Talk:John F. Kennedy High School (Richmond, California)

message: I found the first instance of the reference that became the oral narrative. It occurs on March 6, 2009, on this iteration of the page: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_F._Kennedy_High_School_(Richmond,_California)&oldid=275429735.
Over a number of subsequent edits, the reference is gradually fined-tuned into the one that is on the page now: "Narrative and Oral History analysis provided by Dr. Nicholas Zoffel, San Jose State University, Department of Communication Studies from interviews with inaugural teachers Ms. Dolly Felix, Mr. Michael Peritz, & Community Organizer, Mr. George Harris (Peritz, M., Felix, D., Harris, G., personal communication via. interview, December 29, 2008). Of scholarly note, the interview process follows guidelines for Narrative Analysis compiled in Creswell, J.W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications"
As per our discussion, I will most likely delete that reference. Before I do, however, I'd like to try to contact the researcher who put it in to find out if they have documentation that can be used to make it a reference acceptable by Wikipedia. They are identified by their IP address rather than by a user name, so I'm not sure of the best way to proceed. Is there a recommended procedure for contacting the editor? I'm open to suggestions. JacDT (talk) 21:21, 5 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: This looks useful, if it can be applied to the current article: Wikipedia: Oral_history.   JacDT (talk) 03:54, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Okay, I don't think I will need the oral narrative. It looks like either that that narrative evolved into the masters thesis written by Adkisson at the Berkeley School of Journalism, or they independently verify the same information. Also, a lot of the information is in the Peritz Scenario 3 reference. So I'll delete that citation to the oral history.JacDT (talk) 02:39, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oral narrative 

message: John, in response to your comment upstream, I checked the article for references that are paywalled. I didn't find any in the history section. I did find one in the notable alumni section: the book In Contempt that is cited in the page you linked to as your reference for Christopher Darden. It gives the reference without an online link to text of the book, just the ISBN, which leaves the reader having to purchase the book or do their own search online. Since that was your input to the article, I'll let you take care of updating that reference. Although I didn't find a full copy of the book online, pages are available through various sites, so perhaps those can be referred to. (It's a a good book, by the way; I've enjoyed the excerpts I read online)
I don't know if the notes for the oral history are paywalled are not; I haven't yet found the original text. See the Oral Narrative section above for details. I'm currently checking the revisions to the reference that evolved in 2009 to see if I can find one with an editor with a current contact. It looks like a lot of work went into the obtaining the history, which could potentially be very useful, but without the actual text, my hands are tied. If I can get the text from the author, though, I may be able to use the recommendations given in Wikipedia:Oral_history to upload them. I'll continue working on that.  JacDT (talk) 16:52, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Paywall 

message: Another question: The School Accountability Report Card (SARC) for 1980–1999 is no longer online, at least not that I have so far been able to find. It should be available in paper form from the county, but as far as I can see, it can't be linked to. It's a useful reference for the the article and its information doesn't stop being true because the web link no longer works, but at the same time, it isn't available. What is the common wisdom about dealing with such a link? Since I live on the East Coast, I don't have the option of going to Richmond, CA to find a hard copy and I don't know if it can be mailed or if they would give permission to post it online. JacDT (talk) 21:29, 5 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  SARC Report 

