Talk:Hotchkiss School/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

This archive includes threads from Talk:Hotchkiss School from the page's creation until December 31st, 2010.

Archive 1 Archive 2

Notable Alumni

Owen's the man, but he isn't "notable" just because he's related to someone important. Wait for him to make his own mark on the world, then put him up. Not to mention that he's screwing up the slick alphabetization of that list. -- 23:46, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

The list of Alumni has gotten ridiculously long, it should probably be cut down a fair bit. - Schrandit (talk) 08:01, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
How about a seperate page for alums. Most of them are pretty notable.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 02:28, 22 May 2008 (UTC)


Is Iceaxejuggler employed by Hotchkiss? As an alumnus and son of an alumnus, I'm embarassed to see Wikipedia coopted as a forum for advertizing my alma mater. Hotchkiss is not 'known for its arts, photography and video programs, and a 715-seat glass-enclosed performing arts center and music pavilion opened in spring 2005' it is known in literature and tradition as a rather pretentious prep. school for the sons (and lately daughters) of wealthy or well-connected New Yorkers. I have a limited amount of time to devote to sabotaging this advertisement, but I would like to appeal to the users of Wikipedia: do you really want an institution as wealthy as Hotchkiss boasts itself to be taking advantage of a free forum to put across a glossy, whitewashed picture of itself? Let's cut out the prospectus copy, eh? Hotchkiss can print that up in three colors and mail it out without our help. The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk • contribs) 21:39, 12 August 2005.

You're right. Clearly Hotchkiss isn't all that great, cos they never even taught us how to spell "advertizing" correctly. -- 21:18, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Most editors couldn't care less about articles on highschools, let alone prep schools. Those who do care tend to be highly critical of them. And then there are those who are interested in individual schools, usually because they are somehow related (alumni, staff, students) – they write all these school articles. Very few of them ever make an attempt at writing an encyclopedic article. — If you have any sources for your description of the school, such additions would be welcome; shouldn't be too hard if it is "known in literature". Also, feel free to make any other edits that improve the article. We ask people to be bold when editing. Rl 21:18, 12 August 2005 (UTC
The sentence that you quote is not my material, I merely rearranged what someone else had written to make it more grammatical and to tone it down (and I would fully agree with you that this section currently reads as a somewhat boring ad). I would echo R1's comments, and encourage you to make revisions that will turn this into a more rounded article.Iceaxejuggler, 14 August 2005

I am a '97 grad and have added some information on counterculture at hotchkiss and a bit about the darker side of the founding of the school. i say this all with love; i'm a loyal grad, but i think the school deserves to be represented by more than a glossy photo.LawTree 20:37, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

I went to The Hill. I never got the Hotchkiss thing. Graduates of Hotchkiss always strike me as uptight little white-washed weenies--just like Princetonians.

Hotchkiss students often are "uptight little white-washed weenies," just like anyone who goes to a prestigious New England boarding school (or Ivy League College, for that matter). Hotchkiss... The Hill... Deerfield, etc... it's all the same, you hypocritical putz.

I am a Hotchkiss alum and I was able to dig up some quotations by alums, some of them public figures, telling it like it was. For example, Thomas Hoving (museum curator), Julian Houston (judge and author), and Archibald MacLeish (poet and Librarian of Congress). Private schools may like to boast about their alums, but it's certainly interesting to look into how they actually felt about the school. 03:14, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Hey guys I have begun A MASSIVE re-hauling of the site but I still need a picture for the school seal for some reason I cannot upload it. It would help if you guys could start referencing/linking all of the companies, universities, people ect. in the alumni list that would be extremely helpful thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hotchkisshaka (talkcontribs) 13:17, 20 May 2008 (UTC)


Starting the article with The prestigious Hotchkiss School smacks of POV. No evidence is presented for the claims in the second sentence It is one of the wealthiest high schools in the world and one of the most competitive to gain admission to. This is not the way to establish notability, and sounds more like an advertisement than like an encyclopedic entry. Rl 18:50, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

I have deleted 'prestigious', which may be true but doesn't add anything useful. I have also deleted the reference to one of the most competitive to get into - it is highly competitive, but so are many other high schools. I have provided evidence for other claims. --Iceaxejuggler 09:57, 10 May 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, good work. Rl 11:15, 10 May 2005 (UTC)

Campus and Facilities: Phrases such as "excellent acoustics," "spacious, glass-walled 640-seat music pavilion," and "unique music listening room" sound like they were copied directly from a campus admissions brochure. I am marking this as needing edits for NPOV. Leapingheart (talk) 03:28, 23 January 2009 (UTC)


Obvious POV issues; main editor is apparently affiliated with the school, as evidenced by the user name. (talk) 06:09, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

If you are referring to me as the main editor, I am absolutely not affiliated with the school in anyway other than the fact that I was admitted there. I have never even been to the school for that matter. In addition to that you should judge POV based on actual evidence of POV not merely make a baseless accusation. I am sure you will find that this is a very neutral and absolutely not a self promoting article. • contribs) 14:30, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Hey guys I realized that the alumni list is a bit long, but all the people I listed are rather notable so I am wondering how I can create another page to house the Alumni list much like they do on Exeter's page. Well i'll look that up, However I am also wondering how to license photos, where do I get the license of an image I took myself? Or an image I took from a friend ? or an image I found off the internet ? Thanks that would help if you could explain this all to me. Alright bye. I'll be working on the alumni list for now. Bye.

Oh and also please do help me fix my formating of the headers and divisions, I am not sure that I did it right it kind of looks a tad ugly f indeed I did not do it properly I would be grateful if you could fix it for me thanks.


And by the way I was not lying when I said I am not affiliated with the school at all because I am not. I was just recently admitted and was named a hotchkiss scholar, so I have no reason to advertise the school unabashedly AND I HAVE OT DONE SO!. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hotchkisshaka (talkcontribs) 15:34, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

- sat an expanse of land known for its beauty and commanding views - established itself as one of the premier secondary schools in the country. - Hotchkiss offers a classical education, finding strength in a traditional approach that has worked well and stood the test of time. - Hotchkiss provides the academic resources students need to explore their own interests, to give voice or vision to their own ideas, and to communicate in the languages of various subject areas -... are easily accessible through powerful on-line indices from any location on the campus network. - Elfers Hall seats 700 and has excellent acoustics -Faculty members and senior proctors.... provide extensive supervision and guidance. - One of the Top 100 Contributors to Biotechnology (< no source) - The spacious, glass-walled, 640-seat music pavilion will command panoramic views of nearby Litchfield hills and lakes. - Hotchkiss seeks a diverse and experienced faculty dedicated not only to teaching academic courses but also to aiding the full personal growth of each student (talk) 15:38, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I owe you an apology Sir, you have a point I shall work on that section of the article then in due course for now I have to finish the new alumni page though but as soon as I do i will work on the article. Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hotchkisshaka (talkcontribs) 15:42, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough; all I ask is that the NPOV tag be respected... it is not designed to be inflammatory, but to promote neutrality. (talk) 15:45, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Sources: Citations

