Talk:Old Scona Academic High School

POV
this seems like a school promotional page right now, if you ask me --Pyg 00:13, 1 May 2006 (UTC)


 * This article was probably written by a student or alumnus. I will try to do some cleanup --UnfriendlyFire

Frankly, that's all you really get from the OSA admin. Most criticisms of OSA are directed at the IB program, and possibly how sheltered the school is.

I agree it does sound somewhat biased, however it metions statistics so it's alright with me. The fact that you're making such a big deal out of it makes you guys sound a lot like Old Scona rejects. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.149.244.136 (talk) 06:43, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

-I would not be surprised if the school's staff are editing this page in bias. The "criticisms" section is continuously being removed, despite being written generally positively for the school. Admin at this school have a long rep of warping the truth and censorship.Ravenblacksky (talk) 17:44, 30 May 2011 (UTC).


 * I have no connection with the school (in fact, I had never heard of it before I encountered the request for protection, and I've never been to Alberta, only to British Columbia). One cannot "balance" an article by throwing in a criticism section which contains no citations, and reads like an essay full of personal opinions and weasel words. before adding such a section, find reliable sources which substantiate what is added, or else it will be reverted. The article does need some rebalancing, but not the way it has been done thus far.  Horologium  (talk) 20:57, 30 May 2011 (UTC)


 * I also have no connection to the school (you can confirm this because I use my real name and have a link to my resume on my user page), but I also reverted the criticisms for the same reasons Horologium gave above and placed a warning on DalekCaan42‎'s talk page. Guy Macon (talk) 21:28, 30 May 2011 (UTC)


 * While I agree that this section could use citation, (and I too have no direct association with the school) is there not room for colloquial/local knowledge? By those limitations, the majority of this article should be deleted because numerous sections lack any citations or extrapolate beyond the current citations. My comment was only that the previous deletions of this section were not substantiated / explained in talk. If is should be deleted for lack of citation I support that, but previous edits seemed more to bias the article than any other merit. Ravenblacksky (talk) 15:59, 31 May 2011 (UTC).


 * There is no room for colloquial knowledge. That is original research, which is a no-go here. Especially relevant is the section on primary, secondary, and tertiary sources, which states in part: "Do not add unsourced material from your personal experience, because that would make Wikipedia a primary source of that material." Further, there is a good deal of synthesis in that section, where you have taken two facts, both of which may be cited, but combining them to advance a position which is not in either source. Adding "citation needed" tags does not obviate the need for citation, and any uncited statements are subject to removal at any time. I have considered stubbing this article to deal with the NPOV issues, but your attempts to add an uncited, unverifiable, and synthesized criticism section are not the proper way to balance it out.  Horologium  (talk) 19:15, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Vandalism
Most of the edits attack the school's academic background and/or students. I wouldn't be surprised if the anon edits were coming from the school's library. Does the article need to be protected in some way? UnfriendlyFire 20:53, 9 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Many of the edits -are- coming from the school's IP address, but I wouldn't say it needs protection. And I think it would be nice to take it easy on these students...pulling consecutive all-nighters and just the unique competitive atmosphere and the "unorthodox" decisions made by the administration WOULD stress them out.  This is just one of their outlets.--Pyg 15:36, 14 January 2007 (UTC)


 * No it isn't. See What Wikipedia Is Not. Guy Macon (talk) 21:31, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

just some clarifying by people more in the know
Can someone be more specific on: "the men's and women's basketball team this year is currently the best the school has seen in seven years"? Sounds too subjective, obviously written by a student, and pretty vague. It lists a basketball championship at OSA in 2003-4, so the team couldn't be that bad three, four years ago -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.86.55.75 (talk)
 * According to this diff, it looks like the person who added it probably is/was a student. A statement like that could probably be removed since it isn't NPOV...possibly even COI. UnfriendlyFire 01:50, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

suitable credit in french
French credit isn't necessary to be accepted into the school, although French summer school is required if there is no french credit. I took that part out because it was misleading. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.152.227.26 (talk) 00:30, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

History
The history section is confusing. By saying "Old Scona Academic was opened as Strathcona Collegiate Institute in 1908" it appears to be claiming that this is the same school. It's not. It is in the same building, but Strathcona Collegiate Institute closed in 1955 (possibly a year or two later) and Old Scona was not opened until 1976. Meters (talk) 18:02, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Done and sourced. A word of warning, the URL I used is just the archive's page which gives the book link. The actual book download is more then 200 M. Hard copies of the ref are available from the Edmonton Public Library, and many Edmonton Public Schools libraries. Meters (talk) 22:05, 2 July 2017 (UTC)