message: The school was is nicknamed jail for kids because of it's initials and at one time violent kids it's in one of the old references we should include it somehow maybe during this period the school gained a nicknamed based on its initials jail for kids.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ndołkah (talk • contribs) 
: I was thinking of putting that back in; it's pretty evocative of how the school evolved over the years. If I remember correctly, it was also called that because it has no windows on the outside. It was beautiful inside, with the open central quad where students congregated, but it looks like an ugly monolith from outside. both Adkisson and Pertiz refer to it in their articles, so it's true, we have good references. The reason I didn't include it is because I had several hundred details about the school I wanted to include and I'm concerned for the length of the article.  I've left out a lot already, such as the FEAST program, which was pretty significant. It could also use more about athletics. The article was mostly deleted recently, I think for lack of references and the need to verify the notability of the school. I've addressed those aspects, but I'm still concerned about length. How important do you think including the jail for kids reference would be compared to other details?JacDT (talk) 13:30, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  With the last paragraph taken out (the update on Prop 13), that leaves more space in the article. And I think I can streamline it more. So adding back in that reference should work. In fact, the middle of the article needs to be restructured. I could use input on that. More in the next entry. JacDT (talk) 07:35, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Everyone has done an amazing job on improving the article. As someone from Richmond that attended that school for a terrifying 2 days in the mid 00s I will tell you the cynics called it a dropout factory and the students called it jail for kids specifically because from Cutting Boulevard it has no windows at all and what looks like a double fence with road between even if it's meant to keep the criminals out and the kids in it has an psychological effect of appearing as more of a inpatient institution or jail. So I feel strongly it should be worked in. And what was the FEAST program? WP:PAPER remember if you just executive summarize you can fit a little more in. Want me to get a picture of the place too?Ndołkah☆ (talk) 08:34, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you! That all helps. And yes, getting a good picture of the school would be excellent. Perhaps two, that is, one of the main quad inside and one of the exterior. Any pictures we use need to be entered into the Wikimedia Commons at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page. The information about how to upload is here: Wikipedia:Uploading_images.  JacDT (talk) 09:04, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  FEAST was was a restaurant built inside the school as part of a catering program. The teacher Mike Peritz ran the program, I believe. It offered a model of food service that was so successful, teachers came from all over, even from other states and countries, to learn from it. The students got their training by doing events outside of school, weddings, bar mitzvahs, church dinners, that sort of thing. Apparently the program was so successful that outside catering business complained about it. JacDT (talk) 09:24, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

text: Yes let's include it, also the school had a huge turn around in violence and dropping out as a result of a particular principal, the source is the east bay express exposé on the matter in late 00s.Ndołkah☆ (talk) 09:53, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Do you have a link or the title for the article? Thanks JacDT (talk) 17:06, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

text:  I found this statement in the scenario 3 citation by Mike Peritz "Much of this improvement is credited to Mr. Julio Franco who served longer than any Kennedy principal, from 2001-2008." That was also in the previous incarnation of the article, before it was deleted. Is that what you meant? On an entertaining note, alamy has a picture of Mr. Franco here: https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-principal-of-kennedy-high-school-julio-franco-on-the-richmond-calif-42265976.html JacDT (talk) 00:35, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't remember at this point.99.145.194.98 (talk) 01:10, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jail for kids 

message: I would like to request that Judy Tyrus and Randy Oda be returned to the list of notable Alumni on the John F. Kennedy High School (Richmond, California) page. Judy Tyrus is among of the first black ballet dancers to achieve international fame as a classical dancer, and she danced as a principal with the Dance Theatre of Harlem. She later became the curator for the company. What makes her even more notable is that in those days very few of the top classical dance academies took black dancers, which made it difficult to obtain the necessary training, networking, or opportunities to excel at the top levels of the profession. She not only excelled at that level, she did it at a time when there were very few avenues open to her. The references I included to establish notability include The New York Times, The Washington Post, Memoirs of Blacks in Ballet (see also https://mobballet.org/index.php/about-us/ for a description of the ballet project), an article by Tyrus at the Dance Theatre of Harlem site, and a video of Tyrus performing the Pas de Deux Camponês from Coppélia. 
People tend to know sports more than the world of ballet, which is one reason why sports figures appear so much more often on notable alumni lists. I'd like to see a more varied range of notable alumni. To a trained dancer, it is obvious from the video that Tyrus is among the top of her profession. However, editors on Wikipedia can't be expected to be familiar with every art form and its nuances. The links to the Washington Times and New York Times offer reviews that indicate her status. Such newspapers don't review dance companies or dancers who aren't notable. 
These are the references I originally gave in the entry for Tyrus:
* The Washington Post: https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/1993/04/05/dance/cce66afe-c2fa-4244-b54e-0139522d2bad/
* The New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/1989/06/27/arts/review-ballet-a-giselle-set-in-louisiana.html
* Memoirs for Blacks in Ballet: https://mobballet.org/index.php/2018/08/23/judy-tyrus/
* Dance Theatre of Harlem: https://www.dancetheatreofharlem.org/2018/12/18/looking-back-looking-forward/
* Pas de Deux Camponês from Coppelia: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3kFFzdhV5A 
Randy Oda has less references than Tyrus, but pages appear on Wikipedia about his work. He partnered with Tom Fogerty after Fogerty left Creedence Clearwater Revival, and they formed the band  Ruby. They also did the album Sidekicks released by Fantasy Records. He worked with Eddie Money, as well, and also a project with Arnold Schwarzenegger
These are the references I originally noted in the entry for Oda:
* Allmusic: https://www.allmusic.com/artist/randy-oda-mn0000397161/credits
* Eastbay Times: https://www.eastbaytimes.com/2015/01/21/chris-treadway-world-series-trophies-playland-reading-benefit-and-garage-band-reunion/
Thank you for your time. JacDT (talk) 18:58, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  I posted two draft articles, Draft:Judy Tyrus and Draft:Randy Oda. I used headers to structure the article in a comon format for WP:BLP articles, but if they don't work for you, you are welcome to add/subtract more appropriate headers and sub-headers. You are free to edit, as are other editors, with the only caveat that "abandoned" draft articles can be deleted if there are no edits for 90 days. Let me know if you need help with any oher template or formatting issues. Cheers! — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 21:31, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: With regards to the edit request template, I've inactivated the one which was placed under the preceding section (I believe it was meant to be placed under this section). As the COI editor may know, WP:ALUMNI states that any names to be included should meet Wikipedia's notability criteria. As the two suggested names are still in the draft stage, it can be said that their notability has not yet been ascertained (at least from an article-creation standpoint). Not wanting to put the cart before the horse, I believe that the request to add those names should wait for those articles to be created (and I don't see any problem with at least one of them being created) — after which, the  template would then be appropriate to use. Warm regards,  Spintendo  22:17, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks , I completely agree that before adding the any alums to the JFK High School article, the subjects should have WP bios. Thanks for stating that clearly. Cheers! — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 22:34, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Grand'mere Eugene and  that looks like a good idea. They do need pages, and this gets them started. Thanks! JacDT (talk) 22:39, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

