Talk:Hinsdale Central High School

Chicago Low‑importance

	Chicago portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.ChicagoWikipedia:WikiProject ChicagoTemplate:WikiProject ChicagoChicago
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Illinois Low‑importance

	Illinois portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Illinois, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Illinois on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IllinoisWikipedia:WikiProject IllinoisTemplate:WikiProject IllinoisWikiProject Illinois
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Schools Low‑importance

	Schools portal This article is related to WikiProject Schools, a collaborative effort to write quality articles about schools around the world. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.SchoolsWikipedia:WikiProject SchoolsTemplate:WikiProject Schoolsschool
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Trivia

I took down that bit about locker 666 because it was not verifiable. See Wikipedia:verifiability. Vandymorgan 13:19, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Hinsdalecentral.gif

Image:Hinsdalecentral.gif 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 Wikipedia: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 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 22:33, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy

I've removed some of the unsourced gossip in the controversy section. Please don't put it back without verifiable, reliable sources. Thanks. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 11:13, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest adding the school emblem on the page and cleaning up some of the information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wildcats5 (talk • contribs) 00:23, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There doesn't seem to be any citation about the location of the school or demographics of the school/town. I would recommend inserting a citation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wildcats5 (talk • contribs) 00:30, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the topic headings could be more clear. For example, "Technology" could say "Technology in the Classroom" or something. Or the the one labeled "Controversy" is sort of vague and seemingly unnecessary to warrant its own heading. Isn't that controversy more easily covered under "History" instead? Just a thought... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ewa23 (talk • contribs) 00:49, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

May 2 edits

I have just finished a massive edit to the athletics section: 1. With the athletic accomplishments being so massive, rather than truncating (and in order to keep them parallel to the work done on a lot of other articles on Illinois high schools), I added a collapsable table: this keeps all of the info without dominating the article. 2. The information on the girls lacrosse team was confusing: part of the article said it was not sanctioned by the school, but it was listed in a section about IHSA sports. It had been fact tagged since September 2007. I decided that with the fact tagging, it had to go (per: the policy on verifiability. 3. The section was changed from IHSA Athletics/activities to just "athletics". All other school articles I have seen have separate sections for athletics and non-athletic activities. Further, the manual of style calls for there to be no wikilinks in subsection headings. Given this, if there is a good reliable source confirming the lacrosse, please re-add that. 4. I kept the national championship claim, but fact tagged that. This should be reliably sourced immediately. 5. I have fact tagged the claims about some of the rivalry games. This should be sourced. 6. I removed a few athletic alumni. They should be in a notable alumni section, and only if they meet notability requirements. 7. I removed some unencyclopedic bits about recent teams.

This article still needs a lot of work, and I will try and do what I can. Please remember to use reliable sources and citations when adding new material. Best of luck! LonelyBeacon (talk) 02:15, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2008 Lockdown

Once more sources are collected, I suggest adding the lockdown incident to the article. The only source I've been able to find is from a local newspaper, http://blogs.pioneerlocal.com/talkingoutofschool/2008/06/hinsdale-central-on-lockdown.html. -Netalarm- 02:55, 28 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Netalarm (talk • contribs)

IMO, there is nothing notable about this event. Lockdowns of this nature are very common in American high schools, especially since the events of Columbine High School. Even with the sourcing, I think it falls under wikipedia's policy on handling a one time news item. It is simply not encyclopedic. LonelyBeacon (talk) 02:59, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kay, I'll look into WikiNews, or find other areas of this article to improve. Currently. I'm looking into adding more information to the Social Security incident, as it was reported to federal authorities as a serious security breach. -Netalarm- 22:33, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Cleanup and content adding

As LonelyBeacon mentioned above, this article does need a lot of work. I'll start adding content and generally work on it now.Netalarm 07:31, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've rewritten the section on the Social Security leak. Netalarm 14:37, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And as a result my user page is being vandalized like crazy... Netalarm 06:50, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeesh! You aren't kidding! Remember: if your page is being vandalized, it is a good sign that you were likely doing something right. LonelyBeacon (talk) 18:18, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can try to get pictures up, but I'm looking into why the previous one was removed. Netalarm 23:48, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know why those pictures were deleted (long before I got here), but I can try to help if you haven't done this before.

