Talk:Boston College High School

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

↓    Skip to table of contents    ↓

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Boston College High School article.
Article policies
Boston College High School was a good article nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Reviewed version: February 8, 2007
WikiProject Schools This article is related to WikiProject Schools, an attempt to write quality articles about schools around the world. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
Schools Portal
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-Importance within Schools.

Add lots of refs to get a B Victuallers 11:17, 13 August 2007 (UTC)


This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Boston; If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

Is there any way to get the "Contents" box to appear on the left-hand side? For some reason, I can't seem to find the appropriate code. It looks incongruous in the middle. 141.161.31.47 06:46, 8 February 2006 (UTC) BCH Alumnus

You would have to move the picture, I'll do it Yanksox 23:30, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

I dont think the Renassiance page should be merged because this way all its info can be put on one page, wheras on the BC High page it would need to be sortened. Besides, as they expand the program, many notable names and events can and will be added. Caf3623 20:59, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

As a recent grad from the school, I still have deep ties, so I can still supply some info. Yanksox 11:44, 11 July 2006 (UTC)


My recent edit has been to show that the campaign was not started for the purpose of renovations, the need to say "some funds" and making it clear that the science building and office renovations had nothing to do with the campaign are important to keep. Hughes and Kemaza have said many times during the past year that money was for "financial security" more than construction. I just feel that your edits put the wrong spin on the thing. Thank You. Caf3623 22:52, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Here is the link about the $12.6 million [1], I will add it an edit. Also, I never proposed restrictions on editing, I am well aware what Wikipedia is about and am sorry if you were offended. My point simply is, things like the number 12.6 million and other news on the campaign is more readily available to current students seeing how the school sends emails, newsletters, etc. to us well before the website is updated. Thanks and please continue to correct mistakes and write the specifics on this page so that they can be fixed. Thanks Caf3623 07:24, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Just a side note as an FYI: The image which is a drawing [2] is not depicting the pre-renovation state, this link [3] clearing shows how it includes the soon-to-be 2nd artifical turf, the new road next to it (they ripped up the existing one already), and the transfer of the tennis courts to the end of the stadium. Caf3623 01:19, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GA nomination - on hold

Excellent pictures, but some serious problems:

  • There are absolutely no citations.
  • Stray dashes near the bottom?
  • The list of school facts needs to be consolidated into paragraphs of content.
  • The majority of the content consists of history. Perhaps expanding the list mentioned above will flesh out the article.

Please review the GA criteria. The lack of citations is reason enough to fail this GA nomination, but maybe everything can be fixed in 7 days. :) Carson 04:23, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Failed

It's been in excess of the 7 day maximum that the GA nomination was put on-hold and issues relating to the original reviewer's comments still exist. Specifically, refs, in-line cites, and the general lack of polish (the dashes at the end of the article, for example).

Please re-read his commentary and use it as constructive criticism to improve upon the article. Do try again when you have everything sorted. Nja247 (talk • contribs) 17:37, 8 February 2007 (UTC)