Jump to content

Talk:Amador Valley High School

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured articleAmador Valley High School is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on June 19, 2012, and on October 20, 2022.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 16, 2009Good article nomineeListed
August 22, 2009Peer reviewReviewed
September 16, 2009Peer reviewReviewed
October 24, 2009Featured article candidateNot promoted
November 24, 2009Featured article candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured article
[edit]

Amador Valley High School is an FA that was promoted many years ago (2009), and is thus listed as a potential FAR candidate on Wikipedia:Unreviewed featured articles/2020. I have made substantial updates to this article in both November and December 2020, and I believe that after my updates, this article still meets the FA criteria.

If there are any experienced FA reviewers that see this, I would invite you to help evaluate Amador Valley High School to see if it needs FAR. Thanks, Deltawk (talk) 04:53, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Deltawk; thanks for weighing in at WP:URFA/2020. Just a note: being listed at URFA/2020 does not make the article a "potential FAR candidate"; being listed at Wikipedia:Featured article review/notices given does mean that notice has been given that a FAR is needed. I will start looking through now. Best regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:48, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi SandyGeorgia. Understood, thank you for the clarification. Appreciate that a process like WP:URFA/2020 exists to get feedback. Best, Deltawk (talk) 23:15, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SandyGeorgia notes

[edit]
  • In the Enrollment section, there are table with hidden content. See MOS:DONTHIDE. Those tables are also uncited. I am not sure they are needed, but if you feel they are, another format might be found. Enrollment by grade and ethnicity would seem appropriate for a not-hidden table (but I believe the tables now have accessibility issues) if they were cited, and perhaps the enrollment by year can be summarized more generally in prose (eg, enrollment was A in year B, reaching a low of C in year D, to E in year F). When the tables are expanded, they create a MOS:SANDWICH.
  • There are faulty WP:ENDASHes also in those tables (hyphens are not endashes). You can install this script to keep your dashes in order.
  • The article had a mixture of date styles; you can install this script to keep your date formatting consistent.
  • There are considerable duplicate wikilinks; you can install this script to view them and decide which should be removed, per WP:OVERLINK.
  • HarvRef error: AVHS 2018–2019 School Accountability Report Card Harv error: link from CITEREFsarc2019 doesn't point to any citation. ... you can review this information about how to install a script to view and resolve them. Also:
  • Amador Valley High School 2013–2014 School Accountability Report Card (PDF), Amador Valley High School, retrieved December 9, 2020 Harv warning: There is no link pointing to this citation. The anchor is named CITEREFsarc2013.
  • Amador Valley High School 2018–2019 School Accountability Report Card (PDF), Amador Valley High School, retrieved November 12, 2020 Harv warning: There is no link pointing to this citation. The anchor is named CITEREFsarc2018.
  • There is an inconsistent citation style: eg,
  • Government Employee Relations Report. Bureau of National Affairs. 1987. p. 20. Retrieved November 15, 2020.
  • Amador Valley High School Robotics Club (2020), Amador Valley Robotics Club: Design of Nemo AUV 2020 (PDF), retrieved December 11, 2020
  •  Done (diff) Thanks for flagging, I've gone through the article to find all instances of cite book, cite journal, cite web, and all other applicable citation templates and changed them to Citation to be consistent with the rest. Deltawk (talk) 01:36, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please review throughout for MOS:LQ, eg ... the judges distinguished between "amendment" and "revision."
  • There are nine instances of the word also, which is almost always redundant. Please see the writing exercises at User:Tony1 to help evaluate which can be removed.
    •  Done (diff) Thank you! I spend some time and reviewed the exercises. This is one of the things that plague my non-Wikipedia writing as well, so the link to resources is much appreciated. I eliminated the redundant "also's" and made some more improvements. Deltawk (talk) 01:10, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • These are mentioned in the lead, but are all dated: is this content still relevant for the lead? The school has been named a California Distinguished School,[8] a National School of Character,[9] and a National Blue Ribbon School.[10]
    •  Done (diff) Thanks - I removed National School of Character since that was a one-time 2004 thing and is much less important than the other two. I decided to keep the other two since they are recurring and notable since they're one of the main awards given to schools by the California government and the Federal government respectively. Deltawk (talk) 02:07, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • has ranked in the top-10 teams 15 times, ... why is top-10 hyphenated, and WP:MOSNUM allows you to spell out fifteen here to avoid a lot of numbers in one sentence.
  • Similarly, the Amador Valley Robotics Team is recognized as one of the sole high-school teams at the national, university-level autonomous underwater vehicle (AUV) competition hosted by the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI).[12] ... The similarly is not needed, and again, this is a 20-year-old accomplishment-- does this belong in the lead still ?
  • Puffery for the theatre ... Pleasanton's principal performing arts facility for more than 80 years.
  • eliminating $7 billion of the $11.4 billion in property tax revenue collected each year. ... specify here whether these numbers apply just to Amador, or to the entire state ... not everyone has had the particular pleasure of knowing how Prop 13 destroyed California.
  • Lots to disentangle here:
  • Furthermore, an article in the Los Angeles Times noted that Federal aid money for Californian schools, worth about $98 million each year, may be reduced if state-funded programs are cut. A recent Congressional report had found that Proposition 13 would not result in any major "local spending" cuts. In order to receive Federal aid, the state needed to maintain present levels of spending on local programs or secure local matching funds. However, the enforcement of this spending was "flexible in many programs" and the Federal Impact Aid program for schools was therefore in jeopardy.
  • "Furthermore" is an unnecessary redundancy (found frequently ... pls review throughout)
  • a 1978 article in the Los Angeles Times ...
  • "may be reduced" ... tense ... this is 1978
  • In order to receive Federal aid ... In order to --> To ... see User:Tony1 redundancy reducing exercises
  • the state needed to maintain present ... would need to maintain ... tense ... this is 1978 stuff ...

