Talk:Austin Preparatory School

message: Puhlease! The vandlaism on this page is pretty juvenile- can we just get over it? Tell us something factual. It's not all about you and your opinion.Cor Unum 11:15, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

message: I noticed that "and early 1980s" was removed from the sexual abuse section and "The case against the school and the archdiocese is pending." was changed to "The case against the school was dismissed without finding."
The article referenced states the original version and I haven't been able to find any information about this case to suggest that the alleged abuse only occurred during the 70s, nor have I seen anything to indicate that the case has been dismissed.
Could the anonymous person who made the changes at 02:03, 21 June 2007 from 70.19.168.76 please cite something to back this up?
I was a student there in the late 70s/early 80s and have more than a passing interest in this case.
Thanks!
TheLordOfEltingville 00:16, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If the person who changed it was anonymous and also didn't include a citation, and the citation used says something different, you should feel free to change it back. Rray (talk) 20:44, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revisions about sex abuse? 

message: I neither know nor care about Austin Preparatory School and I'm not one for whitewashing, but I've removed the section on sexual abuse allegations for a couple of reasons.
For the first sentence the cited article is over ten years old and (assuming it's quoted correctly) says "The case against the school and the archdiocese is pending". Well nothing pends for ten years so I assume it was settled one way or the other, and editors need to find a ref for that and describe the outcome. For all we know it was dismissed, in which case that should be stated, or arguably the whole thing not included at all. If there was a finding of culpability that'd be different but we need to have a ref and say that.
The second sentence is about an Alfred Murphy who is a living person (unless he's since died) and so is covered by WP:BLP. Again the cited article is over ten years old and says the he "allegedly molested" a person(s) with no further details. If the allegations resulted in some finding against Murphy we should find out what that was and so state, but if the allegations remained just allegations either that should be so stated or, more satisfactory since we have a living person here, just dropped from the article. (And since no allegations were apparently made against Murphy regarding his actions during his brief tenure at the school, it'd be kind of a stretch to include the material in this article under any conditions, I would think.) 
If editors want to make a case for including the material they may do so here, otherwise WP:BRD applies I believe and the material should not be reinstated. Herostratus (talk) 02:56, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Reverting and making arguments through edit summaries is not an acceptable substitute for engaging on the talk page. Herostratus (talk) 05:08, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re sexual abuse allegations 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Austin Preparatory School. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090616135733/http://cis.neasc.org/cis_directory_of_schools to http://cis.neasc.org/cis_directory_of_schools
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071008055754/http://www.austinprepschool.org/ to http://www.austinprepschool.org/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:58, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified