Talk:Colleyville Heritage High School

2014 Rewrite

As part of a project initiated by the Grapevine Colleyville Independent School District, students have been tasked with acquiring research for and rewriting the main page of this article. To aid in this process I have created a draftspace for the new article using a skeleton created by IDidThisThing. The new article will be created there before being moved over to the article when it is satisfactory.

The draft is located at https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Talk:Colleyville_Heritage_High_School/2014_Rewrite_Draft

Information and sources will primarily be pulled from student research at https://sites.google.com/a/gcisd.net/chhswikipedia/home

Discussion during the creation of this draft should take place in the draft's talk page. Glitch0s (talk) 15:19, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Article Updates

I have revised the article for clarity and removed a number of non-neutral and non-notable references. I redid the infobox and provided current info on school. Reworked a few areas that were awkward to read and added UIL state titles and removed unsourced non-UIL titles due to not finding credible sources. Indyjrg1762 (talk) 07:07, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Comment

To whoever just edited out a lot of the content I added, that was completely unnecessary. I was on another computer, not logged in. I went to this high school and wanted to enhance the page and include citations, but thanks for taking them out, I guess I didn't really experience anything that I had written down. Don't edit something you don't know about. East13th (talk) 20:51, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Please include info from verifiable reliable sources. Thanks!   — Jeff G.  ツ 20:59, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Fixed up the page quite a bit, adding content for several sports and the band, pictures throughout the page, and editing a lot of the previous content. Also typed up a section on the steroid scandal. It was an important event, no matter how you look at it. If you lived here during that time, you know the national attention that was put on this area. It's a big moment in the history of the school and Texas high school sports. East13th (talk) 23:37, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

I have done my best to fix a ton of misspellings and remove people who no longer work there. I will find the current staff list soon and fix it. -- Purrdeta 00:35, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Could we get some sections up about the controversy at CHHS? Like the steroids ordeal that was all over the national news and such. Boy am I proud of my school...

Let's not forget about the cheerleader drinking scandal... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.30.163.32 (talk) 00:04, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Reorganization

Should the dance section, currently under athletics, be moved to fine arts? Glitch0s (talk) 16:04, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

{{subst:mention|Glitch0s]] The band is under fine arts, so it would make sense for the dance team to be as well. —C.Fred (talk) 16:15, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Colleyville Heritage 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/20120628134123/http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/account/2011/index.html to http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/account/2011/index.html

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) 18:11, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Phrasing of accusations of CRT

@Gamaliel: - I'm not a fan of "false accusations" which seems like an overly hostile way to phrase this that isn't reflected by the consensus of sources. Neither https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/09/21/james-whitfield-school-board-vote/ nor https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/10/us/texas-principal-critical-race-theory.html call the accusations "false", exactly - they just say that Whitfield denies them. I'm not sure using a single spoken line by left-leaning MSNBC (which also summarizes the issue as "allegations") is really the best approach here. If there's a desire to show how awful this affair was, surely there's other ways to add it - more details or quotes, say?

(As a side note, from a strict perspective of advocacy, the appearance of neutrality is good, even if you want to advocate against the firing. I think the facts stated plainly are fairly damning here, no need to push too hard and make the article appear slanted.) SnowFire (talk) 21:30, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Facts are facts regardless of whether or not they appear neutral, and NPOV requires us to present the facts. He was either teaching CRT or he wasn't. Mainstream media has reported this as false, and no evidence of the contrary is offered. There is also the issue of BLP to consider as we are talking about a living individual. If there is no evidence to support an allegation against a living person and mainstream media has reported the allegation as false, we are obligated by BLP to state that. Gamaliel (talk) 16:16, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

"Mainstream media has reported this as false" - but, as I said above, I don't think this is really correct. You're taking one off-hand, spoken remark and using it to overturn the phrasing everyone else wrote in neutral sources. Per WP:DUEWEIGHT, we should just use how most reliable sources describe the issue if there's a slight conflict. I checked some more sources, and they again don't say "False accusations" - [1] mentions that Whitfield and his supporters say they're false, attributing them, [2] sticks with "accused", and so on.

I don't want to dive too much into the debate about CRT but it is objectively the case that what exactly counts as "CRT" is unclear and differs by the speaker. To quote Whitfield himself:

“I am the quintessential boogeyman for these people,” Whitfield said. “Anything that has to do with anything related to equity, or inclusion or diversity — they’re going to try to attach it to CRT.” [3]

Since you brought up BLP, it's worth thinking about it in reverse fashion - if you accept that these accusations are not literally about teaching CRT, but more an attitude, then Wikipedia certainly shouldn't suggest that he doesn't care about racial justice and diversity. Yes, it might be bullshit that "teaching CRT" is an overloaded term, but that's how things are. Something vaguer like "accused" is substantially better here IMO, since if the accusation is interpreted as "not racist enough", then it's sorta true. SnowFire (talk) 18:28, 19 November 2021 (UTC)