In spite of the length of this list, this article is in very good shape for an FA of its age, and has held up well. It just needs a tune-up to address the list above, which is only intended to provide samples (not comprehensive). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:44, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SandyGeorgia, thank you so much for taking a look at the article so quickly, and for pointing out many specific examples of where it can be improved. Appreciate that there is an overview process of old FA articles, and opportunities to get feedback on old FA articles to help maintain them at FA status. I will work on your comments. Best, Deltawk (talk) 23:15, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
OK, unwatching now ... ping me when you are ready for me to re-visit with an eye to marking "Satisfactory" at URFA. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:28, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SG revisit

[edit]

Hi, Deltawk; I have finally found time for a revisit. After significant work like this (and because I forget what I raised before :) I usually like to just start afresh. If I repeat something, please let me know, as I will now re-watchlist the page and follow closely.

  • Different types of citations templates used (? maybe) resulting in different formats, eg Retrieved May 5, 2020 ... versus ... retrieved November 13, 2020
  • Are these actually used as sources ? (I haven't yet checked). They should be fully formatted ... that is, publisher, title, date, accessdate
Online sources
  • It is odd that the theatre has a prominent place in the lead about the school ... The Amador Theater has remained a part of the Amador Valley campus since 1932, despite major school construction in 1968, 1997, and 2004 ... I suggest removing the first clause and replacing it with content actually about the school, not a separate group hosted at the school. Perhaps something like this:
    Amador's location allows it to be the launching point for community parades. The school has hosted the Amador Theater, one of Pleasanton's performing arts facilities, since 1932. Major school construction and renovations were undertaken in 1968, 1997, and 2004.
    Never mind, rejigged that one myself. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:11, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The renovations revived one of the school's last original structures: the Amador Theater, the city's most popular performing arts facility. That it is the "city's most popular performing arts facility" is misplaced here, as the Theater is first mentioned several paragraphs above this.
  • The Development section suffers from WP:PROSELINE, where every paragraph starts with "In date" ... Try to vary the way the prose is structured. Similar happens in Court cases. Scan the entire article for how many paragraphs and sentences start with a date. That kind of prose bores the reader quickly.
  • There is some undue emphasis on specific individuals in the Band and Music section, making one think the article was written by a band member and wonder why no individuals are mentioned in other sections. These are not individuals who meet WP:NN; do they have a prominent place in independent, third-party sources about the school (that is, sources not written by the school)? If not, they probably should be dropped.