Please add more in-text citations to this article. This will help with the NPOV concerns. In light of these two issues, I am bumping this article down to High until proved otherwise. — Calebrw (talk) 23:13, 9 June 2008 (UTC)


maybe a B Victuallers 12:27, 2 April 2007 (UTC) ... but requires more third party references. There are meant to be clever students and alumni from this school... this can be fixed. High importance (as a lot of impressive alumni) .... but are there independent refs that they did ? .... we need references! Victuallers (talk) 20:52, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Concur with Start/High.Needs many additional third-party references. Many unverified claims here that could, for all I know, be straight from the pages of the schools recruitment material."In the late 1800s, at the crossing of two country roads in Lakeville, Connecticut, sat an expanse of land known for its beauty and commanding views.[neutrality disputed] On these 65 acres, which at the time comprised open fields and several houses, Maria Bissell Hotchkiss chose to found The Hotchkiss School.[citation needed] Today, that original gift of land anchors a 545-acre campus with academic and residential buildings, playing fields and green lawns, the deepest freshwater lake in Connecticut, and lovely vistas of the Berkshire mountains. Hotchkiss is by design a medium-sized school in a large school setting—a setting located in an area designated by The Nature Conservancy as one of 200 “Last Great Places.”[cite this quote]" The opening paragraph of the history section is nothing but flowery rethoric. Much more is needed. — Calebrw (talk) 14:47, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Ok guys I understand your POV concerns, I will add citations soon and remove some of the "flowery" language used above I concur it does sound self promoting. After I finish this however I hope that we agree that this school should be rated "top" importance because like I have said before this school has produced numerous industrial giants and is the third richest amongst the Prep school behind exeter and andover which is why i think it deserves to be ranked as "top" rated. I am Hotchkisshaka by the way —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:18, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Article Name

Please discuss here. Leave name for now. Thanks. Calebrw (talk) 19:12, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Per Wikipedia's naming conventions, this article properly belongs at "Hotchkiss School" and not "The Hotchkiss School". Unless one capitalizes the The in running text (The Hague, for example), then The is not included in the name of the article. Cheers! Esrever (klaT) 05:38, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

As stated below, if it was up to me the article title would be "The Hotchkiss School". There are plenty of references to the full name, both on the school's website and in online references. The problem is that Wikipedia:Naming conventions (definite and indefinite articles at beginning of name) allows the definite article in very limited circumstances. While a poll is nice, the issue is a matter of policy. It would seem that to satisfy the rules for including the "The" in the title, there would have to be sources showing the use in the form "Jim attended The Hotchkiss School from 1963-1968". The forms I have found look like "Smith is an alumnus of the Hotchkiss School". Unless sufficient sources can be found to support the inclusion of the definite article, even if a majority preferred "The Hotchkiss School", it would appear that it doesn't pass the naming convention's standards. Alansohn (talk) 21:01, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

High Importance

Hotchkisshaka, please do not change the {{WPSchools}} tag on this page. If you would like the Assessment team to reconsider the assessment, please make an Assessment Request. Thanks Calebrw (talk) 12:14, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

okay thnx for the citation format heads-up i'll do it right from now on. I will also post this page for re-assesment. Thanks. (Should I include rankings from magazines to help back my case for a top ranking? because I have a few). Thanks again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hotchkisshaka (talkcontribs) 19:37, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
This is still going to be a B-class article. One thing to work in is refering to reliable third-party sources. If you want to get to Top Importance, you're going to need to refer to the periodicals which you mentioned above. Use those in as many places as possible to back what the schools's website says. That's just a quick assessment, but there could be additional issues other may want to address. Calebrw (talk) 20:44, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Vote on Name

Hey guys should we call our school The Hotchkiss School (which I believe is correct (vote yes if you want this name), or should we instead call it Hotchkiss School (vote no if you prefer this appelation).Hotchkisshaka (talk) 19:42, 21 July 2008 (UTC) (Vote: Yes.)

No. I had challenged a previous rename, removing the "The" from the title. After reading Wikipedia:Naming conventions (definite and indefinite articles at beginning of name), there can be no possible argument to keep the title as "The Hotchkiss School". I reviewed the web site and reviewed online references and sources, and there is no basis under Wikipedia policy for any article title other than "Hotchkiss School". Do I like it? No. But it's policy. Alansohn (talk) 20:32, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
Agree with User:Alansohn. Unless the The is capitalized in running text (cf. The Hague), then it's simply Hotchkiss School. Despite the school's preference for "The Hotchkiss School", normal usage is to refer to it in the manner of, "He attends the Hotchkiss School," for example. Thus, no the in the article name. Cheers! Esrever (klaT) 20:39, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
And Wikipedia is not a democracy. This isn't a vote, so please don't add votes to my comments.  :) Esrever (klaT) 22:12, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
yes. The name is "The Hotchkiss School" and it should be referred to in that way. Just do a google search and you'll see that the "The" is capitalized both on the school's website and in the news.LedRush (talk) 14:47, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Please review Wikipedia:Naming conventions (definite and indefinite articles at beginning of name), which allows the definite article in very limited circumstances. While the school does use the "The" in its title, I have not found a single news article at Google news Archive that refers in mid-sentence to the school with the word "The" capitalized. It's always "Jones graduated from the Hotchkiss School", not "Smith became a billionaire because he attended The Hotchkiss School". Regardless of poll results, policy seems unfortunately clear on this issue. Alansohn (talk) 14:59, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
I would appreciate it if you assume good faith per wikipedia rules. I have read the rules and they clearly allow for the use of the word "The" when that is how it would appear in running text. The school itself clearly uses "The" in running text, as do academic organizations and sites. While wider results of the use of "The" are varied, you can see recent news articles refering to it that way at and .
Perhaps I am reading too much into your tone, and if I am, I apologize. However, I would appreciate it if you can have this conversation without using condescending language or assuming bad faith.LedRush (talk) 15:11, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Yes. The name of the school is "The Hotchkiss School" with a capitalized "The" (as is reflected in the seal) or simply Hotchkiss (as is reflected in their website). The "The" is part of its proper name (See here). So I'm afraid Alansohn, that the page should be at either of those places.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 15:31, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