text:   and  The criteria for inclusion is notability. You seem to have fallen prone to a logical fallacy. Having an article on Wikipedia proves notability, but the lack of an article does not prove the opposite. It is very likely that a person who does not have an article, is still notable. After all, Wikipedia is a project in progress. I do agree that lack of a Wikipedia article is reason to carefully check notability, sure, before including such a person in an alumnae list, but a requirement of having a Wikipedia article is not a valid substitute for the notability criteria. Debresser (talk) 14:22, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:   Meh, po-tay-to, po-tah-to. You are almost correct: notability is one criterion for inclusion on a school's alumni list, but there also needs to be a statement in a reliable source that the subject attended or graduated from the school, and a school's yearbook is not a reliable source. Practiclly speaking, to meet the second criterion often requires a much deeper dive into sources about the subject, and I find it more efficient to keep track by building a draft. In some cases, a notable subject has had nothing published about high school attendance, but there are plenty of sources meeting WP:GNG. For these two particular people, I have found WP:RS published statements for each supporting alumni status at JFK High. However, the sources for Randy Oda I have found so far do not meet the WP:N standard because the articles have only passing mentions or playlists of music he has performed/written. True, he did join John Fogerty of CCR fame in the band Ruby, but sources about him lack in-depth coverage. Sometime about 1983 he moved to Hawaii and went into real estate sales, as there are lots of ads from that period; there are 2 later editorial pieces, one a primary source which he wrote as a middle-school counselor, but nothing else in depth (so far) about his life. In the process of starting a draft, I'm almost ready to conclude he does not meet the notability standard. For Judy Tyrus, on the other hand, my NYT serach turned up 40+ articles about her, her performances, her career as a curator, and some articles she has written. I have not yet read all these sources, but I expect she meets the notability standard. In sum, drafting an article helps me decide on notability issues, and if an article results, all the better.  Cheers! — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 17:19, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Agree. Debresser (talk) 21:02, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Debresser, that makes sense. Grand'mere Eugene found a strong reference for verifying that Tyrus attended Kennedy and added it to the draft of the Tyrus page. It looks here like the consensus is that it is okay to add Tyrus back to the list, as long as we give that reference. I'd like to keep the page Grand'mere Eugene set up; I'd planned to do one eventually for Judy Tyrus, and this helps add the activation energy to get over maximum (my chemistry background is intruding :-)). Once that page goes live, we can link to it instead of using an inline reference in the Kennedy article. Thanks again, everyone! JacDT (talk) 23:34, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Judy Tyrus (and Randy Oda) notability 

