Talk:Hilliard Davidson High School (Hilliard, Ohio)

Content removal and edit war
This article contained far too much POV content and is written like an advert. There is simply no encyclopedic value in detailing a copycat prank, discussing the names of people at the school (BLP violation) and going on at length about non-notable "achievements". It is also clearly written as a conflict of interest. violet/riga (t) 16:55, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Rebuttal
The examples you give as unimportant and worthless are what make this high school unique, and what make every high school unique. Each and every high school in this country is unique in some way. Each and every university in this country is unique. Detailing these events on a page where people can view and edit/improve them is the exact goal of Wikipedia. The previous content which was far too hastily removed provides the cultural information on this high school that makes it worth having a Wikipedia page. Discussing "non-notable achievements," as you put it, is what this page should do, because just because these achievements are not worthwhile to you does not mean that they mean nothing to the people who earned them and the people who award them. I would ask that you do not presume that because you do not know about a certain award or achievement, it is therefore not notable or worthwhile to post on a Wikipedia page.

Most high school can be grouped into three different categories: Academics, the Arts, and Athletics. These are the three core areas that not only make up education in America today, but also make up life and the world as it exists. By deleting everything except the academic overview of the high school, you have made it so not a single person can find valuable information about a place that is more than a home for thousands of people. Our lives may be found within those "non notable achievements," and just like a Tony Award or a Nobel Prize, they matter to the people whom they affect.

The copycat prank became more of a story in Ohio than several crimes and congressional decisions for several weeks. People from all over the United States and the world were tuning into YouTube to watch and learn about one of the most masterful pulled off in history. I can say this because of its popularity; even those who were the target of the prank complemented its genius. Simply erasing something because you feel it is a copycat proves that you do not know the full story, which is the exact point Wikipedia: provide a location for people to learn about events they do not know about. The only way to do this is to have a truly open encyclopedia, where only those posts that are obviously corrupt are deleted instantly.

Several concessions may be made to make this article conform with the guidelines of Wikipedia. Names may be removed, however it should be noted that every name appearing on this Wikipedia page may be found on some other online source; privacy has been extremely protected. No one has made any statement forbidding the changing of the language of this article by outside editors to improve its quality, but the simple removal of material without discussion is hasty, rude, and as inappropriate as self-serving articles.

Pleasa see Dublin Coffman High School (Dublin, Ohio) and Upper Arlington High School (Ohio) for other examples of high schools featuring more material than siimple academics. Specifically, Dublin Coffman offers a section on dodgeball. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Matt Hersha (talk • contribs) 17:18, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Sometimes it's very good to have people on the "inside" editing articles, but other times it is vital for outside eyes to look over the value of the content. There are significant problems with the article that need addressing and POV and notability are the main reasons for their removal.  The article was blatantly written with a positive bias and your idea of encyclopedic worth is marred by your closeness to the subject.


 * I have seen many good articles about schools that detail the three As of which you speak without going into trivialities and trying to sell the place. I have also seen many bad ones that have similar problems and have had to cut them down (or rewrite them) too.  I thoroughly examined the article and could not find a way of removing the bias without cutting it out altogether and starting again.


 * Examples (other than POV):
 * "This curriculum is designed to provide a balanced education..." - this is not unique to the school
 * "Davidson Theatre also provides technical and production support for the Choir, Orchestra and Band at Hilliard Davidson High School" - not a notable thing to do
 * "Tech Crew is an extracurricular activity..." - best detailed on the official school site
 * "Hilliard Davidson High School offers a very comprehensive and beneficial curriculum..." - all schools say that


 * There is a vast quantity of content that simply doesn't belong here. I applaud your efforts to write about the school and add content to the encyclopedia but much of it should stay on the official school site, not here.  violet/riga (t) 17:37, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Several of the items that you call attention to provide an accurate and detailed "persona," or history, of the high school, when one currently does not exist. The point of Wikipedia has always been to provide a community portal where people may come together to learn and teach others about subjects. Having someone on the "inside" editing articles is not only sometimes a good thing, it is a necessary thing. This is the only way in which the information is accurate, true, and clear. Wikipedia has become the "go-to" source for information on the World Wide Web. People no longer go to school websites first to learn about a school; instead, they go directly to Wikipedia to find out if a program offers something they are interested in. Detailing the aspects of a high school can provide a place for people to quickly scroll down to what they are interested in, read about it, and then go to the school's website for more information. Wikipedia has become the primary source for information, and it has to allow for that information to be available and recorded. The fact that his curriculum is designed to provide a balanced education does not have to be unique to the school; every school should do this, and every school should make it clear that they do not specialize in a specific subject area. Davidson Theatre providing technical support for clubs and organizations is acceptable because that is one of the functions of the organization. The fact that Tech Crew is a extracurricular activity is only stated becuase that is what it is. Its function is described, and readers may follow several of the suppliedl links to learn more. Everything provided here is simply a brief introduction to the subjects at hand. More information may be found through the followed links. Finally, the fact that all schools say they offer a beneficial and comprehensive curriculum is not reason to delete it from a school's page. People read information to find out about schools, to learn who they are and what they have done. They do not simply wish to read about one of two achievements. Broadway Comes Home was a major event. Invisible Children was a major event. People read Wikipedia because it provides accurate and complete information. They want to have the entire picture. They need the entire picture. Locke (talk) 18:00, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * A short response for now as I am pressed for time at the minute. Wikipedia content should be sourced from reliable, third party sources.  If you can provide such references then some of the content is acceptable but will still need a rewrite.  This will show the notability that you claim.  violet/riga (t) 18:07, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Hilliard Davidson Theatre
I have begun to add sections to this page about charity events and distinctive awards this school has received that have received national attention. Please do not delete them until I have finished posting them -- this will, understandably, take some time, as I have to source-out the material. Thank you!