So i think we have reached a concensus the school's name is indeed The Hotchkiss School and it does in fact satisfy the naming conventions therefor I think the page should be moved back. If it is not done by the 25th I shall move it back myself because it is the correct thing to do. (talk) 05:35, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

I hardly think we've achieved consensus here, especially since it's pretty clear that there's disagreement over where this article belongs. Again, Wikipedia isn't a democracy, and we're not voting on the name here. Instead, this should be a discussion over the applicable policy. As the naming conventions note, it doesn't matter what the school calls itself when it comes to The. We're looking for the most common name, and as has been noted above very few articles capitalize the The in running text. Esrever (klaT) 13:23, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
While I agree that we haven't yet reached a consensus, I believe that when one examines the results of searches on the school, that there is a consensus that the "The" is capped. In a (case insensitive) Google search of the terms, only 1 or 2 of the first 25 entries says "the Hotckiss School." What we have is academic circles, associated publications (recruiters, rankings, and information gatherers) all using the name "The Hotchkiss School". While the results of a Google news search yields mixed results, those who pay attention to naming conventions seem to overwhelmingly signal that the school's name is "The Hotchkiss School".LedRush (talk) 13:41, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
A(n admittedly cursory) glance at the first 25 Google search results doesn't seem to show a single site that would really qualify as a reliable source; many of them are Hotchkiss's own pages and many others just have "The Hotchkiss School" at the top of the page, with nothing in the running text that would indicate whether that The would really be capitalized or not. Here's a better indicator: does a publication like The New York Times capitalize it? The answer: no, no, and no. Esrever (klaT) 13:50, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but the recruiters and academic-related sites in the Google search are using the name as "The Hotchkiss School" in the running text while only 1 doesn't. And while I have conceded that the results are mixed for the name in publications, it seems that you've linked to an article that can't be read, one from 1931, and one from 1991. Perhaps naming conventions and standards haven't changed in the last 80 years with the rest of language, but this is hardly evidence of the "most common name". In fact, I have already cited other publications that do use the "The".LedRush (talk) 14:00, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
Which "academic-related" site are you referring to? I don't mean that hostilely, I'm just curious as to which specific sites you're talking about. And I was using the older NYT articles to show that the naming conventions haven't changed; if you want to look at recent stuff, the answer is still no, no, and no. I just don't think you're going to find tremendous numbers of mainstream reliable sources that capitalize that the; it's not standard practice in English. Despite the school's affinity for The, Wikipedia's guideline is pretty clear that it doesn't belong in the article's title. Cheers! Esrever (klaT) 14:11, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
I don't take our disagreement to be hostile at all; I think we all want what is best for the article and I take our discussion in that context and appreciate the time you're taking to research this issue. Still, I feel that the Wikipedia guidelines still favor the use of the word "The" as it is the majority use. To more directly answer your question, if you look at the first google hits, myspace jobs,, and the Diplomatic and Consular Offices, Retired (the DACOR organization) all refer to the school with "The". That is not supposed to be the full list or the most authoritative sources, but just evidence that the google search seems to return results that indicate majority use of the "The", thus meaning that this article should include that use as per Wiki standards.LedRush (talk) 14:33, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
See, this is my problem with saying a site like refers to it as "The Hotchkiss School". When you look at the site, The Hotchkiss School never appears in running text (other than at the beginning of a sentence, when of course the The is capitalized). DACOR's own usage is mixed. I just don't think you can fairly claim that a "majority" use The. Esrever (klaT) 15:56, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
Well, at the "The" is capitalized in the sentence (running text) that links to the site (check the google search results), though you're right that the article itself only uses it in titles. As I said, the list isn't perfect, but is evidence that a maajority use the "The".LedRush (talk) 16:33, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
I think you're misunderstanding what I'm saying. The list isn't perfect, and I don't think you can even use it to suggest that a majority uses the The. Esrever (klaT) 17:11, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
I don't know why you think I can't use google results to show what majority use is. That seems odd to me. Also, you can't deny that the results lean heavily towards calling the school The Hotchkiss School in running text.LedRush (talk) 04:40, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
To throw another twist into the discussion, I called Hotchkiss, and the man I spoke to said the official title is "The Hotchkiss School" not "Hotchkiss School." I don't know if that helps or not. Calebrw (talk) 16:43, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
And Ohio State is, officially, The Ohio State University, but Wikipedia's naming conventions rightly place it at Ohio State University. Esrever (klaT) 17:11, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
I agree. See New York City, it's official title is "The City of New York," but I'm sure that Wikipedia's article would be name "City of New York" if it wasn't already New York City. Calebrw (talk) 03:51, 24 July 2008 (UTC) oh look what i found The Ohio State university appears in the running text ! You notice that you ONLY used NYtimes well it is a well known fact that the Nytimes uses grammar strangely from time to time i think it is mentioned on wiki, in order to facilitate easy reading(i have seen numerous references to The hauge as the hauge! on many sites google it). Plus the evidence you gave was in the title where of course 'the' would not be used but hotchkiss school is almost never ever used because people don't like to capitalize the 'the' in the sentence (it looks weird) they instead just call it hotchkiss not hotchkiss school which is wrong as evinced by the school seal, the school website, time magazine, the school's staff and basically anyone who has anything to do with the school! look it has been that way for over a hundred years and you want to change it now ?? (talk) 03:12, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

I used The New York Times not out of some nefarious desire to change thousands of years of Hotchkiss history, but because it is, for better or for worse, a newspaper of record in the United States. Perhaps you'd prefer the Chicago Tribune instead? Or maybe The Los Angeles Times, then. Heck, even Time uses the, and it was founded by a Hotchkiss alum. You'll notice that major, reliable, secondary sources routinely write it as "the Hotchkiss School". For comparison's sake, the first three ([1], [2], [3]) refer to it as "The Hague", too; Time, for what it's worth, seems to prefer "the Hague".
Anyway, my point is exactly that it "looks weird", if you will, to write "The Hotchkiss School" in the middle of the sentence. Wikipedia naming conventions adhere to the "most common usage"; when it comes to the, the rule of thumb is, "Is the most common usage to capitalize it in running text?" If the answer is no—and that is the answer in this case—then it doesn't have a place in the article's title. Esrever (klaT) 04:14, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Still, as far as common usage (and not newspapers), the google search clearly demonstrates that "The Hotchkiss School" is the majority rule. Even in recent articles the results are mixed, as I showed above.LedRush (talk) 04:33, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Could you do me a favor and provide a link to the Google search results page that you're referring to? I find it mind-boggling that we're even still discussing all of this. Esrever (klaT) 04:46, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Go to . Then, type in "The Hotchkiss School" or "the Hotchkiss School". You've seen it above, (or at least claimed to), but here it is again .LedRush (talk) 13:23, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

←I have indeed seen it before, but I wanted to make sure we were looking at the same page. Of the first 20 results, here's what I see:

  • 4 results are from, so that usage is unrelated to your point (that a majority of others would write The Hotchkiss School in running text).
  • 1 result uses text from the Hotchkiss site.
  • 1 result is the Wikipedia entry, which, again, is unrelated to your point.
  • 1 result mirrors the Wikipedia text.
  • 7 results don't use the phrase in running text, but only as a header:
  • 1 is an search result, which still doesn't include The Hotchkiss School in running text.
  • 1 result contains a mixed usage.
  • 1 result is a spammy ad for broadband service (so spammy, in fact, that I can't actually link to it around the blacklist) that uses a lowercase the (I'm not sure if this result is a plus or a minus for my argument :]).

