Talk:M.E. LaZerte High School

article title
Please don't move this article to "M. E. Lazerte high School". "M.E." without a space is the form used by the school and the school board. Meters (talk) 23:47, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Racism controversy section
The same IP has attempted to remove this section four times in the last 15 months. The removal has been undone by me, by user:Captainllama, and by user:Jack90s15 .The IP has been asked via edit summary and his or her talk page to discuss this edit but continues to remove the material, so I'm starting the discussion.

I added this material when I rewrote the entire article two years ago, but I'm fine with removing it if there is consensus to do so. Let's decide whether it is appropriate content.

The IP claims in various edit summaries that it should be removed because:
 * 1) No summary
 * 2) This was an incident that was handled by the school and should not define it. People who read the Wikipedia page about M. E. LaZerte will think that the school has racist tendencies which is absolutely not true.
 * 3) This is not representative of the school and is just about a girl trying to get her 10 minutes of fame.
 * 4) Not representative of the school. Student just did this for 5 minutes of fame.

I don't think a student who blew the whistle on racism having to get a lawyer involved to overturn her inappropriate suspension and clear her record is just trying to get her 5/10 minutes of fame. Wikipedia does not mention her name, and there's no evidence she was trying to get publicity. It's also not true that this was dealt with by the school. The school board (one of the largest in Canada) was involved, and a lawyer, and national media covered the story. There is no claim that this incident is representative of the school or that it defines it, and I didn't intend to suggest so, or that the school has racist tendencies. I simply included it because it was an unusual and interesting situation that received national coverage. Again, I'm fine with changing the content, or removing it entirely if others think it's needed, but let's get consensus on what we should have, and stop the slow-motion edit war. Meters (talk) 05:58, 26 April 2019 (UTC)


 * I was just skimming through the recent changes and saw it maybe get a administrator involved? since the IP Just changes that Jack90s15 (talk) 06:05, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
 * No need for an admin unless we decide to keep the material and the IP edits against the consensus.. We don't need an admin to decide if the content is worth keeping.. Meters (talk) 06:14, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

ok I get it now there are other school pages, that have a Controversy part for the page for the school So I am fine with it being keptJack90s15 (talk) 06:23, 26 April 2019 (UTC) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_P._Becton_Regional_High_School#Controversy


 * I might have listened to a claim that the incident is not noteworthy. However I cannot consent to the section’s removal on the grounds that it is not representative of the school (no-one is claiming it is; it’s not Wikipedia’s job to represent the school), nor on the spurious grounds that it was about a student trying to achieve fame (a disgraceful misrepresentation of a student taking a stand in an attempt to do the right thing).


 * Furthermore, having made no edits other than these, the editor is a single-purpose account, which, while not disallowed per se, when coupled with the fact that the IP address resolves to the same town as the school in question strongly suggests advocacy and conflict of interest, which are certainly not allowed. Captainllama (talk) 17:52, 26 April 2019 (UTC)