Overall looking MUCH better ... nice improvements so far. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:36, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Citation templates

[edit]

Hi, just a quick question. I like taking a quick glance through featured articles to see what standards I should be following/using since I learn a lot better from example than the huge pages of text on the instruction pages.

My question is which is the preferred citation method as I see all the references on this page use the "citation" template rather than the "cite web" or "cite book" ones and the comment by SandyGeorgia about avoiding using different citation templates in the article Mesidast (talk) 11:41, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Mesidast, thanks for reaching out. I believe that there are two main series of templates ("Citation" vs "cite X"). Both are acceptable, and neither is preferred. However, if an article uses the templates, it should pick one of the templates and not mix and match. The consistency is what SandyGeorgia was mentioning I believe. Deltawk (talk) 03:47, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Extracurriculars level of detail

[edit]

I have concerns about weighting for some of the extracurriculars. For instance, the robotics team gets a full subsection with four long paragraphs. If Amador is a typical American high school, the teams have perhaps at most a few dozen members out of the school's multi-thousand person enrollment, so this seems far too much. Ditto for some of the other subsections. I also imagine that there are some other extracurriculars that aren't currently mentioned but that may warrant a sentence or two — the school newspaper, currently mentioned only in the infobox, is one example. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 07:53, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sdkb, thanks for the feedback. I do agree that there is overweighting on the robotics club in particular, I decided to trim out the two out of four paragraphs that give a technical history of the submarine. For extracurriculars that aren't given enough weight, I may have had a difficult time finding good citations for them. I will keep a lookout for any I can add with some quality citations. Deltawk (talk) 01:41, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good! {{u|Sdkb}} talk 04:25, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reference format

[edit]

Given that most of the references are to news articles, not books or the like, having a separate notes and references section seems like a poor fit for this article. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 07:55, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, it is certainly unique and I haven't found many other articles doing it this way. From an editing standpoint however, I will mention that this https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Help:Footnotes#List-defined_references method has actually helped make editing a lot easier by keeping the reference information out of the text and together in a central location.
I believe it was User:Ottre that introduced this format to the article on this edit https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Amador_Valley_High_School&diff=326970492&oldid=326917330&diffmode=source Deltawk (talk) 02:53, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
My general impression is that, for articles that use books as references, it's helpful to have the separation, because each time you're citing a book, you're citing different pages. But for news articles and the other sorts of things used here, that doesn't really apply. My understanding is that you could continue to use list-defined references even if you merged the notes and bibliography sections. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 04:27, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Budget

[edit]

The school's annual budget seems like a notable omission; could that be added, along with any other pertinent info about the administration? {{u|Sdkb}} talk 08:00, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the suggestion. I did find avenues to get budget information for the whole district (https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/districtsearch/district_detail.asp?ID2=0600020), but I was not able to find an unconsolidated budget for Amador Valley in particular. I could potentially add information on the average expenditures per student across the whole school district?
Regarding other information about the administration, I think at some point I tried to fill out the infobox with as much pertinent information as I could. It does include some common information, like the principal's name and the number of teaching staff. I'm not quite sure what other administration information to add right now - I checked another School FA Stuyvesant High School and I think the two articles have a similar amount of information about the administration. Deltawk (talk) 02:58, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
My background on this comes more from working on college articles, where an organization/administration section is important but often gets left out because it's not the sexiest area; here's an example from my FA. I'm not sure how much of this translates to the high school level at a public institution, though. Ultimately, if the information isn't public, there's nothing we can do.
I'd be careful about adding too much info to the infobox — it's part of the lead, so WP:LEAD weighting concerns apply, and information that's trivial/doesn't appear in the body normally doesn't belong. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk 04:38, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Amador_Valley_High_School&oldid=1264940975"