Talk:National Academic Championship
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Chip Beall info
The Chip Beall page was recently deleted, and Beall is only notable as the operator of the National Academic Championship, so I incorporated info formerly on that page into this one. BobBuckeyeBuddy 21:33, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
- This article is about the National Academic Championship not Chip Beall. Reverted. IrishGuy talk 21:34, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
So, is there any place on Wikipedia for information about Chip Beall and QU? It seems pointless to have three separate pages for what's really one topic, and someone deleted the Chip Beall page anyway. What is the right way to include this information? BobBuckeyeBuddy 21:49, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
I am a member of the National Academic Association. I will delete anything from this page that is not strictly factual. If you want to tout one competition over another, do it on another page!
The Chip Beall page was deleted because some sophomoric moron wrote all kinds of untrue drivel.
Hi Chip. Please refrain from editing pages that are about you. WP:COI. Randy Blackamoor 03:10, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm not Chip. An encyclopedia is, by definition, a compendium of factual information. If you wish to post opinion, you should start a blog.
Most of the stuff you edited in was untrue (no way is QU bigger than NAQT as a question supplier) or ridiculous ad copy (Chip Beall is motivated solely by his desire to reward academic excellence, not by the thousands of dollars charged to participating teams!). Physician, heal thyself. And if this is Mastandrea rather than Beall, maybe you should take a hard look at http://www.geocities.com/plagiarismreport/plagiarism.html and see what kind of person your employer is. Randy Blackamoor 03:31, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
The initial information was not only poorly written but unfactual. Not to mention the flagrant violations of the neutral point of view requirements. As for the plagiarism report, I wrote at least one of those questions myself - and it was taken directly from one of M. Scott Peck's books (probably The Road Less Traveled but it could have been People of the Lie or another work) rather than some other source of questions. Given that Questions Unlimited has tens of thousands of questions in circulation throughout schools in the United States, is it not possible that the questions were stolen from QU rather than vice versa? Or that two question writers used the same factual source to write the same questions? I worked with Beall in the early 1990s and am not his biggest fan, but he's not a monster either. Moreover, it is pathetic and cowardly to attack people anonymously by spewing falsehoods over the Internet.
Did you "work with him in the early 1990s" or are you a "member of the National Academic Association" now? How did you get paid to write questions for him in 2002 if your employment ended in the 1990s? How can you not be Chip Beall but be a member of an organization whose only member is Chip Beall? Your story contradicts itself. Randy Blackamoor 04:03, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
I was the former associate director of the association, ending in 1996. I can't speak as to the organization's membership now, but Beall was not its only member then. I do not have a current affiliation to the organization and so do not have a conflict of interest. The errors in this article were so egregious that they could not be addressed via the talk page(not to mention the abysmal quality of the writing). I have merely corrected the errors, added factual information that can easily be verified through public record, and reorganized the content for flow. I have also challenged the article for its violations of Wikipedia policy. As for question dating - Beall has a huge database of questions amassed over nearly 30 years, and it can take years before he chooses to use one in competition after an in-house or freelance writer submits it. Really, though, if you have a problem with him, you should address it with him directly. It obvious by your vitriol that you have no business contributing to this article. And whatever you might think of him, Beall would never have so little respect for the quiz bowl community as to try to smear another organization. Mensa1960 05:05, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
Well, congratulations. You've carved up and ruined this page just like you nearly ruined high school quizbowl before PACE and NAQT came along to start driving you out of business (a process likely to be completed within the next three years, given current trends in NAC field size). Randy Blackamoor 09:43, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
It is certainly true that there is criticism of Beall's format and questions, and it is certainly true that attendance has declined over the past 10 years. The criticism deserves to be explained to a non-quizbowl playing audience. I will restore my edits, and leave out mention of other national quiz bowl championships. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shawn Pickrell (talk • contribs) 01:59, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Oldest?
I seem to recall from minimal involvement in eastern quizbowl that "It's Academic" has been around much longer than 1977. I will put a fact tag on this, but I think there must be something older than 1977. LonelyBeacon 12:38, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
I added an advertising warning as well. The first two paragraphs seem to be written as a partial advertisement to teams/individuals/coaches??LonelyBeacon 12:43, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Also, Delaware County Hi-Q has been in existence since 1948. It is the oldest High School Academic quiz competition. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.71.29.78 (talk) 19:37, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
The tag I added was removed without explanation and without citation. I have now deleted that section and moved it here:
the nation's oldest (founded 1978) provider of high school quiz bowl competition and practice questions.
Please do not add this claim unless there is some kind of a neutral, reputable citation that supports this claim. LonelyBeacon 21:37, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
This link from the New York Times: [1] confirms that the NAC is not the oldest tournament in the United States. I am deleting that statement from the article, and it should not be readded. LonelyBeacon 02:51, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Criticism
I have deleted what was left of a much larger section that was gutted by another editor:
The QU NAC has come under significant criticism from several teams. This is mostly over the differing philosophies regarding the approach to how quizbowl should be played, thou. In addition, short questions often degenerate into a test of reflex between two very talented teams. While some coaches and players prefer the perceived excitement such matches can generate, other coaches and players prefer longer, "pyramidal," questions which allow for finer distinction between two teams at the same level. Declining attendance at the NAC may be an indicator that opinions are gradually changing.
Based on my familiarity with this tournament, this section does not even begin to scratch the surface of the allegation and criticisms (everything from flagrant cheating and plagarism to just tasteless comments made by employees). However, unless there is someway to cite this, it needs to be removed. It is my hope that citations can be found, because the recent history of this touranment has not been without sound and in some cases serious concerns. LonelyBeacon 21:55, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
The editor that gutted the section did so without any rhyme or reason. I am restoring the Criticism section with an eyewitness account from a gentleman I trust completely as the citation. Shawn Pickrell 11:55, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Mr. Pickrell, with due respect to your experience and your hard work in quizbowl, I'm not sure that an eyewitness account qualifies as an acceptable citation here? If that were the case, I could cite my own eyewitness account of the abuses at this tournament. I'm leaving this for now, but I ahve no doubt it will get knocked out by someone else. LonelyBeacon 13:19, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure Chip isn't going to reveal anything bad about his own tournament, so where else can we find a citation about this admittedly minor event aside from maybe a newspaper article that mentions some of these abuses or quotes team members complaining? At least we have a citation now. Shawn Pickrell 18:37, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
I agree, and it is frustrating. I reiterate agreement that there needs to be a way to constructively show what goes on here, and why it is not accepted by most people within the quizbowl community. LonelyBeacon 21:51, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
I think I have stated the problem with some of the NAC questions in language that even a casual follower of quizbowl can understand. Thank you for rephrasing things in more neutral language. Shawn Pickrell (talk) 03:05, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
