Talk:Trinity Christian Academy (Addison, Texas)

message: This information is not relevant to the school. Would it really make sense to publish every disciplinary decision the school has ever made. If the student violated the rules of a PRIVATE school than he gets fittingly punished. It is not neccessary to have on the Wiki page.  Aristotle 15:09, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  James Barnett Case

message: i recently added back info about the gay student that was outed to his parents and expelled by the school, but another used reverted it. whats up with that?!Qrc2006 02:31, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: James Bartnett case

message: Houston Voice article this link to an article in the houston voice about the expelled gay student is wholley appropriate and validated for inclusion. if you have a problem with it please bring it up here and tell my why before removing it again if you feel that is the path you want to go down. i did not recreate the link to my-boi since the site is down for the time being. Qrc2006 01:02, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I again removed the link to the article about Barnett.  It belongs in his article, not this one.  The link to his article is appropriate and I have no problem with it and feel that it's a good compromise.  --ElKevbo 01:36, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I object on the grounds that you are both inserting your POV into the article and giving undue weight to this event.  The links you insist on adding should be used as references and not placed in the "External link(s)" section.  --ElKevbo 10:38, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: innaproproate links

message: ive gone over the pages history and James Barnett has been removed 3 times now over the history, by anonomous users each time, most recently today, i suggest we ask for semiprotection for the time being to avoid information being removed again.Qrc2006 10:13, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You're welcome to request semi-protection but I seriously doubt the volume of "vandalism" isn't high enough to warrant it.  I also believe this is more of a content dispute and thus inappropriate for and impossible to resolve by semi-protection.  --ElKevbo 10:41, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: semiprotection

message: anybody thing any of these links are relevant?
*  James Barnett's blog: Life...Power...Pride...
* Gay.com article: Group gives grant to expelled gay student
* DailyKos article: Gay Teen Expelled From High School
* Towerload article: Gay High School Teen Outed and Expelled
* Towerload article: James Barnett Update
* NotGeniuses.com article: Gay Teen Expelled From High School
* opednews.com article: Expulsion Wasn’t End for Gay Student in Texas
* The Point Foundation article: High School Honor Student Expelled from Trinity Christian Academy in Addison, TX, for Being Gay
* gaymonkey.com article: Gay Texas Teen Receives Scholarship After Being Expelled
* DissentVoice article: Expulsion Wasn’t End for Gay Student in Texas
* Gay.com/PlanetOut network article: Group gives grant to expelled gay student
* OutletRadio article: Point Foundation Grant Aides Student
* PlanetOut article: Group gives grant to expelled gay student
* YubaNet article: Expulsion Wasn't End for Gay Student in Texas
* gayteens article: Expulsion Wasn’t End for Gay Student in Texas
* AxisOfLogic article: Expulsion Wasn’t End for Gay Student in Texas
* kipesquire blog: Gay Student Outed and Expelled for G-Rated Website
* Buzzflash article
*  whosoever.org article: The Gay Community Has To Blame Itself Too
* queerday article: Expelled gay teen James Barnett being disowned by parents?
* HoustonVoice article: Christian school kicked a teen out for being gay
to add to the article Qrc2006 09:06, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They may be useful as references but I don't think they belong as "External links." --ElKevbo 09:11, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I think it is possible to overlink a sub-element of an article.  There is already one link as a <ref> against the expulsion incident.  I think selecting a maximum of two more, as references in the same manner would be acceptable, though really suggest one.  My feeling is that, should the article on the student survive, which it ought to, but is unlikely to, the links are more appropriate to the person than the academy.  Fiddle Faddle 09:14, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  links 

message: The information included concerning James Barnett is not entirely correct. It might be a good idea to contact the school for the accurate information.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.90.14.145 (talk • contribs) 11:28, November 29, 2006
:Thank you for your suggestion! When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes.  Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the  link at the top. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to).  The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes — they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills.  New contributors are always welcome.  --ElKevbo 16:48, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: However, please keep in mind that information should be verifiable with reliable sources that isn't original research. Contacting the school might constitute original research. However, if the school can point us to any sources to use that would be ok. Are there any specific details that you think are inaccurate here? JoshuaZ 16:54, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gay Student Expelled 

message: a lot fo edits over the past few weeks have been pretty destructive and a lot of well sourced content regarding james barnett was removed, i tried to put it back but i might have been shotty since im bad at /ref/'s and it seems to me it might be the school administration or someone involved with them who is doing it, lots of anonomous users, can anyone find out if theyre comming from addison? lots of POV and semi-libelous stuff has been added aswell, it reeks of vandalism and POV pushing in favor and against the school, i would like it nominated for semiprotectionT ALK•QRC2006•¢ʘñ†®¡ß§ 01:22, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  content 

message: I again reinserted the information regarding James Barnett it is notable, the school made national headlines, its well cited, do not remove it without first discussing. Use edit summaries!!!T ALK•QRC2006•¢ʘñ†®¡ß§ 00:08, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: James Barnett

