Talk:Milton Academy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject United States / Massachusetts (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Massachusetts (marked as High-importance).
 
WikiProject Schools (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

The Article is wrong --Deval Patrick was a resident of Hallowell House, not Forbes House (I have the pictures to prove it) Tiassa 16:48, 20 September 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tiassa (talkcontribs) 16:41, 20 September 2007 (UTC)


Elongated the section on Wolcott. -GCH --68.236.84.14 21:12, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Its a little hard to believe that Robert Bennet Forbes was the "founder of the Academy" since the article says it was founded in 1798 and the article on Forbes says he was born in 1804 -- obviously a very precocious guy.I think that's a little odd. Obviously some one got the wrong information about his birth because I am a Milton academy student in the lower school, It was founded in 1798.

(I have corrected the founding date information. 8 June 2007)

Sex Scandal[edit]

Why is this sex scandal ignored? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.180.241.4 (talk) 22:24, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

JDoorjam cut the following, saying "That's a little too scandalous to go without a source."

In 2005, the school expelled five members of the boys varsity hockey team for receiving oral sex from a 15-year-old female student in a school locker room. After an investigation, two of the students who were 16 at the time of the alleged incidents were charged with statutory rape. Both accepted plea deals and received no jail time.

The first part is true—Boston Globe: "Milton Academy rocked by expulsions". I'm not sure about the plea bargains.
—wwoods 07:20, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Checking further, three students were "arrested and sentenced to two years probation and 100 hours of community service for engaging in sex with a minor."CBS4: "Student In Milton Academy Sex Scandal Sues School"
—wwoods 07:29, 16 June 2006 (UTC) I was amazed when I learned this information two years ago.

It doesnt represent the school and is not needed --208.79.42.225 02:45, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

But people should still be informed about this.It's Milton's fault that they did not see this coming and that this had to happen more than once.I was completely shocked and that's what caused me not to apply myself and now I'm their rival school where I feel incredibly safe. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.96.19.107 (talk) 02:05, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Agreed. A decision to preclude the information and label it unrepresentative of the school is certainly motivated by connections to the prep school. As a completely disinterested, unbiased observer, this information is hugely relevant to the school. The article should present it in a fair, NPOV manner. Rlove 12:59, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

I came here to find information on the dates of the sex scandal. It is ridiculous that there is nothing on it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.159.179.151 (talk) 01:05, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I think there should be a section for the many scandals posted in an unbiased manner. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.125.2.186 (talk) 02:25, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

There are BOOKS (Testimony, Restless Virgins) written about the scandal, for crying out loud. The media is still talking about it TODAY (http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2010/06/love-actually/8094/1/). It deserves mention in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.194.193.231 (talk) 19:27, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Needs more history[edit]

The article currently reads like a 2005-2006 Milton Academy brochure, which it probably is, in fact, largely based on. This article is crying out for more on the history of the place. JDoorjam Talk 17:54, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Rate My Teacher[edit]

"(→External links - rm ratemyteacher.com -> not a reliable source of information)"

Looking through WP:EL it seems ratemyteacher.com is a good candidate for inclusion in links. It is informative and fits in under "what should be linked" as a review. As for being a reliable source:

"Links normally to be avoided: ... Any site that misleads the reader by use of factually inaccurate material or unverifiable research."

RMT is very clear on what it is: anonymous student reviews of teachers. So while not entirely trustworthy it's not misleading. In a citation you care strongly about reliability, but for an external link the constraint is weaker.

-- Jeff 00:02, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
I disagree. Ratemyteachers.com is unverifiable research – a self-selected survey of students. It might be fun to read, but it's not reliable. It's like a student's blog. (For that matter, it's like a wiki!) ... discospinster talk 17:44, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
External links do not have to be "verifiable research". We link to official pages of organizations. We link to usenet postings. We link to reviews. In general, we link to material that is useful and not misleading. Read WP:EL.
-- Jeff 04:02, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
No response; putting RMT back.
--Jeff 15:14, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Miltonacademy.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:Miltonacademy.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) 17:22, 2 January 2008 (UTC)


Mark Tribe '85 should be added to the list of Milton alumni. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Tribe —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.48.158.25 (talk) 17:46, 28 January 2010 (UTC)