Talk:Landon School

NPOV

"Exclusive" has a much more negative connotation than "top" as a descriptor of the school. Kukini 15:34, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

True, but "top" is a subjective term. The school is certainly "exclusive" by virtue of its high tuition and admissions standards. One problem with this article is that it is nothing more than an advertisement for the school itself. Terms like "exclusive" seem more objective than "top". There is no citation for the use of the term.

I've flagged the article NPOV, since there seems to still be potentially excessive details and minutia about the school, including non-notable people and faculty. -- Bovineone 04:03, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Infobox link

i give up, someone else put in the link to the homepage in the top info box thing on the right—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.251.238.107 (talk • contribs).

It appears to be unsupported, I replaced the infobox with the current one and it still wont display the link, I tried using [[link]], [link], and just "link" and nothing happened... --MNAdam 03:03, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Cheating Scandal Section

As you all can see from the edit history, there's been an ongoing issue with wholesale removals of the section about the 2002 SAT cheating scandal. Thanks to User:Kwsn, User:Beeblbrox, User:Mike R, and User:Tiptoety, the section has been restored relatively quickly nearly each time.

This section refers to an incident that gained the attention of the Washington area in 2002 and 2003, with coverage in the Washington Post, Bethesda Gazette, Washingtonian magazine, and other media. I can understand that it isn't the most positive thing for those associated with the school, but it is notable, and as far as I know, the school has made at least a verbal commitment to prevent anything like it in the future.

If you are making a good faith edit of grammar or addition of information, that's great, and I don't want to discourage you from making your additions. However, the bulk of the edits to that section have either been to cut the entire section or to remove large chunks of it. Whether they're pure vandalism or an attempt by a school supporter to hide an ugly episode involving a few of the school's students, these redactions hurt the process of building a comprehensive picture of the school.

--Blahblah29 (talk) 20:00, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

The cheating section needed major editing, as it contained unsourced and erroneous information, especially regarding the connection between the cheating scandal and lacrosse program. A good amount of the information from the Washingtonian article is incorrect, as the author made numerous statements based on rumors and heresay. For example, only five of the ten students involved in the cheating scandal were members of the lacrosse team, and none had committed to Division 1 programs. As the school Headmaster Damon Bradley stated in a letter to alumni shortly after the incident, the punishments were meted out on a case by case basis without regard to whether the student was on a sports team.

Timmysmith36 (talk) 02:56, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

The information there was sourced. If you believe it to be erroneous, please cite verifiable sources to the contrary. If you have that letter from Damon Bradley, for example, you might add it to this article or expand the section into a larger article about the cheating incidents.

For now, since you can see there have been multiple attempts at vandalism of this section, I've reinstated what was deleted. However, I left intact the new content you added.

--Blahblah29 (talk) 17:21, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

I re-read the newspaper and magazine articles and deleted information that is not stated as fact in either source. If you want to re-add them, please provide a direct quote from either source. For example, the students that had already "committed to division 1 scholarships" or that 8 of the ten accused students were lacrosse players. I'm not trying to vandalize the article, just trying to present the facts in a more accurate, concise and encyclopedic manner.

--Timmysmith36 (talk) 02:56, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Seems like people have been spending an inordinate amount of time adding dubiously sourced info to this section in an attempt to smear the school. This is supposed to be an encyclopedia, not a gossip website. I think it best that this section simply be a concise summary of the facts of the case from a NPOV.

--Timmysmith36 (talk) 02:56, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

This is not an attempt at smearing, and I took care to double-check everything in the most recent revision, even things that had been in there for a long time, such as the number of lacrosse players (5, not 8) and the fact that the two students were pressed to withdraw (not expelled). Add what you'd like, if it's accurate and sourced; simply deleting a bunch of stuff, however, doesn't seem to be in good faith.

This was a highly visible and controversial news story in the DC area, and I understand how it's easy to find words leaning one way or another. I'm sure some wish the whole thing could be forgotten--evidenced by the many anonymous wholesale deletions of that section in the past. However, this was a notable event that should be included in an article on the school. Lots of Landon students have done good things as well, and if they're notable, they should be included, too.

--Blahblah29 (talk) 19:20, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Famous Alumni

One individual over the past 3 years has continuously added the name "Tully Alford" to the famous alumni section of this school. A google and wiki search of both Tully Alford and "Terry and the Pirates"(the band) leads to nothing of relative importance. Could someone explain to me who and why this person is important? Otherwise it will be removed.