User talk:Bhs itrt
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
My name is Keith David Reeves, and I am the Instructional Technologist at Battlefield High School. I have created this account to assist in assuring that the information available through this vehicle is accurate by including quantifiable and verifiable data, not opinion.
I have been advised of the COI and NPOV policies, and will adhere to them strictly.
Contact the Office of Instructional Technology at 571-261-4518 to verify or discuss information pertaining to the Battlefield family.
[edit] Correct Website URL
A recent anonymous edit changed the website back to BattlefieldBobcats.org. Without getting into the dirty underbelly of this issue, the official school website has been BattlefieldHighSchool since September of 2006, and is likely to remain so. Yes, there are some resources (printed and electronic) that continue to cite BattlefieldBobcats.org, but these are largely being phased out. There was a disagreement with the previous web designer, and it is only recently that BattlefieldBobcats.org redirects to the correct website. The BHS website, as of the time of this writing, is designed and maintained by students in the IT specialty program.
While there are those that continue to refer to BattlefieldBobcats.org, as it was historically the school website, BattlefieldHighSchool.org is currently the official URL.
Bhs itrt 00:58, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Changes to "My talk"
The reason that I reverted was because it is important to preserve old discussions. But if you want to remove old discussions, at least archive your talk page so that the main talk page is not cluttered, but so that people can look back on old discussions. Cheers! V60 VTalk - VDemolitions 01:08, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Excellent. I believe that a far better solution than "nope, sorry, you can't do that." I support transparency, but also like a clean desk! Bhs itrt 01:13, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] The Rivalries of Battlefield High School
Originally when the citation of Brentsville District High School was added to the Battlefield High School page, my impetus was to edit it as unsubstantiated following conversations with members of Bobcat Athletics. While Brentsville is certainly a powerhouse athletic school by any measure, it is nonetheless Class AA in Cedar Run by school population, and therefore infrequently directly competitive with Battlefield. Furthermore, adding Brentsville to Battlefield's Wikipedia page listed as a rival insinuates that Battlefield feels Brentsville is a rival, which is unsubstantiated from an athletic point of view. (A school survey on the subject may be in order! Not really, more important things to do, but nice thought! At least we're being clinical about the edits we support!)
However, I realized after I had made the changes that I had not spoken to other departments for other points of view. After speaking with teachers who helped open the school, they agreed that Brentsville should, indeed, be listed as a rival school because we "took" many students and staff from that institution when our school opened due to the redistricting lines. Therefore, I have amended my original edit to replace the removed citation with my apologies to the anonymous editor.
In the end, additional points of view revealed that it does, indeed, seem objective and correct to list Brentsville as a rival on this page.
Additionally, the citation of Osbourne Park has been corrected to reflect the local rival in the City of Manassas, which is simply Osbourne High School, not Osbourne Park.
NOTE: Subject deprecated as new infobox format does not feature this information as part of encyclopedic content according to the quality standards established by the WikiSchools project. Bhs itrt 12:26, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Vandalism of the BHS Article
For the record, I take time to help keep articles like the BHS page current, accurate, and free of vandalism because I have pride in my community and in the people that work there, and NOT as an official duty. I'm a private citizen acting as a private citizen who happens to think that Wikipedia articles should be robust, accurate, and free of disinformation. The ONLY reason I disclose that I'm an employee is in the interests of transparency, and to provide contact information for the independent confirmation of the data that I contribute to articles.
After all, in research, confirming sources is essential, and too often VERY difficult to do in the Wiki medium.
Recently, the Battlefield High School article has been severely vandalized by those seeking to be hateful, racist, bigoted, and/or belittling. I will endeavor to remain diligent in the removal of such vandalism wherever I see it, regardless of what the article may be, but for the record:
1. The IP address from inside the school is already blocked by Wikipedia, and I support this as I have stated on the user page.