That leaves, by my count, three results: a job post, a Yahoo! Answer, and the website of the Interlaken Inn. You're really going to argue that those three websites are better and more reliable sources of what is common usage than The New York Times, the Chicago Tribune, and The Los Angeles Times? Am I missing something here?

Think of it this way: if this were a paper encyclopedia and you wanted to read about Hotchkiss, would you open the H volume to find "Hotchkiss School" or would you open the T volume to find "The Hotchkiss School"? What do you think a majority of people would do? Esrever (klaT) 14:49, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

I think you are missing a lot. You have tried to move the goal posts on this argument a couple of times. The Wiki standards are clear, it's not what the NYTimes says or what page you'd open up to in an Encyclopedia (The Beatles are under B and The Hague under H, BTW) but what is majority usage. So Monster, BoardingSchoolReview, Charity Navigator,,,,, and with as the lone holdout of the top results. So you have a 20 something to 1 ration with all results and an 8-1 excluding affiliated results. It seems that in everyday life, people call it by it's name, which doesn't seem so odd to me.LedRush (talk) 15:09, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
I agree with the argument, but remember that The Hague is one of the very few exceptions filed under "T". Alansohn (talk) 15:17, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
And I think you're missing my point. Most of the sites in the top 20 results don't actually meet the standard we're discussing, which is if one would capitalize it in running text. None of those sites actually use the phrase in running text. You've provided at least three that do and that capitalize The, and I've provided at least three that don't and that don't capitalize the The. It's not even close to being 20:1, or even 8:1. I'm not trying to move the goalposts on you; I'm merely arguing that normal, everyday usage (which, frankly, I think is best reflected by something like The New York Times than by a random post on "Yahoo! Answers") would not be to capitalize that The in running text.
Clearly, you're not going to change my mind on this, and clearly I'm not going to change yours. If you feel strongly that this current title just simply is not correct and that Wikipedia is a worse place for it, then list this page at WP:Requested moves. Esrever (klaT) 15:31, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
I really don't know what you're counting or why you'll omit results that aren't "meeting the standard" we're discussing. The standard is normal usage, so almost everything should count on some level. With that in mind, the numbers of 20:1 and 8:1 are accurate. Also, you've tried to change the standards a few times. You started with the Wikistandards of majority use, but when the results showed that the "The" is usually capped, the tests changed. Once you've used the "Encyclopedia Argument" which is clearly bogus. Another time you've used the "Major Newspaper" argument. It is clear that we're not going to agree on this issue, and I suspect my next sentence will cause further problems.
As of June 25, the article was named "The Hotchkiss School" and was then changed. Why should we have to go somewhere to make another argument to get it changed back? If the people didn't making the change don't find consensus for it on the talk page, shouldn't it stay that way? If anything, we are closer to consensus on using the "The" (as there are only 2 dissenters). If you don't like the process here on the talk page, you are free to request mediation.LedRush (talk) 16:08, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
I do think everything should "count" (excepting the Hotchkiss site and the Wikipedia results, of course). My point is that the stuff you wanted me to look at (the first 20 results) only features three sites that actually use The Hotchkiss School in running text. That is the crux of this whole argument, no? Esrever (klaT) 16:19, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
I find "The" in the running text 8 times in the first 25 (I think it was 7, but maybe 6, in the first 20. I have listed the relevant sites above.LedRush (talk) 16:24, 24 July 2008 (UTC)


hey guys well as you know for the last few months I "Hotchkisshaka" hve been working on improving the hotchkiss wikipedia page it's become a mini hobby of mine. Anyways that is besides the point I think that what i am missing now are pictures of the architecture of the school the buildings the class rooms the surrounding natural beauty things like this it would be wonderfull if you guys could post some thumbnail images of places around hotchkiss both as thumbnails imbedded in the text (for instance a picture of the library right next to the passage of the library) and in the gallery at the end of the article (perhaps further pictures ofthe library and nature etc. THANKS !! - Hotchkisshaka, (talk) 18:56, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Top Importance Evidence

(it's ranked higher than other top importance schools ie. Exeter, and the WInchester School)

It has more billionaires than any other school EVER, controls alot of American economy, Time magazine, sports illustrated, Chrysler, mars, Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, ford motor cars just a few of the long lst of Hotchkiss controled companies.

At least 13 US ambassadors and 6 or so governors court and a supreme court justice as well as multiple emmy winners and a nobel prize winner, far more than schools, very impressive alumni.

Higher sat score than top importance school Phillips academy andover - academic excellence clearly important.

Prep Review also ranks it in top 10 in America, most ranks rank it in the top 10, in fact a top 5 spot is not uncommon.

Very reputable among most, known as the feeder school to yale university, produced a president of yale. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:36, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

It does seem absurd to include a Choate or Deerfield and not Hotchkiss. The school is always a top 10 boarding school, usually a top 5 one.LedRush (talk) 16:25, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Hotchskishaka, I don't dipute any of the above, but could you compile a list of references on the talk page, so that others may refer to them and use them in the article. If possible, add refs yourself. In addition to references supporting High-Importance, other, third-party, reliable references are needed. A list of these would be great. Thanks. — Calebrw (talk) 20:38, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks Calbrew well here are some third party refrences that illustrate my point about hotchkiss deserving top rating:
This outlines hotchkiss' connection to Yale, and it's status as a feeder school as well as the sway of it's lhead master vansantvrood,9171,823665,00.html
Very reputable source, highlights Hotchkiss' reputation and influence of it's greatest headmaster:
"Though the school already enjoyed a solid reputation when he took over, he has kept its prestige steadily mounting. Of all U.S. prep schools, few, if any, can beat the standards Hotchkiss has set.",9171,987917,00.html highlights hotchkiss as a bastion for the american establishment: Luce spent the next seven years ensconced in all-male, all-white, overwhelmingly Protestant institutions of the American upper class: first Hotchkiss, then Yale (where he joined that bastion of the Establishment, Skull and Bones).
numerous refrences to hotchkiss reputation and graduates from an exremly reputable source.,78,106,10
Comparing with other top rated schools (SAT score proof academic rigor is greater than a "top rated school")
Andover a school with lower SAT scores (less academically rigorous is ranked top! (also as evinced by Prepreview Andover has a higher acceptance rate.
So please reconsider this. Furthermore I think that american schools are not being held in high regard in comparison to their english counterparts it is a fact that the deerfield school, phillips exeter academy, st paul's school, and Milton academy are all equal to if not better than Eton, the rugby , and wellington college. So please review all of these schools but hotchkiss in particular.

