Talk:RateMyTeachers

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale.

There is a new article containing some controversy, and apparently the ownership of the website either changed hands or may change hands soon... www.michaelhussey.com. It seems that the creator is disputing this. This should be watched and the owner information updated accordingly. 137.141.245.34 (talk) 21:45, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Is the nature of the newly added "criticism" section relevant, and if so, is it more of a rant/opinion (poorly written) that should be altered?

"As students and parents are generally not the best judges of the effectiveness of teachers" is stated as fact within the opinion - leads me to believe that the contributor is supplanting a bias into the entry.

I agree. Personally I think students and parents ARE the best people to rate a teacher ... I mean who else can "rate" them? Sure someone from the bored checks in on each teacher for a class maybe once a year ... but obviously the teacher is prepared for that. I think the entire critisism section or atleast part of it should be removed 24.36.231.48 01:01, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Contents 1 NPOV dispute 2 This is an appaling website 3 Credibility section is very poorly written 4 Added the Rules Section

[edit] NPOV dispute

I would add that the aticle itself does not follow NPOV since it takes almost all of the information from the owners of the site. The article takes a completely positive view of what is a controversial, often reviled service. It repeats claims of decorum that just are not true.

"Criticism" section do not maintain a NPOV and do not meet Wikipedia article standards by failing to cite sources, using original research, and using information that cannot be verified.

Since this page is virtually an advertisement from those who run this site can they verify that a single person does not place multiple posts on their sites. It is possible to create as many identity names on this site as you have email addresses and they accept hotmail and other free addresses so one person could post unlimited times.

Who better to rate teachers than children? Are you serious? The principals, school boards, and other teachers all professionally rate the teachers. Some teachers lose thier jobs some get promoted. The students and parents are important to give information to those who do supervise teachers. Children will rate teachers on silly immature things, because they are children. If you look at ratemyteachers.com you will see hundreds of rating based on personal appearance or clothes or how cold the classroom is. People who like this site should place their name and place of work beside their comments and allow others to write anything they choose about them all over the internet using their name and where they work.

[edit] This is an appaling website

, universally condemned by professionals. [1] It reads like a total advert and i'm going to have a crack at editing it back to some sense of reality. --Brideshead 21:54, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Please remove this website. It serves no other purpose the defamation of character. Durff

Wikipedia does not remove articles based on whether or not they are defamatory. We use the criteria of notability, which this subject meets. Natalie 01:57, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I'd be interested to know why you trust Wikipedia, and yet fear RateMy... when but are user-built. If anything, RateMy... runs on a more classically open source model than does Wikipedia, with Torvolds figures at the head of each school. Educators' distaste for the site is understandable, but hardly a discredit to the site. - Plasticbadge 14:29, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Credibility section is very poorly written

There also some facts that are wrong and it really needs to be cleaned up. Who wrote this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.236.165.88 (talk • contribs)

[edit] Added the Rules Section

I've added the Rules section and the first paragraph therein. — Taggard+ 12:13, 31 May 2007 (UTC)