Locke (talk) 19:32, 12 December 2007 (UTC)


 * You clearly have a COI here and you need to make sure the article doesn't go back to simply discussing how good the theatre is regarded by those that are involved with. violet/riga (t) 08:43, 13 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Just a note, this dude has been adding content across many articles on Wikipedia and if you couldn't tell by his previous notes on this discussion thread, he's obviously a very intellectual person. While he may be involved in the programs mentioned in this particular article, he's been adding valuable content to it and is quickly becoming a valuable editor on Wikipedia (if you didn't notice his number growing edits). I believe that the content that he added has been trimmed down significantly from the original revisions that you had moderated. I also believe that these revisions hardly qualify as WP:COI or violate WP:NPOV -- He has simply added citations to factual, notable information that is related to the school. It seems to me that you have something out for high schools, and particularly high school theatre programs. Furthermore, I believe in spirit of Wikipedia WP:CON, the article content should be left alone by Wikipedia "administrators" and allow the general public decide what in the article is valuable and what is not. I think both parties should re-evaluate the text and make suggestions for revised material here before getting into an WP:EW. --Rbtvance (talk) 10:31, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Matt Hersha has several contributions about one subject/area and while his contributions are welcome it is clear that he needs to read some of our policies and guidelines, particularly those on notability. I'm not sure how you can say anything about me having something against high school theatre programs - it would be a rather specific dislike, for a start.  I will look at what to do with this article when I have some more time.  violet/riga (t) 13:45, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I will willingly discuss the "Charitable events" section of this page; I can comprehend your argument with regards to this section, and understand your concern with "Trick or Treat so Tots Can Eat." We should certainly discuss this more on a different thread.  However, national awards the theatre program has received are certainly notable.  The Edinburgh Fringe is also an incredibly worthy and important event in the world of theatre.  Invisible Children is a nationwide campaign to promote awarenes, and these concerts are not held daily.  Please understand, I am not arguing with you about past removals.  I believe there is a conflict of interest here, but it rests with you, the administrator.  I do not believe you have it out for high school theatre programs; I simply believe that you do not value theatre and the arts as much as other people, specifically us.  People whom theatre has affected will value this information to an incredible degree.  Not having an "infatuation" with the arts is not a problem -- some people love hockey, football, or history, while others despise them.  I am asking you to respect our expertise in this area, and we will never infringe on your expertise in other areas. Locke (talk) 14:07, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
 * It is always a pointless exercise to accuse someone of not valuing something to an appropriate degree when you know very little about them, and it is not really an argument we should be having here. Indeed, a brief look through my recent edit history on schools would show a fair-handed treatment of non-notable events across every area of schools.  While trumpeting the nice things that a school has done is a good thing to do it is important to consider if it is actually of encyclopedic merit.  We need appropriate third party sources that discuss the event, and this does not include the school website or small newspapers.  The Edinburgh Fringe is notable and so is Invisible Children, but a small event in a school to raise money for a charity is not worthy of a lengthy section in an encyclopedia.  violet/riga (t) 18:07, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Here is my compromise, which I have already completed because it comes off of your entry form above. I will remove the sections about "Trick or Treat so Kids Can Eat" and "Broadway Comes Homes" until there is either serious third party coverage of these events or something else.  I was very willing to allow this, anyway.  The sections about the Fringe and Invisible Children, understandably, stay, as do the sections about the award from the Kennedy Center and the Educational Theatre Association Hall of Fame.  Both of the latter are serious national matters that have been given to the school.  The final part of this deal is that you remove the questionable information tag from the "Hilliard Davidson Theatre" section; you may, of course, keep the tag at the top of the page -- this will alert other editors to hopefully improve the language, but not remove the sections. Finally, understand that saying you have a conflict of values is not an insult, and accept my sincere apologies if you took it as one; we all have a conflict of values, and it cannot be avoided. Locke (talk) 18:21, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The article is beginning to take shape now and the importance/notability of these events is starting to be documented. There is clearly plenty of information left to include about the school outside of their theatrical endeavours, but these will come with time.  violet/riga (t) 01:21, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Resolution to Conflict
The conclusion to these threads is as follows: The Davidson page is allowed to keep its three notable events (i.e., the Kennedy Center, EdTA Hall of Fama, and the Fringe Festival), while giving up Broadway Comes Home and Trick or Treat so Tots Can Eat; the second part is that the two tags have been removed from the Davidson page, as the information is no longer unreferenced or conflict of interest. Thank you to all those who participated in this discussion, and we (User:Violetriga, User:Matt Hersha, and User:Rbtvance) would ask that all editors who choose to further edit and improve this page abide by the circumstances and decrees of this Compromise. Locke (talk) 13:29, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

First High School?
I'd like to dispute the "first high school" claim made by this article. In 1997, when Darby High School opened, it is true that Davidson High School began operating in the same building which had been simply Hilliard High School the previous year (which, by the way, is not the original Hilliard High School building). But I'm not sure Hilliard High School and Hilliard Davidson High School can be considered the same institution. Half of the students moved to Hilliard Darby High School, and as far as I know, so did half of the faculty and staff. Therefore, Darby High School is almost as much a continuation of the "first" high school as Davidson is. At the very least, the "first" claim should be toned down or coupled with some mention of Darby in the same or next sentence. Vid the Kid (t/c) Yeah, that guy. 06:22, 5 May 2011 (UTC)