sooo... have you gotten around to ranking the school ? (talk) 05:07, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
I agree rating as Top importance. Calebrw (talk) 13:23, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

copyrighted material

Over the last week or so, I've removed rather large pieces of the article because the text was lifted word-for-word from copyrighted websites. I tried to salvage bits and pieces as I could, but I leaned towards first and foremost eliminating the copyright violations. I've generally listed the source website in my edit summary, for reference purposes. Esrever (klaT) 16:36, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Generally, it is considered bad form to just remove stuff and not try and make it acceptable under Wiki standards. Seeing as most of this stuff is just descriptive, much of it can be salvaged by describing it in a slightly different way.LedRush (talk) 19:23, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Most of it was just descriptive, yes, but it was also just a blatant copy-and-paste job. If there had been a substantive, GFDL-compliant base on which to expand, I probably would have incorporated the copyrighted stuff in a more appropriate way. As it is, people can use the available websites to decide what needs to be added back and how best to do so. My first priority was simply to remove the copyright violation. Cheers! Esrever (klaT) 20:15, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
I agree with Esrever, copyvio should be removed immediately. Calebrw (talk) 13:18, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Of course they should be removed! The point is that a good editor will try and save new text to make the article better...a lazy editor will just delete what doesn't work. Constructive changes are always preferable to destructive ones, even when destructive ones are better than nothing.LedRush (talk) 14:55, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Skull and Bones Members

Hey guys here are the skull and bones members from hotchkiss if you want you can double check by comparign the alumni list to the skull and bones list you will see that they match up.

Well here they are: Harold Stanley, Archibald MacLeish, Artemus Gates, Henry Luce, Briton Hadden, Winston Lord, Victor Ashe, Strobe Talbott, Potter Stewart, Gerald Murphy, George longstreth, Harold mcleod Turner, Gaylord Donnelley, William ford, Stephen Greenberg, dan wende Lufkin, frank arnoit Sprole, Gaspard d'Andelot Belin, Willian H. Orrick, Jr., Arthur Howe, Zeph Stewart, Paul Christopher Lambert, John Richard Hersey, David McCord Lippincott,Johnathan Bush—Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:15, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

The website you've cited seems like typical conspiracy theory, self-published dreck. Does it really meet the standard of being a reliable source? Esrever (klaT) 12:49, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Same list different source. it appears that the list is genuine. My cousin is a Yale grad and was approached by numerous societies (he obviously did not admit to being a part of any particular society but I believe that he is a bonesman) and had many friends in such societies. He confirmed that the list did appear genuine. (talk) 13:43, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

While your cousin's testimonial is original research and not relevant here, having two lists is at least verifiable. Is the number of Skill and Bones members even notable, though? Why include this statistic at all?LedRush (talk) 14:12, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
(ec) I'm not sure that website is any more reliable than the one you cited above. Is there any evidence that any of this has been published in peer-reviewed sources, rather than just by people in tinfoil hats? Your cousin—who may or may not even be a Bonesman—hardly counts as a reliable source either.
Look, Hotchkiss has a great reputation on its own; there's no need to add in these half-baked factoids to try to make the school seem more notable or prominent. Find good, solid material that can be verified in reliable sources and add that to the article. Cheers! Esrever (klaT) 14:20, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Citing Hotchkiss in print

Someone thought it a good idea to just delete this section (and fill it with quotes negative to the school (not the simple list it had been)) rather than do some work to actually make the article better. It is always preferable to find a citation rather than delete material. Alas, I am not good at citations for books and movies, so I am just putting a couple of my finding here, hopefully to get some advice on how to format it correctly or how to get the ISDN number or something.

1. F. Scott Fitzgerald mentions Hotchkiss in the first chapter here:

2. How do you reference a movie? (I've seen Primary Colors recently and Billy Bob calls the guy "Hotchkiss".

3. Jeffrey Archer's Sons of Liberty mentions Hotchkiss so much it's hard not to find it,M1

4. American Psycho,M1

Anyway, I need to get to bed now, but this list will be growing so any help will be appreciated.LedRush (talk) 05:39, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

As I'm the one who pared down that "Hotchkiss in print" list, I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree. I tend to think it's better to have less information that is cited than lots of information that isn't. To be fair, those {{fact}} tags have been there since June—that seemed like plenty of time for some willing person to find references for all those bullet points.
Beyond just the lack of citations, though, I think the list still needs to be pared down. Who cares if the son of a minor character in a Wolfe novel attended, or if there's a passing reference in American Psycho? That's just trivia. I'd only keep the items that provide some sort of substantial coverage about the school. Esrever (klaT) 13:45, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
For me, I see more value in just pointing people to where Hotchkiss was mentioned in print. I think that the more famous the work, the smaller mention of Hotchkiss would be warranted. Also, I think that a very simple explanation of how Hotchkiss is mentioned is enough, otherwise the list would get unwieldy. Additionally, this is not a section about how famous alumni viewed Hotchkiss, but merely about H-Kiss in print.
Finally, could you help integrate the above citations?LedRush (talk) 15:38, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
What's the value of pointing people to where Hotchkiss is merely mentioned? How does that make this a better encyclopedia article? Unless Hotchkiss figures in as a major point to a novel or work (e.g., a major character attends or it serves as a setting), I'd argue there's no value in including that work in this list. Again, how does it help a reader to know that Ellis mentions the school briefly? And I'll happily work on the citations later. Esrever (klaT) 15:48, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
It serves as an example of how famous works integrate H-Kiss into their stories.LedRush (talk) 19:47, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Another user (LedRush) is removing quotations *and* citations from this list. This user asserts that the format is not intended to contain actual quotations. I would be interested to see some external standard that says that In print sections should not contain quotations.

It is certainly puzzling that there has been a call for a citation, then I put the citation in, and then LedRush removes the citation.