message: Does this really need a full section all to itself?  The man has his own article, which refers to the school, but the school is 40 years old and doesn't need that.  Perhaps Barnett could be listed as "notable" instead? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 22:52, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revisit Barnett 

message: The information about James Barnett seems to have as much support for removal as its inclusion, and does the disciplinary action taken years ago really belong here?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.252.172.104 (talk) 08:57, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Support isn't the only measure used here. Our guidelines are. In fact 99 out of a hundred users could say Texas sucks, but if one user says it does not and could show that Texas ranked last in the nation for states that suck, it would be that one editor's content that would be added because he would be able to prove that Texas doesn't suck. As for something that happened years ago, it is actually even more appropriate to include old news as this is an encyclopedia. Or else can you imagine, we would end up removing the background on why and when the school was founded since it was years ago as well! This is old news, but it is the current history, so it very much belongs. The only way to remove the James Barnett content is to get in a time machine and make it so that it never happened.Westernstag (talk) 06:19, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not constant reinclusion. It is procedural restoration. No one is allowed to remove content, unless it violates the policies of wikipedia. Most could oppose the JB issue from being included just because they don't think it merrits inclusion. However it would still be allowed for even one person to put it back if taken out. Why? Because wikipedia maintains a neutral stance (see: Wikipedia:Neutral) and that includes information that you may dislike. The information about JB is attested in reliable secondary sources (see Wikipedia:RS) and that makes it so that it meets the bar. Also as a matter of culture when something can be proven as the issue with JB and someone, most often person's clearly related to the subject of the school try and remove it constantly over years, we don't take kindly to it. Wikipedia is not censored (see Wikipedia:NotCensored). To answer your question, at no point does restoring valid sourced material become bullying of any kind. Removing it is not bullying per se, but it is Valdalism (see Wikipedia:Valdalism) and the punishment for vandalising wikipedia or damaging the project and making nonconstructive or disruptive edits is to be blocked. You must come into agreement with editors on this talk page to remove any controversial content from the article and have this rationale be based in policy. However removing the material on JB can not be based in out policy and if you read the links to the essays on our policies you will see why. This is a warning you should head, don't remove content. Content removal after it has been decided that it should remain is considered vandalism, repeated removal is considered edit warring. It damages us, misinforms our readers, and uses up our resources (every edit summary is saved in full and that means more money spent on servers and spent on electricity by a nonprofit with just a few hundred servers and 43 staff members). My best advice if you are concerned about the school's reputation is to add positive information about the school. But you can't just write it based on what you think, that is a primary source (independent of the subject) [not the school paper]. No. You must find positive mentions of the school in any newspapers, magazines, or books. Those are secondary sources and material from there is legitimate to add here. And remember its about honestly, policy, sourced material, and anti-censorship, not insistence. The most insistent people will be blocked too if they violate the tenents of our project.Acdcrocks (talk) 10:21, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

text: Looks good to me. Brammers (talk/c) 12:44, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  James Barnett 

message: The article is really short and lacking in material if you discount the large quote at the start and the item about the gay lad who was expelled.  It looks like the only reasons for notability are because:
#It is a high school, therefore notable because it is a high school
#It hit the news because this kid was kicked out.
Aren't there any content experts here who can flesh this out?  I know it says "Stub", but it could surely be expanded quickly? Fiddle Faddle 11:24, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this really all there is? 

