Talk:Northwestern High School (Hyattsville, Maryland)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Fair use rationale for Image:NHS Seal.jpg

Image:NHS Seal.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 10:06, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Sock puppets

The same set of non-free images has re-appeared in this article a number of times, from a number of Wikipedia accounts. See Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Neno8403 for details. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 17:40, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Northwestern media categories

I copied all the freely-licensed media of Northwestern HS on Wikipedia/Wikimedia Commons (that I could find) into Commons:Category:Northwestern High School (Hyattsville, Maryland)‎ and all the media still hanging around on English Wikipedia into Category:Northwestern High School (Hyattsville, Maryland)‎. (There are something like 50 images and 3 audio files total; enough that I subdivided the category on Commons.) If a file is in the wrong categories on Commons, feel free to move them. --Closeapple (talk) 02:19, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Significant cleanup

I've gone through and removed a bunch of useless unreferenced lists that were probably dumped here as some type of make-work project by students along with a broader cleanup and tagging. This article was in awful shape! Toddst1 (talk) 01:05, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. You rock. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 01:18, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

It looks like Maryland Pride and I had a pretty big collision here and his/her reinstatement of this stuff was collateral damage from the edit conflict. I've re-instated MDP's edits and I'm hoping he/she will manually restore mine as I've discussed on MDP's talk page. This article will still need work but I think we're all trying to go in the same direction. Toddst1 (talk) 16:17, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Assessment

I am assessing this article following a request at WP:Schools/Assessment. I am upgrading this article to C-class on the project's quality scale. This article has a lot of potential, however, in order to achieve "B-class" it must go through some significant revision as is shown below. The article has quite a few references but most everything in an article should be referenced. Please view the "B-class" criteria below, I hope it is taken as constructive criticism rather than undue criticism for the many hours put into this page. Also, citations can be before or after punctuation but should use one form throughout the article. Finally, I am listing the article as "low importance" as there does not seem to be justification for a higher rating. Any questions/comments can be left at my talk page. WikiManOne (talk) 17:07, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

B-class criteria:

• The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations where necessary.N

Large amount of information in the article is not sourced.

• The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies.Y
• It contains a large proportion of the material necessary for an A-Class article, although some sections may need expansion, and some less important topics may be missing.Y (covers a large amount of the content necessary, but it needs heavy copy editing to maintain WP:NPOV)
• The article has a defined structure.N

The article should be revised to follow the structure of school articles found at WP:WPSCH/AG#S

• The article is reasonably well-written.N

Article must be revised to comply with WP:NPOV.

Statements such as "So essentially, students who attended Northwestern, received five years of high school education!" have no place in wikipedia.

• The prose contains no major grammatical errors and flows sensibly, but it certainly need not be "brilliant". The Manual of Style need not be followed rigorously.N

Needs work in general

• The article contains supporting materials where appropriate.Y
• Illustrations are encouraged, though not required. Diagrams and an infobox etc. should be included where they are relevant and useful to the content.Y
• The article presents its content in an appropriately accessible way.Y

Course offerings

The course offerings list should be removed, the wikipedia page is not a course catalog. It'd be best to have someone convert it into a narrative section that discusses the encyclopedic aspects of the curriculum, if they exist. -- Lucas20 (talk) 04:32, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Agreed (again). I've removed it (again) [1] [2] [3]. MarylandPride keeps restoring it against consensus. That needs to stop. Toddst1 (talk) 19:53, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

I keep restoring that section as I base the content of this article on Wikipedia Featured Articles or Class A articles — most notably articles such as Stuyvesant High School of New York. They have the exact same content listed, albeit, they list their course offerings under the general headline "Academics" and not a specific "Course Offerings" section. Until someone can state why it's okay for Stuyvesant to list their course offerings and be considered a featured article, yet Northwestern can't, I shall continue to revert any edits trying to omit this data. I have no issues having course offerings deleted, as long as there is no bias. --Maryland Pride ... a Wikipedia contributor (talk) 20:02, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

You don't have consensus (per the problems on your talk page and objections here). Please seek consensus. Toddst1 (talk) 20:05, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

(indent) Hi folks!
Per WP:WPSCH/AG, quoting: Curriculum – Provide a brief description of the school's curriculum. Does it follow a national curriculum or does it set its own subjects? Focus specifically on aspects of the curriculum which are unique to the school. Is it the only school in the locality which teaches Mandarin, Latin or Greek? Does it have a culinary academy? Do not make long lists of every subject taught - people can get that from the school's brochure or web site.
There should be no lengthy listing of course offerings. A mention (brief) of credits to graudate is fine, but that can generally be summed up in under three sentences. Also, per the same guidelines, there should be no mention of staff beyond the principal and superintendent (list of past principals is fine), unless those individuals meet the WP:GNG as individuals. This school has some level f importance in the project, and I don't like to see it go bacwards instead of forwards. In addition, there is some WP:WEASEL and WP:PRESTIGE issues that are problematic here. The article looks bad when it is obviously written with a POV instead of a neutral encyclopedia article. I am here to help if you want it, but at the end of the day, any fight over keeping this material will lose in any kind of mediation. I have seen others try, and the outcome is always the same. LonelyBeacon (talk) 20:19, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

BTW, per the compairson to Stuyvesant High School, there is a brief mention of course offerings, which is not similar to the edits that were being made here ... the SHS article doesn't get into a lot of detail regarding course sequencing. As I noted in my edit summary, there is nothing wrong with brief (brief) mention of the courses offered. Getting into too much detail is problematic. LonelyBeacon (talk) 20:26, 15 August 2011 (UTC)