Talk:Glen A. Wilson High School

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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.
Stub This article has been rated as stub-Class on the assessment scale.
Schools Portal
??? This article has not yet received an importance rating within Schools. Please rate the article.
WikiProject California This article is part of WikiProject California, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

Contents

[edit] picture

can someone post a picture?? Theturtleguy 04:33, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] world record

There is an error regarding the swim time of Victor Do. The posted time is approximately one second faster than the current world record, and thus obviously incorrect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.101.101.33 (talk) 01:23, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Shooting Threats

There should probably be a mention of the shooting threats on the page. It seems quite noteable, and their are numerous sources for it. Any thoughts?Malbolge (talk) 14:35, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

I would agree on a brief mention, but the deletion log shows that at least one genuine previous attempt to do this was removed. As an admin, I don't quite get that, it seems overzealous. Anyone else? Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 16:10, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
I believe that was done under the umbrella of WP:DENY. I'm on the fence on this one, it was notable at the time, but I'm not certain if that notability will last very long. Mentioning this may set a bad precedent. Redrocket (talk) 16:15, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
I think that it should be mentioned, especially because the person was arrested and the threat originated on Wikipedia. Plus, this has already made national news. User:LeGuy
I attempted to write about this incident, however, it was removed. I agree with the removal of my section because it only gives fame and attention to the threat maker. I say lets cool down a couple of weeks before putting it up. Theturtleguy (talk) 19:35, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
I agree that something should be added, but perhaps not just now. While it does seem they've arrested the suspect, adding too much information this early would be giving too much attention to something we don't need to be seen as supporting (even though the most cursory of glances at the deletion log, history, and multiple ANI threads would confirm we're hard set against it). In a couple weeks, or even just a few days once things have calmed down, I'd definitely agree - this gives more time for news reports to become more correct anyway. Hersfold (t/a/c) 20:49, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
FWIW, I notice it has been reported on in reliable 3rd party sources.[1][2] Even so, there's no hurry to add it. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 21:00, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
The reason why I purged such a large portion of the history was not to be overzealous but to deny the perpetrator anymore recognition than he was getting for the time being. I am not firmly against the addition of this incident to the article and would support a write up that is properly written and sourced at a later date. However, this is not the time to readd it considering how much distress the parents of the students and the students themselves mentioned in the threat experienced.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 06:50, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
That seems reasonable, PPG. We should probably give at least a month, now I devote some proper thought to it. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 16:28, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
The news is reliable to the general public. But there are other things that the authorities does not know. The same guy started posting hate letter around this time last year. I gave him warnings last year, but only for vandalism. You guys can follow the history back to March-May 2007. The IP address and the person targeted is the same. Theturtleguy (talk) 07:25, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
You can contact the authorities - they may find it important. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 08:36, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Could you please tell me the IP? I'd like to take a look. I'm an admin so it's ok if there's some reason not to tell most users, you can e-mail it to me. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 16:24, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
The IP address of the person issuing the threat was determined using Checkuser, and cannot be released due to the privacy policy. As for other edits to the article by IP addresses, you can check the deleted history, Sandman. Hersfold (t/a/c) 16:40, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Ach, stupid me. Of course, account created = privacy protected. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 18:38, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
The IP address of the threat maker was the same (same internet provider, since thats all i can check) as the hate mail writer from last year. I might be able to retrace it using saved history on my own computer. Other than that, I feel not the need of contacting the authoritries unless its absolute necessary. I will see when school resumes and more words is given out. Btw, don't trust the news, one new station misreports one section and the rest follows suit. =/ Theturtleguy (talk) 19:48, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Please do not post the IP address here. Per the Wikimedia m:Privacy policy, we cannot publicly post that information, even if it is obtained through other sources. Hersfold (t/a/c) 19:51, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
To deny something at this level is to obfuscate the truth and to ignore reality. This matter is now garnering considerable media attention. The story is on all the local news in LA and is a front-page story in today's Los Angeles Times and Los Angeles Daily News. It's also been appearing in media outlets as far away as China. While discouraging vandalism is an admirable goal, this matter has proceeded well beyond that level and priority, now that the individual has been charged with a crime by law enforcement authorities. The WP:DENY policy exists to discourage vandalism and attention seekers; I think one would be hard pressed to say that someone would go to the extremes of facing criminal charges in order to garner attention to his/her vandalism of Wikipedia. Further, now that an arrest has been made in this matter, one could make the argument that publicizing it here would discourage vandalism as it demonstrates that threats will not be ignored. As to how much mention within this article, a link now to the more detailed Wikipedia Signpost page should suffice. 71.175.28.121 (talk) 18:26, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

About only a fraction of the school population knows who the suspect is. Personally, I think that he did not hold any motives for murder. More news to come. Theturtleguy (talk) 19:04, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I think the threat should be mentioned on this page. The news is relevant, and there's an L.A. Times article about it now. The reason I think it's not on here is because Wikimedia doesn't want to make a bad name for itself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.182.122.220 (talk) 13:27, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

The student in question was arrested by police and charged with seven counts of making criminal threats.[1] I suspect this will be plenty to put a damper on any copycats... Jpatokal (talk) 06:45, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Now that some time has passed and the facts are in it's a good time to include a short summary. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 06:51, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost story

The Wikipedia Signpost has a story covering the recent events. JACOPLANE • 2008-04-25 16:31

The external links sourcing that news story proves that the shooting threat was notable and, IMO, is notable for at least a brief line. --Bobak (talk) 21:36, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Alma mater

Tagged as a copypaste from http://www.wilson.hlpusd.k12.ca.us/football/ which is hosted by the district [3] which has a copyright notice of "Copyright © 2005 by The Hacienda La Puente Unified School District. All rights reserved." Also see Wikipedia:Centralized discussion/Fight songs. Without any critical commentary, no claim of limited fair-use can be made and this becomes a clear copyright violation. – Zedla (talk) 21:01, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I converted the verbatim text of the school song, clearly a copyvio, to a brief piece about the song, with no copyvio. Someone else deleted that as unimportant, which I cannot disagree with. So the issue has gone away. Wanderer57 (talk) 22:12, 29 April 2008 (UTC)