Talk:Baylor School

Importance rating
I thought that Baylor school deserved to be in the High-importance category of Wikiproject schools because Baylor is clearly one of the more outstanding schools in the Southern United States. While it may not be as well-known internationally as Phillips Andover or Exeter, Baylor is a bit like Vanderbilt—one could even call it the Exeter of the South. Thus, its important on a regional level, and since the South is such a large part of the United States, it deserves to be in the High-importance category. Madking (talk) 19:21, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Assessment
I am assessing this article for WikiProject Schools following a request at WP:WPSCH/A. This article is developing well, and is clearly beyond Start-class, though I have decided not to give it B-class for reasons I will highlight, with further work needed to get beyond C-class. On importance, the standards needed for schools to be classified as high or top-importance are tough. The article does seem to have some national significance, with a good alumni list and record, although I would still say at best it was on the low end of high-importance, and at worst the high end of mid-importance. Also note that importance ratings are intentionally different across WikiProjects, and what is high-importance for WP Schools may not be for other projects tagged. For the moment I am leaving the existing importance rating of high-importance.

One major issue which stood out immediately when reviewing the article was the overly liberal use of non-free material - I have taken the liberty of raising my concerns on an image by image basis. The general layout of the article appears okay as per WP:WPSCH/AG, although there are some issues in places. The article should be primarily in prose with lists, bullet points, and tables only being used where necessary. The programs and campus section should be converted into prose, with the excessive amount of bold removed per WP:MOSBOLD.

There are a good number of references, though there are still enough gaps in places such as in the traditions section, to justify failing the B-class criteria on referencing alone. The reference list does seem to be dominated with primary sources closely connected to the school e.g. the school website. Wikipedia articles should primarily consist of secondary sources, particularly those from third parties, per WP:SECONDARY. The citing of other Wikipedia article is never appropriate as Wikipedia itself is not a reliable source - unsourced article content should not be trusted, and sourced content should be used by simply re-citing the sources directly. Also, I would suggest using citation templates universally rather than having bare URLs, with as many fields as possible in templates such as filled in.

While I have seen much worse, the article does have neutrality and tone issues in a few places, which may be compounded by over use of primary sources. To start, the lead should introduce the topic and summarize the entire article rather than simply note the best things about the school - see WP:LEAD for guidance. The article should not introduce rivalry or otherwise have commentary comparing the school with other educational institutions, which the finances section appears to do in places, unless reliable third-party sources make such a comparison per WP:WPSCH/AG. "Baylor School's mission is to foster in its students both the desire and the ability to make a positive difference in the world" in the academics section tells readers very little and mission statements are also disallowed per WP:WPSCH/AG#WNTI. In any case, content which quotes from a source should have quote tags. There are unfortunately many examples of an inappropriate tone with use of peacock terms in other sections including "Baylor's 1973 football team was tabbed mythical national champions" in athletics, "state-of-the-art wrestling arena" in campus, and "Baylor alumni excel in a multiplicity of fields" in alumni. To start off with, I would suggest trimming the campus section down and sticking to the key parts of the campus, which will remove both trivia and promotional content.

Feel free to ask for further feedback when needed on my user talk page or at WP:WPSCH/A. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 20:04, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the interesting assessment. One factual note: the phrase "mythical national champion" isn't a peacock term at all, but it's what the selection of a national champion was called in those days. It's jargon, or a term of art, but not a term of showing off.67.86.3.161 (talk) 02:38, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Baylor School. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150203012736/http://www.boardingschoolreview.com/largest_endowments.php to http://www.boardingschoolreview.com/largest_endowments.php
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/highschool/06/19/top.state/index.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120214155405/http://www.hsfdatabase.com/nationalchampions.htm to http://www.hsfdatabase.com/nationalchampions.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:02, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

UT/Chatta
Section 1.3 states that a headmaster left Baylor to serve UTC, and then U of the South at Suwanee. Very impressive.

I am inclined to change the name of UTC to Univ of Chatta, though it may have had an earlier name. Within living memory the name was changed from UC to UTC, say 1960's or 1970's. I'm old, but I'm not that old. rags (talk) 21:25, 3 June 2018 (UTC)