Talk:Newmarket High School

message: User:Serie left a message on the Help desk asking if he needed permission to edit articles, after you two reverted edits on the article and talk space that you deemed to be "pointless." I found the article edit to be legitimate and the concerns raised on the talk page to also be valid. Please practice good faith in the future and address concerns instead of wiping them out. Mike H. That's hot 03:05, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Disgusting. Bloody disgusting. Do not bite the newbies. You do not own this, or any other page on this wiki. Rob Church (talk) 20:58, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Kelisi and JaysCyYoung

message: There are a number of vague statements in the article.  I'd like to see concrete  sources or values for them, or they should be removed.
*"generally perform well in Boys' and Girls' Football and Baseball."  What does "generally perform well" mean, and who's saying it?
*"has an arts and music program which is well regarded"  Well regarded by who?
*"as well as an active and prominent student council."  What does this mean?  Most student councils could be described as "active and prominent".
*"has raised student awareness about the importance of issues such as human rights"  Where's the source of this statement?
*"have improved the quality of life in the school and the surrounding area by encouraging student participation in volunteer efforts and other worthy causes"  Who determines what a "worthy cause" is?  How does this improve the quality of life in the school?
-Serie 21:47, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Vague statements

message: I don't think most of the student groups matter at all, and I already deleted stuff like a list of staff members, including the name of the secretary.  That's simply not encyclopedic and it's impossible to maintain, anyway.  High school sports generally don't matter and unless you're regularly having people graduate to the NBA, NFL, or whatever, they can be cut.  --Cyde Weys 03:25, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article needs to be pared down 

message: I am warning you for one last time, Be civil toward others. Your edit summary of "rv pointless dickering" is not productive or civil, and from what I gather, the person removing the words you added back was quite right in doing so. You do not own this article, so please work with others in a collaboration. Thank you. Mike H. That's hot 20:48, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You don't own this article, either, and I shall continue to revert destructive edits. Take your own advice. Insulting my intelligence by trying to threaten me with unspecified action is not civil. I shall put "pointless dickering" if I like, whenever an edit is pointless dickering. This I do when an editor has made no meaningful change to an article, for instance, if he has simply changed a few things for the sake of editing. Also, if, as in this case, someone tries to dumb an article down, I will put the same. Kelisi 03:49, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Perhaps Mike has been incivil at some points in the past. That's not the point. You have to be civil in your interactions with users, full stop.  Please start doing this. Thank you.--Sean Black (talk) 04:46, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems to me that Mike H.'s conduct is subject to another discussion. I'm not saying Mike is the perfect example of an editor - I wouldn't know as I don't know him. I am saying that it's not relevant to this discussion - it's Ad hominem and avoiding the issue: Putting semi-personal attacks in the edit summaries is bad form and uncivil - regardless of who does it - please keep it cool and stay civil. Celcius 04:54, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You two have much better styles. All right, fine – I'll stop. But I would like to mention that there is one other thing I don't like about Mike's style: He is an administrator, and he has not once announced that fact. I had to have a good look at his talk page before I discovered that; it's not mentioned on his user page. I don't really know what all that says about him.....but fine – I'll stop. Kelisi 15:47, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Kelisi

message: This is for anyone who would like to transclude it. Kelisi 03:30, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Userbox 

message: :Image:NHSbadge.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) 23:08, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:NHSbadge.jpg

message: I feel like the Jonathan Wamback incident needs to be in this article. Jonathan Wamback was a student who (as far as I believe) went to Newmarket High School at one point, and got almost murdered in nearby College Manor Park, probably due to events which unfurrled at NHS between he and other students. While there is no concrete information that he went to NHS online, he did live in Newmarket and College Manor is the nearest highschool (also, I personally know people who said he went there before the incident, and moved into Denison afterwards). Perhaps someone should look into this more?
In addition, various sources I've talked to (I'm from Newmarket and went to NHS)have consistently stated that NHS was a violent-ridden school with gangs in the 90s, which came to a close due to the Wamback incident.Not trying to stir the pot here, I just want to make sure my school's article has as much detail as possible, thanks!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.250.153.3 (talk) 22:44, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the trick is to find material on the topic, specific to NHS, from reliable sources.  I get what you wrote about, but we must not add unreferenced allegations, particularly not negative ones.  PKT(alk) 19:32, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jonathan Wamback Incident? Violence in the 90s?