Talk:Newton South High School
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Newton South High School article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
On history in wheeler
editI personally had history class in Wheeler while I was at the school. It seems that I cannot access the list of classes on the NSHS website (seems to be behind a google doc login?) to use as a source anymore. I honestly don't know how to cite this short of digging through my (few) old handouts I've kept to see if I have an old syllabus and uploading it. I know this is original research, but given that the rest of the article on the Layout isn't cited either, I request that User:John from Idegon assume good faith and treat rules as principles rather than removing information that is correct. ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 07:51, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
- You're missing the point. I am not disputing the accuracy of that fact. I'm saying it doesn't belong in the article. I'm sure the town of Newton has some document detailing the location of every sign the street department has ever erected. Does that mean we must include that information in the town's article? No. It simply has no encyclopedic value. Same goes for where in the building a particular course is taught. Besides which, no special facilities other than visual aides are required to teach most subjects and those visual aides can be moved in a few minutes. Wikipedia articles are to be targeted to the entire English speaking world. Do you honestly think that it is important enough to Benny in Bhopal or Will in Winnemucca to include. The guidelines for school articles is clear that we are not to include info primarily of interest to the local population. Where particular classes are taught are clearly that. If you want a webpage to share your memories of your high school, go daddy is thataway. John from Idegon (talk) 16:40, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
- By your logic then, why not remove then entire section? "The houses are Goldrick, which contains the History and English departments, as well as the Preschool; Wheeler, which contains the English department and some math, science, and history rooms; Cutler, which contains the Math and Science departments; and Goodwin, which contains the World language department. Building 1 is Goldrick; 2 is Wheeler; 3 is the science wing; 4 is Cutler; 5 is the field house and associated wellness classrooms; 6 is Goodwin; 7 is the cafeteria and the college and career resource room; 8 is the administrative section; and 9 is the arts wing, which also contains the Van Seasholes Auditorium." Instead of blankly reverting other editors changes? Clearly, we don't need to know what Goldrick is, or the preschool or that English is taught in Wheeler, or math and science in cutler. I never said I wanted a webpage to share my memories. I would appreciate it if you would offer less straw man arguments or selective use of wikipedia policies. ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 06:47, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
- The guideline you refer to links to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_London_School#Buildings, which does list that music is taught in some buildings, or that some building was next to a newspaper, etc. The style guideline says to avoid room-by-room description of the school facilities. Room by room descriptions of school facilities is not the same as describing the different buildings of the school and what are in each building. In fact, according to the guideline you used, the buildings section should be expanded on this article to include details about the building architecture or whatnot, (which I would consider to fall under your so called "info primarily of interest to the local population")ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 06:55, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
- I have gone ahead and removed information on classes and instead added additional information on the size, style, shape, etc. of the campus per the guidelines you listed. ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 07:35, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
- The guideline you refer to links to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_London_School#Buildings, which does list that music is taught in some buildings, or that some building was next to a newspaper, etc. The style guideline says to avoid room-by-room description of the school facilities. Room by room descriptions of school facilities is not the same as describing the different buildings of the school and what are in each building. In fact, according to the guideline you used, the buildings section should be expanded on this article to include details about the building architecture or whatnot, (which I would consider to fall under your so called "info primarily of interest to the local population")ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 06:55, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
- By your logic then, why not remove then entire section? "The houses are Goldrick, which contains the History and English departments, as well as the Preschool; Wheeler, which contains the English department and some math, science, and history rooms; Cutler, which contains the Math and Science departments; and Goodwin, which contains the World language department. Building 1 is Goldrick; 2 is Wheeler; 3 is the science wing; 4 is Cutler; 5 is the field house and associated wellness classrooms; 6 is Goodwin; 7 is the cafeteria and the college and career resource room; 8 is the administrative section; and 9 is the arts wing, which also contains the Van Seasholes Auditorium." Instead of blankly reverting other editors changes? Clearly, we don't need to know what Goldrick is, or the preschool or that English is taught in Wheeler, or math and science in cutler. I never said I wanted a webpage to share my memories. I would appreciate it if you would offer less straw man arguments or selective use of wikipedia policies. ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 06:47, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
Suicides
editI tried to put in a brief description about the string of suicides that happened in Newton in late 2013 and early 2014, of which two victims were from Newton South. It was removed by User:John from Idegon based on BLP issues, but a. the suicide victims are not alive and b. I provided references for my the information. If more or better references are needed, I would be willing and able to find more. I know that some people might not think that the suicides would be a good thing to put on the page but, as a Newton South student from a class that had a victim, I think they are an important part of Newton South history. We should not forget them or block them out of history but instead write about them and make sure that mental health is de-stigmatized so that suicides like the ones at South don't happen again and to give people all the facts about issues at South. Knowledge is power and it is our duty to provide people with the full picture of knowledge so that they can change the world for the better. The suicides were real things that happened and it is not being biased or unobjective to write about them. Tcbhowe (talk) 04:51, 28 June 2015 (UTC)Tcbhowe
- Do you have one single argument based in policy here for including this info? Unfortunately kids kill themselves. Suicide is the second leading cause of death amongst teens. If you insist, I'll find a ref for that, but it has been widely discussed. So, other than its kids you knew, why is this important? Did some great nationwide suicide prevention campaign start due to these events? Has their been any assertion that these suicides were directly linked to the school in a causal way and did this have widespread (in other words, nationwide) , sustained coverage in reliable sources? Indeed, did these tragic (and they ARE tragic) deaths garner any coverage outside your community? This is a world wide encyclopedia. Before it belongs in the article, it had to matter outside the local community. This doesn't now and certainly won't in 20 years. Wikipedia's purpose is NOT to affect change in our world, and it is not a Memorial. John from Idegon (talk) 05:29, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
- Oh, I forgot. BLP does apply to this, even tho they are dead. See WP:BDP. John from Idegon (talk) 05:34, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
- BDP states "The only exception would be for people who have recently died, in which case the policy can extend for an indeterminate period beyond the date of death—six months, one year, two years at the outside. Such extensions would apply particularly to contentious or questionable material about the subject that has implications for their living relatives and friends, such as in the case of a possible suicide or a particularly gruesome crime." WhisperToMe (talk) 01:19, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
External links modified (February 2018)
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Newton South High School. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131105115033/http://www.studentpress.org/nspa/winners/opm13.html to http://www.studentpress.org/nspa/winners/opm13.html
- Added archive https://archive.is/20130209202343/http://www.wickedlocal.com/newton/archive/x241890742 to http://www.wickedlocal.com/newton/archive/x241890742
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:06, 18 February 2018 (UTC)