Talk:Stone Bridge High School

message: Shouldn't the debate state championship be stated somewhere else in the article? Currently it is listed in the Athletics section, but I don't see how debate can possibly be classified as an athletic sport. I cannot think of anywhere else to mention it though. Possibly create a new section for other extracirricular accomplishments from the school? If more information could be found for a section like that, that would make more sense to me. -- Johnny06man 02:42, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: It seems to me that this article is getting a bit lengthy. While a lot of the content in here is important, I don't think it all belongs in this specific article. Sections such as "Schedule Information" and "Curriculum" mostly apply for the entire county. Instead of placing it here, the information could be included under the LCPS. Take for instance the "ESL" subsection. All Loudoun County high schools have ESL, so why does it need to be pointed out in Stone Bridge's page? Perhaps we could include a link to a page dedicated to LCPS curriculum and then point out any exceptions on the schools' page.
Another section that could be branched off is the football history section. It looks like there is enough info to support a full page. Thoughts on this idea? -- Johnny06man 20:29, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds fine to me. I will look at expanding the LCPS page with more curriculum info. I also went ahead and renamed the athletics page to make it more accurate. -- Johnny06man 00:20, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Length of article 

message: :Image:Loudoun Seal.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:35, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Loudoun Seal.jpg

message: This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 10:39, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject class rating

message: :Image:Stonebridgelogo2.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 06:21, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Stonebridgelogo2.jpg

message: I have tagged History of Athletics at Stone Bridge High School for merger with this article.
The athletics article contains a huge amount of unencyclopedic, unreferenced, and uncited material, and should not exist per WP:NOTWEBHOST, as most of this belongs on the school's website, not as a separate entry in an encyclopedia.  There are schools with athletic programs which are over 100 years old, and far more successful, and they do not warrant pages.  The article constitutes a content fork overemphasizing the school's athletic program. LonelyBeacon (talk) 00:33, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Note:the article has been tagged as lacking sufficient references since 2007. LonelyBeacon (talk) 00:34, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Upon further review, I should throw a dash of original research in there as well. LonelyBeacon (talk) 00:36, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

text: It is unfortunate given the amount of care and attention the page has received. However, I agree I don't see anything that could justify athletics getting its own article. There could be a detailed athletics section in this article but the level of detail on this sub-page is way over the top, and while some references are present, a lot of it is unverifable commentary which violates policy such as WP:NOR, WP:NPOV, and WP:V. Besides whether it is wrong or right; many editors object to most high schools having an article at all. They will have a field day (no pun intended) when they come across this. Camaron ·  Christopher · talk 21:28, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: In the absence of any counter discussion over 6 months, I completed this merge today.  I tried to sort through was "keepable" (encyclopedic) even though it was not cited.  The section now has a reference improvement tag.  A bulk of the information was simply unencyclopedic, and was not transferred over in the merge. LonelyBeacon (talk) 16:52, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge discussion

message: I've seen some sources saying that the mother of the accused boy said the following:
:He's a 15-year-old boy that wanted to have sex in the bathroom, with somebody that was willing
:And they're twisting this just enough to make it a political hot button issue
:If I was in a position where I was about to be raped, I would be screaming, kicking, everything ... You're 15. You can reasonably defend yourself. You're not just going to sit there and take it
There has been a highly critical response to this. Is there a way we can acknowledge that in the sexual assault section?
Another possibility might be to split this off into it's own article given the international coverage it's gotten. That would help avoid it detracting from overall discussion of the schoolWakandaQT (talk) 20:56, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I agree that a separate article is due. Online Encyclopedias' strength is that we can create lots of off-shoot articles on particular issues of a wider topic.Polska jest Najważniejsza (talk) 23:26, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

text: We should absolutely not include a long quote from the mother of the accused. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:06, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: mother comments about sexual assault claim