Talk:Seymour High School (Connecticut)

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Connecticut Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Connecticut, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Connecticut on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConnecticutWikipedia:WikiProject ConnecticutTemplate:WikiProject ConnecticutConnecticut articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Schools This article is related to WikiProject Schools, a collaborative effort to write quality articles about schools around the world. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.SchoolsWikipedia:WikiProject SchoolsTemplate:WikiProject Schoolsschool articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. National Register of Historic Places Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S. historic sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Someone needs to find a citation for the schedule section and write a clearer paragraph.

Can we put the sports into a nice chart? BrandtSchneider (talk) 12:17, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Should clubs be the first section? Are the sections in the right order? Perhaps we should eliminate some sections.

We are editing this page as a class project. Students: be sure you are adding reference material that follows wikipedia's guidelines. Not sure? Add a question here on the talk page. BrandtSchneider (talk) 14:24, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We need to be careful of adding sections that do not have external references. BrandtSchneider (talk) 14:28, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Needs reference. BrandtSchneider (talk) 14:20, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am removing links to Ratemyteachers.com because the site falls squarely into the realm of criteria 2 and 11 in WP:EL#Links_normally_to_be_avoided: "Any site that misleads the reader by use of factually inaccurate material or unverifiable research." and "Links to blogs and personal web pages, except those written by a recognized authority."

Could someone can explain the difference between Ratemytechers.com and a random person's blog? ... discospinster _talk 20:43, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How often do news blogs find their way into the external links on articles? Quite often. Users of Wikipedia aren't morons. They can see what is and isn't user-created content, and are apparently alright with such content. After all, they are USING WIKIPEDIA. Noone is being mislead. Discredit RateMy... and you discredit Wikipedia. Neither is perfect, but both are uniquely useful tools. -Plasticbadge 01:14, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you can show me an example of a news blog in an article, I will consider it as well. ... discospinster _talk 12:38, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Blog" isn't a dirty word - look at Wonkette and the Drudge Report. As a Wikipedian, I would think you would understand that content need not be conventional and unassailably verifiable to be of use. I would argue that RateMy... is unambiguous, but would you accept a tag next to the link stating that RMT contains unverified, user-provided content? It seems redundant on a site like Wikipedia, but I'm a man of compromise. - Plasticbadge 20:15, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that this was a school project, but this simply falls way short on content, sourcing and tone. This reads like a web page for the school and there simply aren't enough third party sources here.

Take a look here to help you get started: Wikipedia:Referencing_for_beginners. Also, keep in mind that you are allowed to reference the official source (i.e., the school website once in an entry (see Wikipedia:External_links under "Minimize the number of links"). In this case, perhaps a couple of references will be allowed, but right now there are way too many internal/login only references.

Finally, Wikipedia is not a newspaper or a directory. Teachers/coaches should be noted for their awards or outstanding achievements, not by holding the current title at the school. Take a look at Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not for more details.

In the meantime, I have flagged the page so other editors can help re-do this page.--Stlamanda (talk) 19:16, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also, these references need to be formatted properly. Please see WP:CT for the chart -- it will help you all with creating valid reference tags.--Stlamanda (talk) 19:27, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What sections should we add? Link crew seems like a minor thing. Remember, you need citations for any change. BrandtSchneider (talk) 15:48, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Don't forget to sign your work on the talk page using four squiggly lines.