Furthermore, oddly enough this user has left in certain quotations, but excised other quotations from the same source which reflect negatively on Hotchkiss. This suggests a bias in favor of the subject of the article. This is a point of view. The quotations have informational value to help understand the school's history and reputation. Leapingheart (talk 01:52, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

I have tried to leave in the citations and apologize for any removals. However, as argued above, I don't see the encyclopedic value of getting quotes from disgruntled alums. The list has, until quite recently, been a list of where you can find mentions of Hotchkiss in books and movies. This points readers to another place to see hkiss in popular culture. But if we start just putting alums' opinions of the school, we could thousands both pro and con. What is the value in that?LedRush (talk) 02:15, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm not seeing what points readers to Hotchkiss in popular culture. Please clarify.
If the section is called "Hotchkiss in Print" then maybe movie references are not appropriate here, or the section should be renamed.
As to your point about "disgruntled alums:" Whether the quotations are positive or negative is immaterial (if there are other quotes by prominent alums who enjoyed their time at Hotchkiss, of course those would be worth citing here as well). If references in print shed light on the history and reputation of the school, then they seem entirely appropriate here. Would we want to include every last mention of Hotchkiss in the written record? Perhaps not. However, below are reasons for including each quote I have recently added (actually, re-added because they were removed at some point).
Thomas Hoving quotation: Hoving is one of the more notable alums, a longtime director of the Metropolitan Museum of Art. As a public figure who is also an alum, his perspective on the school is significant. McPhee is also a leading writer of profiles and this piece originally appeared in the New Yorker. So, it's authoritative.
The Cullman quotation: I believe Cullman was chairman of the board of trustees, and the Cullman family has been one of the school's major supporters. Since Cullman is an alumnus and a prominent supporter, his comments on the school are worth noting.
Julian Houston is a judge in Massachusetts. As a successful legal professional, an alumnus, and a person of color, who has written a book that is clearly based on his experience at the school, it is appropriate to quote him on his time at the school.
Archibald MacLeish is among the school's most prominent alumni. Because of his stature, his comments on the school are notable.
Lemisch is both an alumnus and an emeritus history professor, who has written an article on the history of Hotchkiss. Because he is an alum and a historian, and because the subject of this article is the history of the school, a quotation from it is notable. Leapingheart (talk) 02:39, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
I've tried to find a bit of a compromise here. I left in those quotes from alums that are from works specifically about Hotchkiss, while removing the other ones (as it is, after all, about "Hotchkiss in print"). I've also integrated the citations from the first comment here. Esrever (klaT) 01:20, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
I appreciate the effort, but I don't think it is quite right. I have looked at various prep school and colleges, and while many have an "in print" section, I did not find any that have extended quotes, positive or negative. They merely summarize the book and how Hkiss is mentioned. This seems like the best policy for many reasons, not the least of which is that it can easily degenerate into an attempt to track down the best and worst quotes possible. Also, there is almost no encycolpedic benefit to the quotes. If anything, they are harmful as they each seem to address a hotchkiss from the distant past, as most quotes pro and con would. I don't see any reason at all to break the trend of other schools or how this has been.LedRush (talk) 01:32, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
I applaud that non-book references have been removed, and the removal of New Boy from this section seems reasonable, since it is not explicitly about Hotchkiss. At the same time, I noticed that Curtis Sittenfeld's well-known novel Prep, which was based on her experience at Groton, is mentioned in the wikipedia article on Groton--even though Prep is set in a fictional school. So perhaps a mention of New Boy elsewhere in this article is appropriate. The History section of the Hotchkiss article is meager in comparison to that of Groton, and it should be filled out (one important source would be The Hotchkiss School: A Portrait by Wertenbaker and Basserman, 1966).
Going back to the quotations section: it seems a fair point that Hotchkiss in Print may not be the best place for quotations. At the same time, they bring to light an issue which is not addressed by other parts of this article, and should be. The Cullman quote and the Lemisch quote point to anti-Semitism and endemic sexism in the school's past culture. Other passages in the Lemisch article, not quoted here, dig deeper into the issue of harassment and intolerance of minority groups as a strong element of the school's culture--at least in the past.
There is another quote supporting this view, one that used to be in this article but was later removed. It is from The Hotchkiss School: A Portrait: The longtime Hotchkiss headmaster George Van Santvoord, known as "The Duke" is quoted as saying "'...we took a religious census and found two Baptists, twenty-seven Jews, eight Quakers, three Mormons, and so on...a peculiar breakdown. We never bothered with any of that. Only question: are these boys going to gain from the experience and not prove too intractable?'" (Wertenbaker & Basserman, p. 113). (By the way, "The Duke" was a definitive figure in the history of the school, so any article on Hotchkiss claiming to be encyclopedic which does not mention him, is lacking.) The fact that this quotation, freighted with bigotry, is coming from the Duke--along with the above examples--seems pretty strong evidence that there was a culture of intolerance towards minority groups.
Maybe these perspectives on bigotry at Hotchkiss would be more at home in the History section, or a section on school culture. Leapingheart (talk) 00:44, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Also--I must pointedly disagree with LedRush that quotes from the past are "harmful." First, what constitutes "distant past" is debatable. Is a quote from the 60s the distant past? The school was founded over 110 years ago so it's not clear what is distant and what isn't. Second, prep schools like Hotchkiss strongly identify with their history. They certainly trumpet the names of famous alumni from long ago -- as does this article -- so I don't see why quotations on the experiences of those alumni would be "harmful." To the contrary, they increase understanding of the subject. Leapingheart (talk) 00:54, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Restored reference to MacLeish interview in American Heritage magazine. Periodicals, especially a well-known one such as this one, qualify as print. Also, this is especially notable because it is an interview with one of the school's most accomplished alumni. Leapingheart (talk) 02:10, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

I have seen no other schools with sections of "in print" where there are quotations of any kind, positive or negative. These seems like obviously the best practice so as not to attract people looking to praise or attack the school too much. Also, the new "culture" section is not encyclopedic, does not flow into the article, and is also susceptible to the problem of being a repository for pro and con comments about the school. The new section should be deleted, and the "in print" section should be reverted to conform to other school's sections, in a more encyclopedic way.LedRush (talk) 14:38, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Culture section

Was removed from the article. For consideration I am posting it here:

