect any copyright violations, but almost all of the references are missing important information (publication date, access date, author, etc). Citation templates can help you to ensure that relevant reference information is included.

Issues

There are still some big issues that are preventing this from reaching GA status, including some things mentioned in the last GA review. Examples:

• Several issues with Wikipedia's words to watch, especially "current" or "currently". Replace all uses of those words with an "as of" date supported by the references. (ex: As of June 2015, the school...)
• The motto probably doesn't belong in the lead section.
• There are a number of charts that could probably be easily represented with prose. You could take the first table out and just say "Feeder schools include..."
• The article mentions #SAU 4, but I think you mean SAU #4.
• Are all of those staff members really considered Administration? The source uses School Staff and Administration. I'm not sure we need some of those personnel listed in an encyclopedia article.
• The history of the school is unclear. The infobox mentions a date of 1989, but the list of state champion athletes mentions a student from 1972.
• No need for the School Board section since this is not the article about the school district.
• No need for detailed grading info, as mentioned in the last review.
• Student Activities doesn't need to list every club or activity. It looks like there is undue weight on Yearbook and SSS.
• The SSS section is mostly unsourced. The source seems to just be a member list. There is nothing about Robert's Rules of Order on that source.
• In the Yearbook section, you mention Mr. O'Malley again. I'm not sure if that's necessary, but his length of service is different in this section (30 vs 40+).
• Largely unsourced Football section.

The biggest issues are grammar and clarity.

• "It was originally located where Newfound Memorial Middle School currently stands until the present high school building was constructed in 1989." - confusing. Try "From _____ to 1989, Newfound Memorial High School was located _________________."
• was awarded NH Excellence in Education - full name is New Hampshire Excellence in Education Award.
• a 81% proficiency in reading, while 37% proficient in mathematics - an 81% proficiency rating in reading and a 37% proficiency rating in mathematics
• "Newfound Regional High School has finally added" - finally isn't really a neutral word
• The football field was named "Morrison Field". From the start of the project to the end of the project, it took nine years all together for the field to be ready to be played on. - change to "The football field, Morrison Field, took nine years to complete."
• There are a couple of places where you mention that champions were won. Champions win, but championships are won.
• "Under her belt, she has won" - change to "She has won"
• "Ann Hall was the first coach known to have coached the Girl's Basketball team." Not sure what this is trying to say. Are the coaching records incomplete?

These are just a few of the issues. Before renominating this, I would go back and take a look at the previous review feedback again and address all of the stuff here. Because this list is incomplete, I would also recommend two things.

• Submit a copyediting request at WP:GOCE, which will help with the writing issues.
• Request a peer review, where you can get lots of advice before another GA nomination.

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Issues noted with imprecise language and some grammar issues. Requires a thorough copyedit.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	At a minimum, does not meet WP:WTW.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Could use more complete citation information.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.	Fairly large sections of unreferenced material.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Could use more History information.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Unnecessary detail related to grading and a couple of organizations.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Mostly neutral.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	I have copyright concerns related to the images.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.

In a moment I'm going to close this as unsuccessful. It would take extensive work to bring this into compliance with the necessary guidelines. Good luck with this article. High school entries are challenging because they don't always receive a lot of independent coverage in non-athletic areas. EricEnfermero (Talk) 03:13, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

File nominated for deletion on commons

file:c:File:Boys Newfound Track.jpg Reason:No permission indicated subpage: 

Message automatically deposited by a robot on 09:00, 2 January 2018 (UTC).

File nominated for deletion on commons

file:c:File:Entrance of Newfound Regional High School.jpg Reason:No permission indicated subpage: 

Message automatically deposited by a robot on 09:01, 2 January 2018 (UTC).

File nominated for deletion on commons

file:c:File:Newfound in Granite State Challenge.jpg Reason:No permission indicated subpage: 

Message automatically deposited by a robot on 09:02, 2 January 2018 (UTC).

File nominated for deletion on commons

file:c:File:Newfound Track.jpg Reason:No permission indicated subpage: 

Message automatically deposited by a robot on 09:02, 2 January 2018 (UTC).

File nominated for deletion on commons

file:c:File:Paul Hoiriis with Jeanne Shaheene.png Reason:No permission indicated subpage: 

Message automatically deposited by a robot on 09:02, 2 January 2018 (UTC). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Harideepan (talk • contribs)