Talk:William Horlick High School

Fair use rationale for Image:William Horlick Seal.png
Image:William Horlick Seal.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:50, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Additional References Added
I have added several new references to the article after a visit to the school. Several faculty members provided documents from the H.O.P.E. program (which is the school's freshman orientation program) as well as other documents from both the R.U.S.D. and Horlick archives. None of these documents, unfortunately, are in a digital form. The resources are all available from the school or the district, and can be retrieved by contacting either. I believe this meets WP:V for the cited material. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns related to these resources. Daniel J Simanek (talk) 05:41, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Remove section
I think the "Parody of Rival's School Song" should be removed as this is an encyclopedia, and the inclusion of trivial information is best to be avoided. - SilverOrion (You talk way too much!)
 * You are probably right (just tell me to go read WP:OWN, and I'll shut up and sit in my corner for a while). What do you think of condensing the two noted sections into one section along with the the fight song, and titling it something like 'Songs and cheers' as per the recommendations of the WikiProject Schools assessment? Daniel J Simanek (talk) 05:08, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm what does it say on WikiProject Schools? I suppose it can stay, seeing that it is a traditional element to the school life. - SilverOrion (You talk way too much!)
 * I am not sure what Schools officially says about it, but the assessor from Schools said. "...the fight song text may be under copyright. It might be better to simply mention the song and parody instead of having the full text." Daniel J Simanek (talk) 07:07, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I suppose the parody section is ok.- SilverOrion (You talk way too much!)
 * I just consolidated the sections per the assessment and removed the deletion tag. All is well, hopefully. Daniel J Simanek (talk) 05:16, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Original
This article is probably a lot closer to Start than B-class, but I like how much it has improved in terms of organization and referencing. It could definitely be expanded, with more than one sentence about the history of the school and more written, sourced information about academics/curriculum and extracurricular activities. There are two things I am slightly concerned about: 1. The mission statement may be too generic and I frequently see them removed from school articles if only because they are under copyright. 2. Similarly, the fight song text may be under copyright. It might be better to simply mention the song and parody instead of having the full text. Continue expanding and referencing (e.g. Notable alumni could be double-referenced) to as many reliable, third-party sources as possible. Off-line references can also be used, but try to provide as much information as possible about them (title, publisher, volume/dates, page numbers) See WikiProject_Schools/Article_guidelines, Category:GA-Class school articles, and Category:FA-Class school articles for guidance and relatively well-sourced school articles --Jh12 (talk) 21:12, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Re-assessment
I am keeping this article at C-class, though I would say it is not that far away from B-class. I am however giving it mid-importance for the alumni, particularly Laurel Clark. The lead is too short, it should introduce and fully summarise the article per WP:LEAD. The history section is generally well written, but there are some sourcing gaps. The campus section is a good length, though it is close into going into excessive room-by-descriptions, try to avoid that per WP:WPSCH/AG. It is also all based on one source, I would try and diversify if possible. Traditions is another good section, though I would suggest putting the school emblem/logo in the info-box as is standard for school articles. The athletics section contains very little prose; it is mostly just tables and lists which give a rather limited amount of information and context to a reader. For example, the athletics table could be converted into prose with a brief history of athletics. The alumni section needs to be fully sourced. The See also sections seems appropriate, though if The World's Best Prom has a strong connection to the school it should be discussed in the main article body. The sourcing is tidy though the main issue seems to be quantity. For the length of the article fourteen sources is not very many, particularly taking into account that a few are from the school website (a primary source), when articles should primarily be based on secondary sources. Diversify the sources used as much as possible and continue expanding the article and it will be well on its way to B-class. Camaron · Christopher · talk 12:54, 13 January 2010 (UTC)