Talk:Monifieth 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
Low This article has been rated as low-Importance within Schools.
This article has been marked as needing an infobox.

Why do people keep deleting things?

The Miss Coates/Mrs Gordon is true, and the Mr Saunders story is real!

SO STOP DELETING UNLESS YOU KNOW YOUR FACTS!!!

w00t, pwn teh n00b

Truth is not enough. [[WP:|Verifiability]] is what's needed. Jimbo Wales himself has said that unsubstantiated personal criticism of living people should be removed. He has more authority on Wikipedia than you do or than I do. Loganberry (Talk) 16:02, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Let us edit Monifieth High School again. We won't vandalise it. Pinky promise.

I've unprotected, but if there is any more vandalism, the page will be reprotected/vandals blocked. --Majorly (Talk) 19:53, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I was in the process of adding references when you deleted the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Random2502 (talk • contribs)

Well find the last version in the history and add them. --Majorly 20:58, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Okay, what parts of the article do I need to find sources for? Tell me and I'll do the best I can to find them. --User:random2502 21:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
All of it. See WP:CITE. --Majorly 21:17, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
18 Sources now Random2502 22:11, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Dead Links

They need to stay stop deleting them they encourage people to write articles --RMC1989 15:24, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sources

Can some admin or other tell me how to correctly add sources, so far all I can think to do is add hyperlinks with superscripted numbers or add something along the lines of "see [insert link here] for details". Both of which I have used when finding sources.

So far I have found 4 seperate sources for facts on the site, so if people agree, I think that at least one of the messages at the top of the article should be deleted. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Random2502 (talk • contribs) 20:32, November 28, 2006 (UTC)

WP:FN has information on how to use footnotes correctly. The {{unreferenced}} and {{OR}} tags can be removed at any time, but the fact that they are there is an indication that somebody thinks the article either isn't sufficiently referenced or includes original research. You should probably wait for somebody else to remove the two templates from the top of the article. JDtalk 20:37, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks :D I'm adding sources right now :) Random2502 21:13, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Pupil Council

The Pupil Council won't solve the problem of pupils reaching their potential, the pupil council is meaningless and pupils only go to it to miss out on lessons but i can't write all that in the article because someone like Majorly or Random will go and delete it even though it is the truth. --172.202.109.67 16:22, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Certainly do. Verification is important, not truth. --Majorly 16:28, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
True as it may be (and I should know, I was on the pupil council) do you have any sources? -- 81.153.241.44 16:33, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Where on earth am I going to get a proper source for that unless you count verbal evidence from everybody who's been on it? --172.189.240.5 20:10, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
What verbal evidence? --Majorly 22:21, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
The verbal evidence of User:81.153.241.44 for one--172.159.189.231 14:20, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
That isn't verbal, that's written, by an anonymous user who could be anyone. Any websites, books, magazine, newspaper articles? --Majorly 14:23, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
I was on the pupil council... And it really was a pointless thing... Although I liked putting my opinions across nothing ever gets done about what you say so it really is just a big skive off of whatever you've got that period. - Random2502 21:45, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] cleanup tag

There are so many unreferenced, POVish and anticipatory/speculative statements statements like these that i thought do not meet the standards:

   * "There was shock and outrage from the parents of the school as the school's Higher results slumped from 36 to 30% for pupils passing 3 or more highers from 2005 to 2006. This is an indication of the failing standards of the school and something that Mr Coton needs to urgently address."
   * It remains to be seen whether this approach will help results improve. Some people have claimed that the failings of the school are caused by the recent exodus of experienced teachers and the school's refusal to organise revision classes during the holidays."
   * "The pupil councils in Monifieth High School aim to promote and enhance the quality of school life for staff and pupils."
   * "Hopefully, thanks to the pupil council, something will now be done about this problem."

to mention but a few.

And then there are some facts that I doubt would fit in an encyclopaedia. Like for example the the fire and power failure, the duration of each period, the tucking-in-your-shirt rule... If you think they are notable, please give acceptable references. TwoOars (T | C) 12:46, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup: April 18, 2007

I just performed a major cleanup of the page to remove the Cleanup tag. In this cleanup, I deleted a lot of what I felt was POV, unverified claims, and other things that need not be included in a wiki article (e.g. listing the entire curriculum). Hopefully I didn't step on anyone's toes, but I felt some major changes needed to be made as the article was veering away from Wikipedia standards towards the feel of a small-town newsletter. Regards, BierHerr 02:57, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Alas, this article has been destroyed, oh well. It was more interesting then a small town newsletter anyway ;)--172.143.217.93 19:13, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry to hear you use the word "destroyed"... Perhaps, just "pruned". Yes, it was "interesting", but that's not always a good thing... ;)