Talk:Charlotte Latin School

message: I'm reverting the changes made by 64.128.75.236 as they are taken verbatim from http://www.charlottelatin.org/Resources/FastFacts.pdf
They were first person and not NPOV (excerpt: "Our campus is truly inspirational.")   
--Heath 69.174.65.58 02:27, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Reverting changes

message: I reverted a huge amount of vandalism and dropped the notability tag. The school is a significant independent school in a major city. The page needs much more work. Ezratrumpet 20:58, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Reverting vandalism

message: I tried removing the information about the school being started in direct response to racial integration of public schools, but it was reverted by Billhpike. I was informed we should achieve a consensus on the talk page. I dispute the claim that multiple sources support Charlotte Latin being founded in response to the racial integration of schools and bussing in Charlotte, NC. 
Source 1
The first source in question is "Lassiter, Matthew T. (Oct 24, 2013). The Silent Majority: Suburban Politics in the Sunbelt South. Princeton University Press]. p. 165, 169. ISBN 9781400849420. Retrieved 9 January 2018."
If we take a look at the link that is associated with the source, below, we can see the search query was "charlotte latin segregation" 
Interesting.
[https://books.google.com/books?id=_a0EAQAAQBAJ&pg=PA368&lpg=PA368&dq=charlotte+latin+segregation&source=bl&ots=q0ClbZYNpa&sig=c_EnDNbu09n9EVpFpdrKDZvpNaw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiRnO3BisvYAhWq54MKHe85ALc4ChDoAQgoMAA#v=onepage&q=latin&f=false
"
This book citation is attributed to only one statement: "School Board member Don Roberson enrolled his children in segregated Charlotte Latin, saying, 'I've simply taken my children off the battlefield while I fight the battle.'[2]"
When we look at the cited text, the google search reveals 2 meaningful instances of Charlotte Latin. 
1. "Robertson said after enrolling his children in the Charlotte Latin School, a preparatory academy located in the southeast suburbs, 'I've simply taken my children off the battlefield while I fight the battle.'"
2. "The three main Christian schools in the metropolitan region took advantage of the crisis to boost enrollment, as did a new preparatory academy called Charlotte Latin (in planning before the bussing order)"
I think the information about Don Robertson being a member of the School Board is a nice addition and helps provide some extra context to his quote, but adding "segregated Charlotte Latin" seems unfounded as far as this text is concerned.
There is no mention that I can find in this source stating that Charlotte Latin was founded in direct response to racial integration and bussing. This source even seems to loosely imply that these were explicitly not Charlotte Latin's intentions, stating that it was "in planning before the bussing order" 
Interestingly shortly after the second citation, the text continues to tell how several members of the Concerned Parents Association leadership circle helped start Providence Day as an anti-busing refuge. There is nothing on Providence Day's wikipedia page about their origins. 
Source 2
"In 1970, the IRS conducted an investigation into the tax exempt status of newly established private schools that practiced racial discrimination. As a result, Charlotte Latin was only granted tax exempt status after the school published its non-discrimation policy in a local newspaper.[3]"
"Rulings Revealed". Record & Landmark. Statesville, NC. October 8, 1970. p. 13 – via Newspapers.com.
https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/4141133/
This one is behind a paywall, I'm not going to take a look at it right now (I will if necessary). From the details of the last citation, I find this one dubious as well, at least in its wording and implication. It seems to imply that the school only begrudgingly published a non-discrimination policy in order to retain tax exempt status, but nothing I have seen would support that. 1970, the year the policy was published was also the year the school opened its doors. So it seems that the school has had a published non discrimination policy since its inauguration, so I'm confused as to why it says so many times throughout the wiki page that the school was founded in response to racial integration of schools. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CrateNBerry (talk • contribs) 
:Thanks for your feedback on the sources.
:I agree that "segregation academy" can be seen a slur and might not be the best term to characterize this school. Nevertheless, I think that this school's history would be incomplete without a discussion of the racial issues. 
:I recall that this school was discussed in Nevin & Bills.. When I get back to university in a few weeks, I will review the copy in the libarary and update the article.
:With respect to the IRS grant of tax exempt status, I think the article could be updated to clarify that, under IRS policy at the time, any private school founded after desegregation court orders that had a student racial composition that significantly differed from the surrounding community was prima facial a segregation academy. — BillHPike (talk, contribs) 22:33, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've reviewed Nevin & Bills. The book specifically states (on page 8) that school was not a segregation academy, so I have updated the article.  — BillHPike (talk, contribs) 00:20, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Question of foundational response to racial desegragation

message: I am requesting that the sentence regarding the cum laude society deleted by JohnfromIgdeon be re-inserted. This is encyclopedic and notable - the cum laude society has a wikipedia entry - and not promotional. It is also supported by citation of a primary source noting the school's membership.
Jiffy.morton (talk) 00:24, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  cum laude society 

message: Hi everyone - I have been working on this page (as well as a few other charlotte area independent schools) in an effort to improve it and move it up from "stub" status on the WikiProject Schools quality assessment scale. The history section of this page has obviously gone through several iterations and edits over the years. I would welcome any input on my proposed draft of the history section, found below. 
In particular, it seems important to achieve consensus around the segregation/busing issue that has been the subject of debate in the past. I have tried to present this in an NPOV way and to provide citations to every important fact (without overdoing it, I hope). The books and articles available on the topic seem to make it clear that Charlotte Latin was not founded as a segregation academy. Multiple sources report that the school was in planning well before court ordered busing began in 1970. But it is also very likely that it, along with most other independent schools in Mecklenburg county, experienced an influx of potential students as a result of the turmoil in the public school system in the early 1970s. I have tried to offer a balanced treatment of both sides of this issue in terms of both tone and content.
I am cc’ing  the editors I’ve seen as most active on this page in the recent past in hopes of having a good dialogue and reaching consensus. 
User:Billhpike
User:C.Fred
User:John from Idegon
User:CateFromArcadia
User:Birdledew
User:Ktin
User:TheGEICOgecko
Finally, just to clarify in advance, I do not have COI with this page. I’m just a person with an interest in education in the charlotte area who recently finds themselves with a lot of free time. All the best  - Jiffy.morton (talk) 02:14, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not too much of an expert on school history, and I don't normally check for relevance/legitamacy of sources, but assuming everything is correctly sourced, this definitely seems well-sourced. A couple of things I'd like to note: I'm almost certain that the members of the Board of Trustees are not notable enough to mention their names. I don't think the 1st sentence of the 2nd paragraph about the 2,000 brochures are notable. The paragraph about The Charlotte Observer coverage is out of chronological order, and should be before the paragraph about the school opening. There is also a handful of places where I'd edit for punctuation and spacing, square feet shouldn't be abbreviated, and there's a typo in the 3rd last paragraph ("30,0000 sq ft.") TheGEICOgecko (talk) 02:52, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

text: - Thanks for the careful reading. Amazing how many times you can proof something and still have a typo slip through! I don't have strong opinions about listing the members of the board. I guess they were prominent people in the area and they are listed as such in numerous press articles at the time, so I went with it. I do think the 2,000 brochures data point adds a nice piece of detail (and again, mentioned in several articles from the era) as it yielded 425 students. Quite a change from today where one must apply to the school vs. getting a ~25% yield on a mailing back then. The Observer article/Thies quote are primarily there to add balance and NPOV to the desegregation discussion. It probably wouldn't make the cut at all except for all the focus on the issue by previous editors, which I've kept in place and not deleted. So I think it should stay where it is. Separating it from the language it is there to balance would disturb the flow of the artilce and make it read very oddly. Thanks again - Jiffy.morton (talk) 12:26, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  History Section