Talk:Northside College Preparatory High School

I don't know how watched this article is, but it's kind of clear that a member of Acadec wrote this, since I attended that school and it is far from the most noteworthy things about it.

I look in on it now and then to make sure that nothing too outrageous goes on.

A national acadec championship is a worthy thing to note. Furthermore, blatant insults to Northside alumni really don't belong here since we dont know who might stumble onto this page. It's important to keep the image of the school up, especially in a public venue such as this.

~Aric

But whoa, why did you take out the part about Mr. Mather and Mr. Giles leaving and Mr. Hampton passing away? That's important, they were all like "founding fathers" of the school!

Agreed--that needs to be reverted, their leaving and Hampton's passing; moreover, I have to say that being on the team that went to nationals, I'd like to think that the school is not really just defined by that. You could set up a separate section discussing that, but it seems vain to have that in the main body of the article. Also, comments like "Northside's 23 Advanced Placement classes also place its curriculum among the most thorough and challenging academic programs in the nation." make this jazz read like a promo piece from Northside's PR department; good representation isn't Wikipedia's job, unless we mean accurate. Let the facts speak for themselves, eh? Unless, that is, you have some article thoroughly vetting this through rankings in some sort of national or accredited publication other than the school newsletter.

I dunno, I thought it deserved to be in the main body because it was something that brought people's attention to Northside as a contender. But if you want to move it and make it a recent event, be my guest. Oh, and I changed the AP sentence to make it sound, I think, a little less like a brochure.

Ok, first of all, more Northside students called Mr. Giles "Juice" than those that called him "Jack." Also, I fail to see how he is "innovative." I also don't like the unwritten policy that it's okay to be opinionated if you're in favor of someone... No one blinks that Mr. Giles is called "innovative" without even a hint as to how he innovated, and yet something like "bland," which I can verify firsthand as an accurate assessment of his teaching presence, causes "Aric" to despotically censor this page to conform to his happy views.

Whoever "ohnoitsjamie" is, they removed vital portions of this entry that are quite important in describing the school, notably my addition of a section addressing block scheduling and the Colloquium program. I am mortified by the gestapo running this website and their disregard for actual, reasonable discussion of problems. They simply erase what they don't agree with.

The "block scheduling" was only reverted because that edit also included your point-of-view assessment of a teacher as "notoriously bland." OhnoitsJamie 06:03, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why couldn't you simply edit out the "notoriously bland" part? Also, as a Northside student, I can attest to the fact that nearly every Giles student I have talked to will say he is bland. In album reviews, it's okay to say an album met with "widespread acclaim" or was "panned by critics," and this is no different. Also, enough with your fancy links, logos, and fonts. No one is impressed. ==65.43.127.235 06:13, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have revised the piece to conform to the neutral point-of-view policy regarding Mr. Giles, while retaining the colloquium section and updating the current events. I hope this matter can be considered closed. --65.43.127.235 06:24, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The edit is fine, except for small section discussing the teachers merits and flaws. While you did attempt to write the passage in a NPOV fashion, there's no need to catalog student opinions of teachers in Wikipedia. You won't find such comments in other articles about schools (but if you do, they should be reverted as well). OhnoitsJamie 06:30, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Given that we are claiming that Mr. Giles is an integral founder of the school, I think an investigation into the actual views on the matter is quite relevant. Also, I do not appreciate the way you are treating me. You use "attempt to write," as if all I can do is mimic your excellent example. Exactly who are you to determine what goes into this article, and what examinations should be made within? 65.43.127.235 07:26, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't intend for the comment to be taken as an insult. As far as your complaint that I'm not treating you well; I'm trying to be civil with you, but I think your comments here and on my talk page [1] speak for themselves. OhnoitsJamie 17:46, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Having read both a. the comments left on Jamie's talk page and b. all[and I do mean every one] versions and edits to this page, I think I'll say this much: Jamie's comment, while pompous, was probably not intended to incense[hate to say it, but unless you're either a demonstrably apt instructor or performer of aught you've critiqued, remarks about their attempt can and will come off as aggravating.]. I do think Jamie has a point about needlessly hostile remarks on his talk page.

However.

Having been a member of that school, I will say that there is an aggregate of opinions concerning Giles, and prominent among them was that his teaching method was considered bland; moreover, saying that nothing need be taken into account concerning critical opinions [at least as students regard teachers] is absurd, since Wikipedia can and will often take into account praise of an institution[clearly even in this article which you so closely watch you haven't touched the portion I so far consider most objectionable(the mentioning of Acadec's achievement in the first paragraph). There was an earlier complaint of mine concerning a sentence that sounded like an advertisement, but the author of that one has since changed it.], and these accolades are considered "verifiable" because they are published. It's ridiculous that, since these critiques are not lent the credence that follows publication, we do not acknowledge them. Incidentally, we can't let one or two testimonies from former students [whose status as alumni is similarly unverifiable] attempt to speak for the school.

Still, just because there is no particular spark or genesis that would allow discussion of someone's quality as an instructor[recall Ms. Guest's somewhat recent brush with notoriety], this doesn't mean that it's horrifically POV to discuss these things. For example, given the near schoolwide affection of one sort or another for Dr. Lalley, I don't think it would be improper to devote a portion to prevailing opinions of his effectiveness as a principal[See Lawrence Summers as an example.] Of further interest in that example, one of the contributers even added a bit about an anonymous online poll, which is about similarly verifiable as any of the claims made prior.

Then again, I thought the extended discussion of Giles in that portion was really disproportionate when one could've discussed the fear Mather inspired or the jovial nature of Dr. Lalley, as well as those two being far more important in the initial establishment of the school. And if you're going to discuss Giles, discuss his Tashkent initiatives; that's a bit more relevant. Or how many faculty were plucked from working at Schurz or graduates thereof[at least seven to ten.].

ps: I think anon has a point about your deciding what is essentially inappropriate with regards to a school of which you know nothing; while anyone can edit, it's not suggested that everyone edit--moreover, if you're going to apply for adminship, you should know by now how to edit out something while retaining something of value.

-russ.

As of today, I'm not watching it anymore. Good luck, OhnoitsJamie^Talk 23:10, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good riddance, ya piece ah shit.

Current Events

Does it make sense to even bother listing departures of teachers? Why list Giles at all, while ignoring the departures of teachers like Muriel, Guest, Bobendrier, Wellman, Stabler, etc etc? Aren't real current events, like the current budget crisis and the threats it poses to the pioneering Northside programs like Colloquium and block scheduling? ALso, whoever "moderates" this page is doing so with a blind eye for what is "proper." There's a lot of truth behind the vulgarities people have posted here, and what is here and considered "good" is woefully out-of-date and bland. -SHK

To be fair, a lot of what passes for "good" in the context of, oh, say, a high school would be bland, if we take that to mean not generally exciting. As for moderation, wikipedia doesn't seem to really "do" that, outside of admin; anyone can "watch" a page and edit when they see fit. On that note, to whomever thought writing something like "magnificent" about any teacher there is appropriate, that would be dumb. Ditto for the remark about the newspaper[whose only credit can be the occasional april fools edition.]. My spiteful remark about the teachers listed or suggested regarding their departure is that they are a. insignificant, b. incompetent, or c. I don't like them.

I kid about that last one.

In fact, I kid about the whole thing insofar as applying a and b beyond the first two in that list. The rest stands, though.

--russ.