Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Schools/Article advice

Draft

Draft:BKTPP Prabir Sengupta Vidyalaya- this is my first draft. The draft is entirely single-handed, so it may contain flaws and errors. If any helpful editors can correct those, please do so.--Michri michri (talk) 08:54, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Draft deleted G5: Created by a banned or blocked user (Soutut) in violation of ban or block). Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:53, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Wording change

The following is text in the article: "Do not make long lists of every subject taught—people can get that from the school's brochure or website. Do not include school performance tables—people can get that from the school's brochure or website."

Should we take out the part about finding this information on the school's brochure and website? It seems to me that it does not make sense to make such a statement, as there are plenty of other things that we should put on school articles, despite whether or not the information is on the school's brochure/website, or despite the fact that it generally is on school brochures/websites, whether it be the principal name, address, notable achievements/awards, etc. To me, it seems that this statement contradicts much of the rest of the article advice.TheGEICOgecko (talk) 04:11, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

@TheGEICOgecko: How about changing to

"Do not insert long lists of every subject taught or school performance tables, gigs of the marching band, or its drama group produtions—people can get those from the school's prospectus, or website which is adequately linked to. Wikipedia is for providing basic information about schools and is not a publicity exercise or a second brochure."

The only exceptions are if the school is truly notable for something very special that could even turn it into a GA such as Hanley Castle High School, Malvern College, Eton College etc., - schools whose work or alumni have had a significant impact on regional or national society and culture (UK), or perhaps Blue Ribbon schools (US). And even then, the bell schedules, subjects, and sport results are not mentioned, and neither is trivia about the private lives of the staff and pupils, or the bike sheds burning down. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:28, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

@Kudpung: I still think this emphasizes a bit too much on the brochure part. Also, I don't think saying Wikipedia providing basic information is the best or most relevant/helpful way to put it. Perhaps:

"Do not insert long lists of subjects taught, school performance tables, marching band shows, or its drama group produtions—Wikipedia is not a publicity exercise or a second brochure."

This way, it is more clear that it is saying that Wikipedia should not act as a brochure or school website, rather than that things on the brochure.website shouldn't be on Wikipedia.TheGEICOgecko (talk) 06:41, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

@TheGEICOgecko: whatever, do go ahead, but the emphasis is the same. Unfortunately I gave up my over 10-year tenure as coordinator of this schools project a couple of years ago when I retired from Wikipedia and I don't look at it much nowadays. The current coords whom I suggested take the relay do not appear to be very active these days. Maybe you would have time to help out on a regular basis. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:53, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

WP:WPSCH/AG#OS

I have a problem with some of the things listed here--specifically "clubs". There is no surplus/encyclopedic value whatsoever to adding a list of clubs. For starters, it's totally US-centric. Second, clubs come and go; they are ephemeral, and there is never any secondary sourcing for it, which we require for all kinds of other information. In the end, it's nothing more than directory information which is appropriate only for the school website--not for us. "Student council activities" and "regular activities" are really problematic for the same reason, but starting by taking "clubs" out of these guidelines is a good idea. Drmies (talk) 21:50, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

@Drmies: I think it's good to keep it. It says specifically to only mention it if it is notable. If it's US-centric, then it still shouldn't be a problem, as it would not be notable in the non-US schools. There should not be an exhaustive list of clubs, but this page has not stated such. There is actually quite often secondary sourcing for clubs (particularly when they have won an outstanding award of some sort). Personally, I find the inclusion of student council to be more odd, but still believe it should be included, as it is made clear that it should only be included when there are secondary sources for it. TheGEICOgecko (talk) 04:49, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

To the extent that athletics are 'clubs', should this not also apply to lists of sports? If there's no encyclopedic value to including every glee club and student government group, is it not also the case that lists of every tennis and cross-country team fail to meet the same added value?

If individual teams or ensembles or clubs have secondary notability, they should be included, but it's silly to require articles to justify the existence of clubs while leaving lists of minor, US-centric, and non-notable athletics groups untouched. 38.75.239.15 (talk) 05:38, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

The term "notable"

"Notable" is a term used often in policies and guidelines. However it seems to be used quite loosely here. I believe the word "notable" should only be used if used in the same way as policies and guidelines, so as to not create confusion. Particularly, in the "Other sections" and "Awards" section, replace all occurrences of "notable" with "significant" (or something of the like) other than when speaking about the Notable alumni/staff sections, and if there's ever a need to use a term that's opposite of "significant", to use the term "trivial." What do you guys think? The GEICO gecko (talk) 07:02, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Relevant RfC at Wikipedia talk:Notability about notability and embedded lists

You are invited to participate in an RfC at Wikipedia talk:Notability asking if relevant notability guidelines should be modified to clarify that notability can be used as a criterion for inclusion in embedded lists. If it is passed, it may result in changes to this advice article. ElKevbo (talk) 01:21, 24 August 2023 (UTC)