2. I have suggested to school officials, specifically in the Department of Information Technology, that it experiment with a smart filter to prevent editing from school facilities. While it will not reduce the amount of vandalism from outside the school, it is taking a step that says "we value Wikipedia for what it is, and want to keep it safe from vandalism." That's just my opinion.
3. I encourage anyone who sees an anonymous IP address vandalizing any article, including the BHS page, to use the warning templates.
I recognize that neither I nor any other school official can or should "control" Wikipedia content. However, individuals and institutions can continue to exert appropriate, participatory influence upon Wikipedia content by maintaining statistical, data-supported documentation, evidence, and information in ways that meet the standards of good research and dissemination, and by flagging, reporting, and removing information that is clearly vandalism.
I cannot help but marvel that there are people who literally have nothing better to do than make childish comments on a Wikipedia page.
In any event, thank you to the account-bearing users who have been so helpful in removing and undoing vandalism and who, like me, believe in transparency in the public sector, provision of information to the community, and maintaining rigorous standards of data and research.
Bhs itrt 13:36, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] BHS article assessment
Bhs itrt, I saw your request on WikiProject Schools and took a look at the BHS article. It looks like you have a good start: the information looks good and the pictures are a plus. The content is informative and well-written. Suggestions after a first look center around changes that will bring it closer to Manual of Style guidelines, adding references to verifiable sources, and its current quality and importance assessments.
Regarding suggestions about WP Style (section headings, dates, infobox, image link parameters, etc.), I've left some ideas on the BHS article Talk page. I hope these are helpful, but please let me know if you have any questions or comments.
The biggest issue is lack of references, especially for a school article, which frequently contains a lot of stats. Content usually includes NCLB and testing info, population statistics, dates and events that require something other than the school/district website for back-up. Given your position with the school, you should have no problem locating web sources for everything. Usually, a combination of VDOE sites and newspaper stories will do the job. Not only does this address the issues of verifiability, WP:COI and WP:NPOV, but facilitates updating information that changes regularly (like SOL stats) — i.e. other editors know where you found the original data and can recheck it for quick updating. There are citation templates you can use with the <ref></ref> tags and all you'll need to do is add a References and Notes section at the bottom with the {{reflist|2}} tag (this template collates and formats all the references in the article).
You were right to ask for a review from someone else. This provides a fresh set of eyes and enhances objectivity. You rated the article "A" in quality and "Mid-level" in importance. After reviewing the article, I think you should consider pulling the quality rating back to a "B". If you look at the Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment guidelines, you'll see the criteria for Start, B, GA, A and FA grades. Generally, articles are promoted through the grades (sounds especially appropriate for schools, huh?), and each grade includes all the criteria of all subordinate grades. "A" grade articles are considered "complete", with little work left to do. Grades of FA and GA require a nomination process (and review) and it would be a good idea to prepare this article for a GA review before even considering it for "A". After carefully reviewing the article it seems to fit best in the "B" grade if a fairly complete set of sources is added.
Take a look at the list of A-Category schools at WikiProject Schools. BHS is the only one. Now, to put things in perspective, look at the GA-Class school articles (of which there are only six) and check some of them out. Then look at some of the B-Class articles, such as Horace Mann School. These will give you some ideas for expanding the article.
Once the article is sourced then you may want to look at some of the great suggestions on the WikiProject Schools page. The Structure section provides good information on layout and more ideas on content. It's not a format set in stone, but it is useful. Once you feel you have a solid B-Class article, add content that shows what makes BHS interesting to the outside world (this will help you raise it to "Mid-level" importance) and develop a good Lead. Then nominate it for GA status.
Good luck, have fun and happy editing. Let me know if you have any questions.