message: I’d like to start a discussion about this article now largely constituting an attack piece, focused solely on historical controversies. WP: Attack.  Yet this is an article about a real school with more than 1,200 students (with a 20% minority student body). In addition to controversial content, the page should give a well-rounded article about the school as it is today, following Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools/Article advice, as well following the article structure of the many Good Articles about secondary schools. MOS:STRUCTURE.  There are plenty of good sources available to make this a more standard school article, such as the GAs for Arlington Senior High School, Auburn High School (Alabama), duPont Manual High School.
Since I have a COI, I have tried to use Talk to suggest content to make this article better, Talk:Trinity Christian Academy (Addison, Texas)#October 2022 Requested Updates to Page but after the review by User: Jacona, the situation became worse in several ways and only marginally improved in others
1.  In the lead,  it now says “...as of 2020, 4 percent of the student body was Black” but the body of the article gives the fuller context of diversity of the student body: “In the 2019–20 school year, 1101 of 1,379 or 80% of students in grades PK-12 were White, 85 or 6% were Asian, 76 or 6% were Hispanic, while 58 of 1,379 or 4% were Black, .”
By choosing to  highlight only the recent Black student population in the lead, right after a statement about the discriminatory 1971 history, it gives the false impression that the current student body is 96% white. A 1971 to 2019 comparison is not something being paraphrased from press coverage - it’s an editorial decision by an editor, based on primary sources. While use of WP: Primary is probably valid for these types of statistics since these are very straightforward, being selective in what stats to show, and contrasting it in a sentence with historical press coverage, adds a layer of impermissible WP: PRIMARY analysis.
The school now actively promotes and practices diversity. Not giving a misleading  impression of the current makeup of the student body is very important since there is also prominent emphasis in the lead about the school’s origins, 50 years, as an all-white school.
The body of the article should also have its own paragraph about the diversity stats today rather than the stats being placed as the last sentence of the very long first paragraph about History. A repeat of info from the lead is consistent with Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section which says that the lead is a summary of important information from the body of the article.
2. In the lead, a general description of the school as it is now constituted should precede a description of controversial historical events from 50 years ago. Basic school description and statistics are consistent with the structure and content of similar articles, including the Good Articles for Scarborough Day School and Briarcliff High School. Also consistent with the the type information recommended by Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools/Article advice.. Here’s a suggested new, well-sourced second sentence.
 The academy is co-ed and serves students in Pre-kindergarten through twelfth grade, with 1379 students.The school has a 10.5 to 1 student to teacher ratio.
The size of the student body and student-teacher ratios are usual facts given in the lead for secondary school articles. It’s not in every school article but it’s well-sourced and moves the article away from being an atack page. Yes, the stats fluctuate, but not dramatically and can easily be updated. Furthermore, this information should be repeated in the body of the article, as per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section
3. The section about the historical origins of the school as an all-white academy is no doubt important. But it’s now filled with excessive detail given the length of this article and the fact that it is about a large, functioning school with a student body of 1200. It’s also not accurate – what the headmaster said 50 years ago was awful enough that it does not warrant exaggeration. The article does not quote him saying Black students couldn’t do the school work – he said the “pathetic situation” was the testing scores were bad. I read that to be a commentary on public school education being bad, not a statement about the abilities of Black students.
4. I’d also ask that editors discuss requests #7 and #8 in  Talk:Trinity Christian Academy (Addison, Texas)#October 2022 Requested Updates to Page. The first request used local editorially-credible newspapers to add current History. Yes, it’s not as exciting as the controversies but this type of history - new buildings, new academic programs, sports teams – is the majority of most good articles about schools. Content like this is very much needed to keep the article from just being an all-out attack.
Many more changes can be made to make this article into a better article, closer to the standards or what secondary school articles should be. Sports team championships, academic awards, course offerings, etc.  I’d be glad to discuss other ideas and make more suggestions. Lkspears (talk) 16:05, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Calling it an "attack piece" seems silly, but there's some interesting history behind the school, for sure. tedder (talk) 18:01, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

text: Lkspears, The school has certainly come a short way in a long time, so far as diversity is concerned! I think the article would surely benefit from expansion, if sources are available. If you would like to see the article improved, perhaps you could provide some independent, secondary reliable sources. Just cutting and pasting the URLs would help. We all want the article to be better, but not everyone is interested in accuracy - the Wikipedia article should not look like the school's website, which tells this fairytale about the school's founding. It makes me very sad to see racial discrimination equated to "the glory of God". Since you're connected to the school, perhaps you could encourage the administration to publicly acknowledge their founding and demonstrate how they've grown despite of it, rather than claiming that very sordid beginning to be glorious and divine. — Jacona (talk) 20:26, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

text: Lkspears, After reviewing what I could find on newspapers.com, it appears that the notability of this school rests almost entirely on it's being founded to preserve segregation. The article would probably not exist if it were not for that. — Jacona (talk) 22:38, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: A further, more personal response may be found at User talk:Lkspears — Jacona (talk) 14:01, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

text: Demographics of Addison, Texas: 48% White, 23% Hispanic,16% Black. Demographics of TCA: 80% White, 6% Hispanic, 0.7% Black. If this article were an attack piece, it would likely dwell more on how this school was founded to perpetuate segregation, and successfully continues that mission today. — Jacona (talk) 15:19, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improving article from attack piece to standard school page 

message: Editors following this page may be interested in this discussion at ANI   — BillHPike (talk, contribs) 20:40, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  ANI 

message: I thought that Twinkle would automatically make a talk page section, but I guess not, so I will make one myself.
I have added a  tag here after seeing this article brought up on AN/I; it seems like the article is giving WP:UNDUE focus to scandal and controversy (i.e. the majority of the "History" section is quotes from its principal... in 1972). There is also a paragraph of unclear relevance, that talks about a Ponzi scheme perpetrated against some relatives of people who went to the school (). I may be missing something here, but it doesn't seem like this has much to do with the school. jp×g 02:58, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: JPxG, As far as the Ponzi scheme, I agree with you wholeheartedly. As far as the history, it would seem the circumstances of the founding of any institution would be some of the more important information about the institution. Any history of the United States for instance, is likely to include a lot of quotes from the declaration of independence and the constitution, I would probably expect more quotes about Washington, Jefferson and Adams than about the ten most recent presidents combined. — Jacona (talk) 01:24, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV tag