Talk:Redlands High School

message: I have changed the name of "Young Philosophers Club" to "Young Philosophes Club" because that is what it actually is known as (I'm in it.), even though the Makio titled it incorrectly.--71.103.211.189 05:59, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clubs 

message: Mouse over the RHS mascot and the popup says "REV HIGH is Better than RHS!!!".  The message is embedded in the title property of the image.  REV is a reference to Redlands East Valley High.  I edited this title to read "Redlands High Terriers"  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Qwy47 (talk • contribs) 22:00, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism or Prank?   

message: When I type in Redlands High School on facebook, the wikipedia article page come up first on top. Am I the only one who has noticed it says Sydney, Australia on there? I tried to go to edit the page on wiki, but when I go there, I cannot see even one reference to anything about Sydney, Australia. So, will someone please take a look at this and fix it please? I have never edited a wiki page before and am not sure if I would know how anyways. I find it disturbing that when someone might look up Redlands High School on facebook then see the false location listing they might be thrown off. Not to mention it just looks stupid and annoying anyways.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.34.158.119 (talk) 21:08, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redlands High School location incorrect. 

message: Would it be appropriate to include discussion of the school catchment area, perhaps with a link to the map from the district?  See Redlands USD district map for high schools  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.197.222.231 (talk) 20:10, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Geographic area covered 

message: Regarding this edit, I'm a bit confused. Redlands Daily Facts is the town's daily newspaper, owned by a national chain, and this is a published article written by the newsroom staff. (Also available on HighBeam Research.) Wouldn't that qualify it as a reliable source? As for the charge of original research, I must confess that my research consisted only of reading this article. I couldn't quote the relevant passages in the citation, because quoting such a short article might run afoul of fair use guidelines. But if I were to quote a passage, it probably would be "Anyone who has participated in athletic, primarily football, at RHS is a part of the Long Blue Line," and "At football games, the Terrier mascot runs across the track space in front of the bleachers with a streaming banner that says, 'The Long Blue Line' to rally the fans." – Minh Nguyễn 💬 20:43, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Please read WP:NODEADLINE. I don't do anything substantial on Wikipedia on the weekends. Get back to you Monday night. John from Idegon (talk) 01:32, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sure, no worries, I'm certainly not asking for an immediate response. In fact, I edit primarily on the weekends, so I may not be able to get back to this discussion for a little while; take your time. It does feel ironic that reverting distinct edits of mine without responding to discussions on the talk page makes me essentially reliant on you to be my reviewer. That's unfortunate and a somewhat novel experience for me as an editor, but I appreciate that you're busy trying to keep school articles from devolving into promotional mush.Anyhow, I hope we can agree that ultimately we shouldn't let stand an unsourced statement about the cost of the stadium that contradicts the source I found. In case it's unclear, I have no connection to the school. I made this edit because I felt compelled to respond constructively to the  tag at the top of the page. Generally, I respond to that tag by adding sources, where possible, rather than deleting content, but your approach is also justified in many cases. – Minh Nguyễn 💬 04:13, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

text:  I know you've been busy, so just a friendly reminder that this discussion is still unresolved. Of the edits I've attempted to make to this article so far, the "Long Blue Line" one is the least important. More important is sourcing the team name and correcting the stadium's price tag, per the cited Daily Facts articles. If you'd rather make these changes in your own words, that's fine, but we shouldn't let the current version of the article stand. – Minh Nguyễn 💬 15:58, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sport team name 

message: From Talk:Long Blue Line#Redlands High School:  While I obviously can't explain 's precise reasons for removing the source for Thin Blue Line, my concern with that reference is that it is a question/answer page, not an article. There's no author or indication that it is any more reliable than a user forum. I think that the discussion of Thin Blue Line has been wrapped up in the overall discussion (above) on sports in this article, and will hopefully be resolved in that discussion. 
As for Long Blue Line, in my opinion this article falls into the fuzzy regions of MOS:DABMENTION. I would not add it because I don't think that the local use of the name is notable and I don't think that readers will end up on the Long Blue Line DAB page looking for Redland High School. However, my previous experiences editing DAB pages has demonstrated that many editors disagree with me. Leschnei (talk) 14:55, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for explaining your reasoning, . Maybe I'm mistaken, but from what I could tell, the answer portion of the article was written by the paper's staff, and the article was formally published as part of the paper, as opposed to one of the user-generated content sections commonly found on community newspaper sites these days. Otherwise, the article wouldn't have appeared in HighBeam Research via ProQuest. It also doesn't appear in an op-ed section. There are other mentions of "Long Blue Line" in the paper's online archives, but none that defines the phrase so clearly. You may be right about the disambiguation page; I don't have a strong opinion on that. – Minh Nguyễn 💬 15:53, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  , I wasn't aware that High Beam would screen that out - that's interesting. You make good points and, to be honest, I probably wouldn't remove it from the article if another editor had added it. I just wouldn't add it myself. Leschnei (talk) 16:49, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: It was removed because it was added to the infobox in the "nickname" parameter, which, somewhat couter-intuitively, links to the Wikipedia article on athletic team names. However, one un-bylined blurb from the local paper is not enough to elevate it to information that is informative and useful to our wide audience, so I continue to oppose its inclusion. The bit about the football field was and is too much content for the sourcing provided (see WP:WEIGHT) and belongs in a section on the campus, not athletics and certainly not its own section. There is no need to name the donor as no one outside the school's community gives a rat's ass about it, and the cost is of little consequence either. Per school article guidelines, with a very few very narrow exceptions, we do not name non notable students, past or present. You want to improve the article, write a proper athletics section, listing all the sports offered on a varsity level for both sexes, and any top level achievement. In California, that would be CIF section championships. If there is no other source, the sports listing can be sourced to the school. Achievement requires secondary sources. John from Idegon (talk) 02:38, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  To be clear, I didn't write the "Stadium" section or the "Notable alumni" section; I only attempted to improve the "Stadium" section incrementally. It's unrealistic to expect that an editor fix all of an article's problems in order to make any improvement to an article. You're arguing that the passage about the stadium is unworthy of inclusion. Meanwhile, I'm arguing that the passage about the stadium is inaccurate and unsourced – so I set out to fix those two problems. If I channel my inner deletionist and remove the passage, would you let my edit stand, or would this slow-motion edit war continue? – Minh Nguyễn 💬 09:11, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Long Blue Line 

message: I noticed that the opening line for the article, and the first sentence under the history section, are word-for-word identical. Do we have any unique information we could place in the opening line instead? If not, I would think we should reword or delete one of the two sentences, for the sake of removing redundancy.
TheHardestAspectOfCreatingAnAccountIsAlwaysTheUsername (talk) 02:50, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Identical Sentences in lead and History section 

message: The Wikipedia article on Joan Baez suggests she went to Palo Alto High School and not Redlands High School.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zalzoid (talk • contribs) 00:15, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Joan Baez? 

message: Please explain how the people you been adding as "key people" to the article's infobox with edits such as this are actually relevant encyclopedically to Wikipedia readers per :WP:NOTEVERYTHING and provide some reliable sources supporting such a claim. Assuming that you're just not adding the names of some friend (perhaps fellow students) just a laugh, there should be a pretty strong and reliably sourced reason for adding such names; otherwise, they probably don't belong in the article per :WP:Namechecking. I'd more than happy to re-add them myself if there inclusion can be properly justified. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:12, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Key people