— Jim Dunning talk : 04:41, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Reply
The current level of vandalism doesn't really warrant protection. You seem to be keeping a good watch on the article. If you just keep up the good work, you should be able to keep it in good shape. If it starts getting vandalized several times a day, semi-protection can be reconsidered. John Reaves (talk) 22:28, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] License tagging for Image:Exterior bhs x1.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:Exterior bhs x1.JPG. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 18:08, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Sewickley Edit Inappropriate
Sorry about that, I saw some vandalism by Special:Contributions/24.3.191.248/User:24.3.191.248 rolled back what looke like vandalism, but didn't realize there was a previous vandal edit by a different user that didn't get reverted. Remeber to assume good faith. Good wiking, --Mariano(t/c) 16:27, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Potomac Senior High School
I have a few questions that I would like to ask you. First can you show me the template that you used for Potomac Senior High School and Second what was wrong with the template that I had there before? Thank you. John R G 05:51, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Sure thing! The template was provided by the WikiSchools project, which you can link to from the Talk page of the article itself. It was advised that we convert to this format for ease of editability by the WikiSchools project. It's not that anything was "wrong" with the previous template. However, as part of trying to help all PWCS school articles reach the standards of quality described in the project, I took the liberty of converting each infobox. In no way am I trying to micromanage; merely to enhance transparency at the behest and advice of Wikiers more experienced than I!
Bhs itrt 12:20, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the response. I will leave the new template up that you put there. I did however update it. I hope you are not upset with what I did. I have been working on that project along time and hopefully we can make it better. John R G 06:35, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Oh, goodness no! It's not at all my place to dictate what is or is not appropriate or welcomed in WikiWorld. To the contrary, I'm just playing my little part with everyone else, and I'm all about collaboration! I thank you for your thoughtfulness and wish you well in your WikiEfforts!
Cheers, Bhs itrt 17:20, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] GSA @ Battlefield
As of 8:21 AM Eastern Time on Monday, 23 April 2007, there is no active, sanctioned chapter of the Gay-Straight Alliance at Battlefield High School. This is not to pass judgment or to make any kind of statement. I made the edit to remove the listing, as the bot did, not in defiance of Jim's assertion that it is a valid student organization - which it most certainly is - but that it is not a formally-organized student activity at Battlefield.
If there are students who have formed a GSA and are interested in organizing, they should speak to their teachers or counselors to pursue that. There are indeed faculty members that would sponsor such a group.
However, for the sake of accurate encyclopedic content, I have edited it out of the list. This is NOT a sociopolitical statement. It is simply a matter of factual reporting.
Bhs itrt 12:26, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Non-free use disputed for Image:Stonewall logo.jpg
 |
This file may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading Image:Stonewall logo.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 11:25, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] DC Meetup notice
Greetings. There is going to be a Washington DC Wikipedia meetup on next Saturday, July 21st at 5pm in DC. Since you are listed in Category:Wikipedians_in_Virginia, I thought I'd invite you to come. I'm sorry about the short notice for the meeting. Hopefully we'll do somewhat better in that regard next time. If you can't come but want to make sure that you are informed of future meetings be sure to list yourself under "but let me know about future events", and if you don't want to get any future direct notices \(like this one\), you can list yourself under "I'm not interested in attending any others either" on the DC meetup page.--Gmaxwell 22:09, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:FODcouncil.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:FODcouncil.jpg. 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 Wikipedia articles 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. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.
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 ensure 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 you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media 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. -- SilentAria talk 06:33, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Image source problem with Image:Battlefieldhs.jpg
This is an automated message from a robot. You have recently uploaded Image:Battlefieldhs.jpg. The file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.
As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 14:17, 12 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. If you believe you received this message in error, please notify the bot's owner. OsamaKBOT 14:17, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Pwcs logo blue.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Pwcs logo blue.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 19:40, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
All due respect to the diligent, I'm about through with being the only one typing the rationales for these publicly-provided images. I respect the necessity for appropriate fair-use rationales, but that one's about as self-explanatory as it gets. I leave it to another citizen this time around. :)
Bhs itrt (talk) 18:31, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Bhs_int_commons.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Bhs_int_commons.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 15:56, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Bhs it medal.jpg}
Thank you for uploading Image:Bhs it medal.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check:
-
- That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
- That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.
Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 04:01, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
