Talk:Elmbrook School District

Snow Day Policy
Is this really necessary? I think it was written by a student who was upset to go to school on a snowy day. On the other hand, it is not obvious vandalism and actually has a cite (which is why it probably hasn't been removed thusfar). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.94.26.157 (talk) 15:23, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Content relating to David Marcell
Since there is a dispute as to whether controversial information relating specifically to David Marcell should be in the article, I have posted the issue on the BLP noticeboard here. You are free to add comments there if you like. -- Tom N (tcncv) talk/contrib 04:43, 2 January 2010 (UTC)


 * The person in question is Dave Marcello (note the trailing "o"). A vast conspiracy theory ("spelled “marcell” instead of “marcello”. Probably to keep this off google") is now being spun concerning this dispute on a Brookfield blogger's personal site.  See the comments near the end of: http://fairlyconservative.com/2009/11/30/schellinger-reddin-to-jump-into-brookfield-mayoral-race 01:14, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Ah yes the highly publicized mayor race........Thanks for fixing the errors, however you should Assume Good Faith when editing here. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 01:42, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * While this means I'm calling tcncv stupid, I suspect this "Marcell" can be explained with Hanlon's razor. tedder (talk) 02:01, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * My apologies to all who have been offended by the mispelling. Truth is – I didn't drag my mouse far enough whe I cut&pasted the name, and not being specifically familiar withthe topic, did not catch my error.  --  Tom N (tcncv) talk/contrib 02:07, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * That's WAAAAAY too simple for the conspiracy theory blogger and followers. And yes, thank you for correcting the spelling.  Wikipedia should be, first and foremost, accurate.  I can't wait until April 7, the day after the election.


 * I confess I've always had difficulty with allowing this kind of content, in general. It's sourced material, but it's local news, concerning a non-notable person, and it's reasonable to assume that it only made it into the article because one or several people had an axe to grind. I'm even more uneasy with the concept of censorship, but I'm not convinced that Mr. Marcello's legal difficulties have any real shelf life--something tells me nobody will care much about this after the election. Perhaps Tedder's suggestion is a good compromise, but one remains dubious, per WP:NOTABILITY, and WP:WPSCH/AG, which, although not a perfect fit for this situation, makes me wonder whether the individual members of the board merit mention at all . 99.12.243.20 (talk) 02:58, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

It appears that the consensus is to remove the material. I would suggest that any proposals to restore all or part of that information should be discussed here before making any edits to the article. -- Tom N (tcncv) talk/contrib 03:30, 5 January 2010 (UTC)