Talk:Hyde School (Maine)

repeated edit reverts

The content of this article is repeatedly striped down to Hyde school PR by the same IP address. I am going to put back my changes. -- Vincent Van Gopher

counting at hyde

The reference to the character compass had four items yet said there were "five" points.

The pdf I just put in the citation has 5 pages.

On the last page it says "continued on page 6" Innumeracy seems out of hand at Hyde.

This seem especially bad because the school was founded by a math teacher. --Vincentvangopher 16:09, 10 July 2007 (UTC) Vincent Van Gopher

Can someone undo the most recent blanking? Since this is close to a content dispute, I'd be close violating the 3 revert rule if I changed it back. --Matt 18:23, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

content removal

I made my edit of removing a sentence from the "Curriculum" section for the following reasons. (1) The statement that Hyde utilizes 'corporal punishment' is highly misleading. The definition of 'corporal punishment' is "the infliction of physical injury on someone convicted of committing a crime" (from freedictionary.com) or "Corporal punishment is the deliberate infliction of pain intended to punish a person or change his/her behavior." (from wikipedia.com) If you do a google search on corporal punishment you get articles associated with violence. The wikipedia article on corporal punishment describes spanking, whipping, paddling, or other means of physical violence. None of these things has ever or is currently accepted practice at Hyde. I am guessing what the author was referring to was the practice of group workouts, or individual pushups. While a workout can be painful (I know this from running sprints with my lacrosse team today) it is an extreme stretch and I would say an incorrect assertion to call these "corporal punishment." If it were, you would have to say the same thing about every school who has a sports team that does sprints at practice for tardiness or a bad practice. The workouts that are done at Hyde outside of athletics are all approved as "reasonable and healthy." Argue all you want about whether you agree with the use of any type of physical accountability, but that's not what a wikipedia page is for and lets not call something its not for seemingly bias reasons (although that is an assumption on my part). I was going to simply change "corporal punishment" to "workouts" or "physical accountability" until I realized that that sentence didn't really make sense in that spot and that the use of "workouts" is already described in detail in another section of the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Putney13 (talk • contribs) 23:37, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Hyde does utilize corporal punishment and staff encourages students to be physically violent to a rule breaker.

I am a former Hyde student. When I read the content that was added to the original entry ( the original IMHO, was added by a Hyde publicist) I found it to be written from the stand point of disgruntled former student or parent. My edit striped some of the language that could arguable called slanted. The article as it stands now, is factual. I feel the attempts to strip the article are acts of censorship on the part of Hyde supporters or Hyde employees. I find this to be unfortunate as Joe Gauld, hyde's founder. always told us to "bet on the truth"

I thank the wiki expert that has locked the article and challenge those that have been stripping the article to use this comment talk page to dispute the facts of the article. Vincentvangopher 12:23, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I am stripping the article of the sarcastic and negative remarks. I think it is cowardly and unfortunate someone keeps injecting their negative attitude and now it is unable to be edited on the page. I also agree that it seems it is a disgruntled former student or parent. I understand that people may have their differences with Hyde (as I do too) but that doesn't change the profound impact it has on people and their lives. The way the article stands now will turn off prospective families to be a part of this amazing process and to share what I have so grateful been a part of. I am a former student and faculty member and I am disappointed in the way this has cowardly been edited. I think we should have someone at the school officially edit this article and leave it at that. If you want to inject your opinions, do so on another page. 208.254.30.129 13:20, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I suggest you check out wikipedia's stance on personal attacks, and refrain from calling people cowards. I also suggest that you think about how civil it is to simply remove someone else's work, repeatedly, without commenting on why.

Also, I disagree with "I think we should have someone at the school officially edit this article". It would come off as advertising. Check out wikipedia's stance on neutrality for an understanding.

I asked for the temporary protection on the page as I couldn't get anonymous editors to calm down and actually discuss what they were removing, and why, even with a plea. Now that you are here discussing it, what, exactly, do you object to?

I am not affiliated with Hyde at all. I don't have an agenda, other than trying to make the article better. I can't see the content being sarcastic, but I also don't necessarily see it as notable and verifiable, something that's hard to work on when people keep removing content. --Matt 13:54, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I believe I removed most if not all of the remarks that could be construed a negative and substituted words that hyde it self uses. For example I removed the references to "amateur" and "non-accredited" leaders of large group seminars at Hyde even though the groups are in fact lead by folks who are not psychological professionals. I used the hyde phrase "peer culture" to replace a more pejorative description of "Brothers Keeper." The article may in fact "turn off prospective families" but the content and purpose of this entry should dispassionately and rationally describe Hyde School. If people are "turned off" by that then so be it. "Bet on the Truth" "The Truth will set you free" Vincentvangopher 15:27, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I read the defs for notable and verifiable. I think this article may need to be linked to support the material presented: [1] Vincentvangopher 11:08, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

I see they are at it again. Again I say, if the content is inaccurate correct it don't remove it. Vincentvangopher 15:10, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Eh, last edit was on August 2. Nothing major. --Matt 15:30, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

[2] looks like content removal. BTW could the Hoover institute article be considered as reference to the assertions in this article? Vincentvangopher 16:54, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

That was 2 weeks ago... I can't get too worked up over it. Can you link to what you want to use as a reference? --Matt 17:38, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Because an experience from Hyde is so personal, it really cannot be conveyed by anyone who hasn't really experienced the school. That by itself gets rid of any form of neutrality. As it stands, the article is factual and relatively neutral, albeit not well-written, but it does not give an outsider a legitimate chance to understand the school. For this article to be accurate to what Hyde stands for, it can only show exactly what the Hyde principles state, a section for the ethics, one for the words and principles. The only thing that should give context to this article should be Hyde literature, Joe Gauld's Hyde: Preperation For Life. -Alex 13/04/08

history?

I'm confused by the tense change in the History section. The first sentence seems to be the only statement about the school's history, as it's the only sentence in that paragraph written in the past tense. Everything that follows seems to refer to the present, and maybe should be moved to another section. TJLink 02:24, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

The tense change reflect that fact that only those sentences are History. There are some interesting point in the schools history. The trajectory of Hyde and Joe Gauld from a scrappy start up in the mid sixties, marginally successful school in the seventies and early 80's, the removal of Joe Gauld, the near bankruptcy of the school, the return of Gauld and the expansion to two campuses and the founding of charter schools would make an interesting read. The History, however would have to be written from original research.

Vincentvangopher 16:51, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

I added some "original research" from school meetings in the pit where Joe told us about the 3 times he heard the voice. It'll probably be gone tomorrow. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.192.38.102 (talk) 05:04, 17 March 2008 (UTC)