==Culture== There are recurring references in print to the social structure and culture of the Hotchkiss. In ''The Hotchkiss School: A Portrait'', the Hotchkiss headmaster George Van Santvoord (known as "The Duke") is quoted as saying "'...we took a religious census and found two Baptists, twenty-seven Jews, eight Quakers, three Mormons, and so on...a peculiar breakdown. We never bothered with any of that. Only question: are these boys going to gain from the experience and not prove ''too'' intractable?'"<ref>Wertenbaker & Basserman (1966), ''The Hotchkiss School: A Portrait''. Lakeville: Hotchkiss School, p. 113.</ref> In ''Can't Take It With You: The Art of Making and Giving Money'', alumnus and supporter Lewis B. Cullman writes, "Like most New England boarding schools of the time, Hotchkiss was built around the concept of rugged, manly Christianity... There was a Hotchkiss way to do everything." On page 41, Cullman wrote of "the virulent anti-Semitism of Hotchkiss back then" and added, "as with all minorities, our status made us vulnerable."<ref>Cullman, Lewis B. (2004). ''Can't Take It With You: The Art of Making and Giving Money''. Wiley. ISBN 0471657638</ref> In ''Hotchkiss in the Fifties: Myths and Realities'', alumnus and historian Jesse Lemisch writes of the various forms of bigotry he witnessed at Hotchkiss. A disabled student was "stigmatized and physically beaten here." He goes on to write, "...anti-semitism was deep in the history and culture of the place." According to Lemisch, Jean Olsen, the wife of a Hotchkiss headmaster, suspected that the school was "by far the most male-oriented, chauvinistic school in the country."<ref>Jesse Lemisch, [ Hotchkiss in the Fifties: Myths and Realities]. ''History News Network'' from George Mason University, November 29, 2004.</ref> Julian Houston, a retired judge and alumnus who is African-American, wrote the book ''New Boy''. The novel is set at the fictional Draper School which bears similarities to Hotchkiss. Houston writes in a 2008 opinion piece: "My most searing experience with bigotry at Hotchkiss, however, did not involve racial prejudice, but ethnic prejudice... One of the members of the sophomore class, an Italian-American student with terrible acne and dark, slicked down hair, was being singled out for ridicule and ostracism. The practice was called "baiting," a time-honored tradition of hazing at Hotchkiss, which the headmaster and faculty chose to ignore."<ref>Julian Houston, "[ Messages from the dark side]." Op-ed piece, ''Boston Globe", March 17, 2008.</ref> ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:29, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Third opinion

LedRush asked me to have a look at this page and comment. I think most of the "in print" section does not belong there; some things are too trivial (the fact that the school was "mentioned" in some story) and some are things that should be integrated into the main text, rather than being in this funny list. As for the trivia impression is that usually these kinds of things (stuff like "X character in X went to this school") are often added to try to add some notability to the article, but in a case like this there should already be enough assertion of notability (the article claims it's a well-known, prestigious school, after all) that it doesn't need these tidbits; for example, I wouldn't go to the Barack Obama article and say "They talk about Obama in an episode of 30 Rock once." As for the other stuff, if it's specifically about the school (such as Cullen's memoir and Lemisch's book), it would be more appropriate to just use those things as references for information in the article, rather than examples of trivia.

I'll try to go through and break down what I think about each item in the list.

  • The school is mentioned several times in F. Scott Fitzgerald's This Side of Paradise and in his short story Six of One.[1]
  • In the book Primary Colors by Joe Klein, later turned into a film, the principal character, Henry Burton, was educated at Hotchkiss, and is frequently referred to as "Hotchkiss".[2]
    • Trivial.
  • In Jeffrey Archer's novel Sons of Fortune, protagonist Fletcher Davenport is a Hotchkiss alumnus.[3]
    • Trivial.
  • In John McPhee's profile of alumnus Thomas Hoving (A Roomful of Hovings), Hoving recalls being unhappy with his time at the school: "'The thought of being locked up there for weeks and weeks–I used to sweat with the horror of it. If you see your life in terms of weather, Hotchkiss was overcast and threatening. Trees were green there in my last year, because it was my last year.'"[4]
    • Should be used as a reference elsewhere; it's specifically about Hotchkiss.
  • Alumnus and supporter Lewis B. Cullman wrote a memoir, Can't Take It With You: The Art of Making and Giving Money, in which he recalls a spartan, strict culture at the school, and refers to anti-Semitism and intolerance of other minorities.[5]
    • Should be used as a reference elsewhere; it's specifically about Hotchkiss.
  • For the school's centenary, Ernest Kolowrat was commissioned to write Hotchkiss: A Chronicle of an American School (ISBN 1-56131-058-1).[6]
    • Self-published, no reason to include here.
  • In Hotchkiss in the Fifties: Myths and Realities, alumnus and historian Jesse Lemisch levels a critique of the school's culture, addressing various forms of bigotry he witnessed at Hotchkiss, among other things.[7]
    • Should be used as a reference elsewhere; it's specifically about Hotchkiss.
  • The Hotchkiss School: A Portrait was published by the school in 1966 (Wertenbaker & Basserman, p. 113).[8]
    • Self-published, no reason to include here.
  • Prominent alumnus, Librarian of Congress, and poet Archibald MacLeish refers to Hotchkiss in a 1982 interview in American Heritage magazine. He mentioned not liking his time at the school. [9]
    • Should be used as a reference elsewhere; it's specifically about Hotchkiss.

There's my two cents. Politizer talk/contribs 16:00, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Further clarification: in my above comments I'm not meaning to say there necessarily should be a section devoted only to criticisms of the school; I'm just saying that, if there is some sort of section like that, that would be where these items belong. If someone does decide to write something like that, it will of course be subject to all the regular policies about NPOV and UNDUE; it would have to present opinions from both sides or, if it only presents negative opinions, you will have the burden of showing that there are no comparable positive opinions anywhere. Politizer talk/contribs 16:44, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
Well, I disagree with Politizer on just about every point. When looking at other comparable schools, it is clear that an "in print" section is acceptable and various quotes from alumni either slagging or praising the school is never ever seen. However, I do agree that the quotes should be removed until proven to pass normal policies of NPOV and that there aren't positive opinions elsewhere. Perhaps it is better just to remove the whole sha-bang, as Politizer suggests.—Preceding unsigned comment added by LedRush (talkcontribs) 20:36, 30 January 2009
I'm not too familiar with other school articles so I'm not sure what the precedent on "in print" sections is...if there is a precedent for including them, then I wouldn't have a problem with keeping this section, although I agree with you that quotes need to be subject to NPOV policy and the section shouldn't be around to push a particular opinion. Politizer talk/contribs 21:01, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
i think Politizer's example of how to make the content encyclopedic and a bit more consolidated would be good to follow. I have no problem with the notable mentions being included in the article. ChildofMidnight (talk) 23:02, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

I wonder why Htochkiss is the only school on wikipedia that has someone actively tearin the page apart. and constantly bad mouthing the school. NO other school page on wikipedia has a section on criticisms of the school and I am sure they exist there is a sever double standard here. I think ledrush has a personal interest in dammaging the reputation of the school - he is a very sophisticated vandal in my eyes.—Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:44, 17 February 2009

