Talk:American School in Japan

Fair use rationale for Image:Asijlogo.jpg
Image:Asijlogo.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 Wikipedia articles 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 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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 22:41, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Deleted Controversy - Cluster Bombs and Jin Roy Ryu
who deleted this, and why? it's relevant to the article, possibly more so than counting the facilities available (which makes this article sound like an advertising shill).

Deleted Controversy - Mormons
kinda pointless and.... seriously... how is having too many mormons a controvercy... its just a fact that there are a lot of mormons at ASIJ.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrew319 (talk • contribs) 22:06, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Information
You shouldn't discuss religious biases towards articles. Something like "There's a lot of Mexicans at John Doe Middle School" can easily be taken out-of-context and offend several people with Hispanic history. Ellomate (talk) 10:19, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Enrollment costs
Here's some estimates (according to XE.com) of how much the private school costs. ''These estimates are based on ELC (probably preschool) through Grade 12.


 * Tuition - $19,522.37
 * Application Fee - $180
 * Yearly Fee (or Capital Assessment) - $947.68 per year ($13,267.63 total)
 * Registration -$2,843.06
 * Building Maintenance - $4,738.44
 * Busing (if nessesary) - $3,079.98

This comes to a grand total of $43,631.48, including the whole 14 years of the Capital Assessments and Busing. That's about $1,000 more than an average teachers salary. God damn, Japan must be more inflated than a blow-up doll. Ellomate (talk) 10:19, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

it is very expensive...but also a very nice school :) Nihonshoku (talk) 21:52, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Except for the Japanese students, most other students are the children of international business expats and diplomats; so the firms and governments are paying the high costs, not the families themselves. The business types are usually very affluent in any case. It's really good deal for the diplomatic kids, because with few exceptions, their parents could never afford such pricey schools. Some taxpayers grumble about this in the U.S.-- why should Americans pay for the kids of diplomats to go to absurdly-priced private schools? They may have a point. On the other hand, if the Govt. did NOT pay for education, most diplomats could never afford the costs of having children/living overseas-- so the State Department would not hire people based on merit or skills, but on social class, like it used to. Only people rich enough to become diplomats could do so. Canada, the UK, they do the same thing so that the Foreign Office can hire people based on education rather than personal ability to afford living abroad.214.13.130.104 (talk) 09:10, 15 March 2010 (UTC)Vaino

Photos
I've added a photo. It's not the best as it wasn't originally intended for this article, but a snapshot I took, which I've added because I just spotted the image request. Below is another photo which may (or may not) be more suitable. --Calton | Talk 18:01, 21 December 2016 (UTC)