Talk:Fordham Preparatory School

message: Why was the school logo removed?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.198.123.106 (talk) 01:17, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Picture

message: This article is heavily waited down with sub-trivia of no interest to anyone but Fordham students and their families. -- Jmabel | Talk 07:14, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I am actually going to do some massive editing right now. The terminology section has to go. Full of neologisms. Only of interest to students at the school and we have to have a global view here. --Woohookitty(cat scratches) 01:42, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Sub-trivia

message: Why was my academics page removed? It provided an accurate listing of courses offered at the Prep and proper sources were cited. This was in the style of many other articles about secondary and prep schools, in which their curriculum and offerings are detailed. No grounds for deletion. Mla.squash (talk) 00:27, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:WPSCHOOLS/AG#OS has information that Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools has established as a standard/reasonable level of detail for these sorts of articles. The prose intro also seemed to cross the line into copyvio from the school's website. DMacks (talk) 02:18, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Regarding your note that some other school articles have this sort of information, feel free to let us know what articles those are, so they can likewise be brought up to standards (see WP:OTHERCONTENT for why this is not a valid reason to include poor content here). DMacks (talk) 13:57, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: This is why everyone dislikes wikipedia. Whenever someone is trying to make constructive edits on an article with which they are familiar with and care about, a number of nameless and faceless "editors" immediately jump in and delete everything. Why is this page being monitored so closely? There is nothing wrong with the information I included; everything was appropriately cited. While this page is of moderate importance overall, the school has a very rich history and deserves more than a blurb. If my content was not appropriate, then I expect you to go into every other prep school or secondary school's page and delete all similar content, of which there is much. A list of facilities and their benefactors is appropriate for a private school page, as is a general overview of the curriculum if it is notable, and I believe that one that includes Latin, Ancient Greek, five modern languages, and a plethora of other courses is notable. Mla.squash (talk) 21:09, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The above is in reference to my second attempt at this page, which was quickly deleted by some fool Mla.squash (talk) 21:10, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:   The page is not being monitored closely, as far as I can tell. I found your changes because I tend to keep an eye on edits made by newcomers (as they are the users mostly likely to make mistakes). The mistake here (in my opinion; I'm nobody special other than a more experienced editor) is in adding a lot of material that makes the article appear more like a brochure for the school rather than a neutral encyclopedia article. You were already pointed to WP:WPSCHOOLS/AG#OS which lists the type of material that is appropriate to include in an article about a school. In particular, material about the school's curriculum, facilities, etc., are only useful if they are in some way unique. Unique features of the school are likely to be covered in independent sources, and will not rely on the school's own website for their sourcing. The material you added about the school's curriculum and facilities do not make Fordham Prep unique in any way, and thus are not really relevant to an encyclopedia article. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 21:30, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Academics