message: Upstream in this discussion, several editors referred to the Request edit function of Wikipedia (Grand'mere Eugene,  Steven (Editor) , Debresser,  Spintendo ). If it is what it sounds like--a means for the subject of an article to request a change to the article in a manner that conforms to Wikipedia policies and guidelines--then this is significant in (good) ways which I don't think are fully utilized by the encyclopedia. I'm hoping you all can refer me to a page where I can continue this discussion. I'm particularly interested in how to set up a page to start such a project as described below. The current SFWA president is also interested in developing such a project. It could be beneficial for both Wikipedia and writers in general.
This describes what I'm looking for, and also gives some history about how the proposal first arose.
Some years ago, I was president of the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America. One of the topics brought before me was a difficulty authors had in working with Wikipedia. There is an inherent tension generated by the interaction, where WP editors wish to ensure an article's neutrality and the subjects of the pages wish to ensure their accuracy. None of the authors I spoke with were aware the "Request edit" option exists. I'm not sure Wikipedia realizes how important this function is. The pages for many writers have mistakes, inaccuracies, are incomplete, or otherwise need development. The person who is most aware of what the page needs is also the person least able to make those changes according to WP policies and guidelines.
Wikipedia is not considered a promotional device by most authors; far better means exist than an encyclopedia. What most would like is an accurate, unbiased article. From the Wikipedia's point of view, any input from the subject of a page presents a conflict of interest, and this can be true even if that isn't the intent of the subject. It's not a small matter; this is the largest encyclopedia in the world, with a staggering amount of information, and to maintain the reputation of the encyclopedia, it's vital it maintain neutrality, provide a thorough presentation of cited works, and preserve quality. The tension comes from authors feeling they have no recourse. Ironically, the very policies intended to prevent bias end up making some authors think a bias exists. Most are not familiar with editing on Wikipedia, nor do they wish to become involved at that depth. Many have encountered what they feel is hostility when they tried to figure out what was going on with their page. However, it is clear from the superb interactions I received here that the environment is much better than perceived.
Authors could contribute a great deal to the Wikipedia in general, and I suspect more would if the tension over their own presence could be alleviated. However, it is daunting to figure out what is going on at the encyclopedia. Most authors have no clue that their interactions here may go against expected policies and guidelines. Very few know how an editor's page works, for example, how to sign, how to build a history, all of that. I learned more in editing this article than I learned in the previous ten years. I could do that because I'm retired from teaching and have the time to seek out help and explore. Most authors don't have that time or can't afford to take it. 
In the SFWA discussions, I suggested we send someone to Wikipedia with a proposal about working together on a collaborative project to pair WP editors with authors. The goal was to allow authors to work with WP editors in a non-confrontational way to improve the content of their pages in a manner acceptable to Wikipedia. The editor could mentor the author about policies and guidelines, not just for their own page, but for the Wikipedia in general. I hoped the project could include an application process for authors without a page, where they could request an editor determine the notability of their work and, if acceptable, to write a page for the author. This could also help increase the presence of minority subjects less often represented on Wikipedia (see Wikipedia:Systemic_bias). I also hoped that if a better relationship could be forged between our communities, then more authors and editors outside of WP would be motived to contribute to the encyclopedia in ways not connected to their own work. Everyone benefits.
I couldn't find a volunteer for the position. Part of the problem was the perceived animosity I mentioned above, but I don't think that alone would have prevented my finding someone for the project. It was also the lack of anyone at WP to contact about setting up the discussion. WP is huge and sprawling, and even if you know the culture here, it can be a large time sink to find what you need. No one wanted to start posting on pages in public with questions about a project when we didn't have any idea how it would work.
However, if I understand the "request edit" correctly, this goes a good distance toward developing such a partnership. If it is correct that an author may submit a requested change to their page via this method, then this is huge. I know of no authors who are aware of it. That doesn't mean none are, but when this came up during my tenure as SFWA president, no one I talked with was aware it was possible.
After seeing how well collaboration can work here, I think this could work well. If such a project existed--and became well known to the writing community--it could lead to improved relations and possibly increased contributions by such authors to the rest of the encyclopedia. Authors like to do what they do best, which is write; if they feel that the environment welcomes their participation, many may get involved. JacDT (talk) 17:17, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request Edit Function on WP 

message: These might have one or two nuggets in them: Ottoump (talk) 01:58, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some parked references 

message: additions to notable will have their own article.
additions without article will be removed as lacking notability.
thanks for your time,
s 24.17.106.158 (talk) 05:10, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  notability edits