Dude, I'm the guy saying to cut out the criticisms, which you correctly state, are unheard of for an article like this. I also want to have the "in print" section form to other schools, meaning generally literary works and not criticisms in newspapers and whatnot.LedRush (talk) 21:04, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Don't worry, LedRush...if you've gone a day on Wikipedia without being accused of being a vandal, sockpuppet, fundamentalist, or spy then you haven't been doing your job ;) rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 22:22, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

sorry Ledrush i meant Esrever or whatever his name is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:52, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Music pavilion

Removed this: "The spacious, glass-walled, 640-seat music pavilion will command panoramic views of nearby Litchfield hills and lakes. The pavilion seating—configured in the round with parterre and upper-level balconies surrounding a flat-floor orchestra—takes its design cues from Boston Symphony Hall. The pavilion’s one-inch-thick glass walls open to an outdoor terrace for community concerts during the summer. The pavilion itself will have adjustable acoustics to support a wide range of musical performances as well as a variety of other school functions. When in “routine mode,” the pavilion will be furnished with lounge chairs and serve as a unique music listening room for students."

I had a few problems with that paragraph. First, it's written in a biased way. Second, it's written in a strange future tense, suggesting that it's not yet true, and/or copied from somewhere else. Third, it's unsourced. If it can be rewritten in an acceptable manner, please put it back. --mkorman (talk) 13:16, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

The only potentially biased work in there was "spacious". However, a 640 seat pavilion in a school with 550 students seems objectively spacious. I question the motives of many people who edit this site.LedRush (talk) 23:08, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
I don't know...even if most of the words themselves are factual, I think the style of that passage does sound a lot like something out of a brochure, it's very advertisement-y. Plus, it's entirely unsourced.
As for the text that was removed about Hotchkiss' admissions rates...well, there wasn't actually a source for the rate itself, there was just a lot of puff about how selective the school is. Of the references there, one was about Exeter's admission rate (for an arbitrary comparison) and the other one, as far as I could tell, didn't mention Hotchkiss, except on one subpage where it listed Hotchkiss as #33 in something (which is problematic because the sentence it was sourcing claimed that Hotchkiss was #1 in selectiveness). rʨanaɢ  (formerly Politizer) talk/contribs 23:13, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
The language says that Hotchkiss is at times the most selective. The citation shows 14 schools in America with under 25% acceptance. Hotchkiss is at 20%. Exeter, which is regularly considered the best high school (and therefore the comparison is not at all arbitrary) is at 21% now. But the larger problem here is the propensity to delete anything positive and input anything negative, with only a superficial use of Wikipedia policy. This article is being ruined by childish behavior. I don't have the time to spend on Wikipedia that I once did and cannot mount full scale protective campaigns to clean up articles against the wishes of vandals and partisans as I once did.LedRush (talk) 00:04, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Do you believe that Hotchkiss's selectiveness is one of its most important characteristics, something that needs to be in the lead paragraph? --Taeshadow (talk) 16:13, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Absolutely. It is one of its defining characteristics.LedRush (talk) 22:29, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Ledrush please do not leave we need you. otherwise the vandals win... We cannot allow them to destroy this article. Do it for Minerva.—Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk)


Do NOT change the importance level of this school. A wikipedia editor is the one who place it at top importance so you have no right to change that if you want to get it changed place it for review. there is a process to things people.—Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk)

It doesn't matter who ranked the importance; I believe the rating should be changed, and I am also a Wikipedia editor. If you think it should be listed as Top, you need to state your case why. As for me, I think that as it's just an article on one example of a school, the highest it should be rated is High; the only articles that should be Top in the project are broad articles on types of schools and things like that (ie, Primary school, Secondary school, etc.). If you disagree, you should leave a message at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Schools.
And by the way, if you ever impersonate another editor, as you did in this edit, you will be blocked. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 15:49, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
I've left a message at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Schools#Importance rating at Hotchkiss School requesting an assessment. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 15:52, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Ummm, I did NOT impersonate that author. If oyu bothered to scroll up and see the section called "top importance evidence" you would see that exact quote by the said author... plus it is signed. So don't accuse me falsely. this has already been discussed (again just scroll up) it was already sent for review, and it was already made a top article. I dont know what you have against the school but you seem intent on destroying it. (talk) 21:18, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

The distinction between Top and High, according to Wikipedia:WikiProject_Schools/Assessment, seems to be related to the number of notable alumni. The distinction at that point seems to be somewhat arbitrary. Hotchkiss does have quite a few notable alumni, so I don't think it qualifies as Mid. But, yes, I think it would be best to reserve Top for general articles, and High for schools that have more than 2 notable alumni. --Taeshadow (talk) 16:17, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
The criteria used for assessing school articles are outlined at Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools/Assessment. A select number of important schools in each country are given a top importance rating. A full listing of top importance schools can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools. This school has already been rated as top importance by consensus (see the discussions above). The rating shouldn't be changed unless there is a consensus. Dahliarose (talk) 16:26, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
I agree with Dahliarose. In fact I would argue that the primary focus of WikiProject Schools has always been individual schools, not broad articles. Broad articles primarily fall under the WPSchools parent WikiProject Education. Hotchkiss School has an established history (1891), numerous notable alumni, and it has been listed by the Wall Street Journal as one of the top schools in the world for admission to top American universities regardless of school type. [11]. It matches the other institutions that have been rated at Category:Top-importance school articles, and I think the dedicated assessor User:Calebrw acted in good faith as a member of the assessment team by approving the change. In my opinion, it should be kept at top unless another American school can be shown to be of significantly greater importance --Jh12 (talk) 02:30, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
There are several schools within the arena in which Hotchkiss finds itself: Andover, Exeter, and a couple others. Hotchkiss has produced some notable alumni, and qualifies, at least in my mind, for the top rank. Just my two cents. MarmadukePercy (talk) 02:33, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
  1. ^
  2. ^ History Unfolding retrieved 1-19-08
  3. ^,M1
  4. ^ McPhee, John (1979). A Roomful of Hovings and Other Profiles (5th ed.) Farrar, Straus & Giroux, page 20. ISBN 0374515018. Retrieved from Amazon full text on 22 January 2009.
  5. ^ Cullman, Lewis B. (2004). Can't Take It With You: The Art of Making and Giving Money. Wiley. ISBN 0471657638
  6. ^ retrieved on 1-19-08
  7. ^ Hotchkiss in the Fifties: Myths and Realities. George Mason University's History News Network, November 29, 2004.
  8. ^ Amazon Hotchkiss Portrait retrieved 1-19-08.
  9. ^ Robert Cownley (interviewing Archibald MacLeish), "America Was Promises" (August/September 1982), American Heritage Magazine, vol. 33, issue 5.