Are these pictures you have taken, or pictures from a website? LonelyBeacon (talk) 01:20, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The previous ones were deleted because they did not cite a reason on why their use would constitute as "fair use". If we cite the reason for the picture, it should stay. I can either take picture myself, or use ones on the school website. I think if I took them myself, there would be minimal chance of any disputes in regards to the copyright. Netalarm 01:55, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just my two bits: I think any pictures from the school website will be regarded as under copyright, and will not have been released for use. I think that you may have a problem justifying their use. If you take the pictures yourself, you will be in great shape. When you go to upload, one option will be "did you take these photos yourself?", and then you just need to fill in some info, and then pick a license agreement for your work.LonelyBeacon (talk) 06:02, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alumni cleanup

I've removed Judy Biggert, as http://judybiggert.house.gov/MeetJudy.aspx clearly shows she did not attend this high school. The source is inaccurate, so I'll review all the other entries soon. Netalarmtalk 00:32, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I wholeheartedly concur .... see List of New Trier High School alumni. I probably added that reference for her, but the U.S. Congress site confirms she went to New Trier. The news article is wrong.LonelyBeacon (talk) 01:27, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder what happened with that double post... My browser probably froze when I was posting. We'd have to review the other alumni too, since they all use the inaccurate article as the source. Netalarmtalk 03:31, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

reliably sourcing from the school webpage

I have reverted some claims regarding the number of national merit finalists, semifinalists, Illinois State Scholars, etc. Claims of this nature need to be supported by a third party neutral source, per the guidelines on reliable sources. While school websites are fine for sourcing non-controversial material, this comes across as being promotional when it is sourced from the school itself. It should be re-added if it can be reliably sourced from a third party source. This is also covered in the policy on verifiability, which is a key policy on this website. If there is a reason that this policy should be ignored, please discuss that as such here. LonelyBeacon (talk) 02:28, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Weakly sourced but ... killed?

This removal I can't quite support. The source seems adequate for its use here.- Sinneed 17:06, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In general, the Wikiproject Schools group does not encourage adding alumni unless they are subjects of articles already in existence, or would be eligible for an article under WP:BIO. (see: WP:WPSCHOOLS/AG#WNTI and WP:WPSCHOOLS/AL). This is not a hard and fast guideline, for sure, but it is one that keeps people from adding their cousin who rushed for 100 yards in a college football game, or their aunt who just got her PhD in something.

Having said that, I think if you are the founder of something that meets notability (I think that auctioneer fits the case), you are in that grey area that demands at least a little consideration. That's just one person's opinion, but I think it is in the spirit of being a notable alum. LonelyBeacon (talk) 17:31, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Leak?

One was a hacker attack. The hackers were caught, and appear not to have used the data.

The other was a security breach, and as I read it *could* have allowed hacking. Neither was a leak. - Sinneed 02:54, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How about "Computer break-in" or "Server hack" or ? "Social Security Leak" is indeed far too strong.- Sinneed 02:55, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that describing the incident as a "leak" is not the best term for these incidents, but that's just what it was originally called here. So for the new naming, I don't believe using the word "hack" is appropriate, as it has negative connotations. "Compromise", "Unauthorized access", or something of that matter? What do you think? Netalarmhappy holidays! 02:58, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest "computer break-in"... but the database cited calls it "hack"... the notability of this incident is very very weak.

I question the need any of this in an encyclopedia article. If it had wide-ranging repurcusions or affected the future or reputation of the school, I would argue for inclusion. As it is, I argue against all 3 entries... the assault, the computer hack, and the University security flaw.- Sinneed 03:07, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In general, I've seen such information included on many school articles (even censorship). It is hard for us to determine whether if such incidents are notable enough for inclusion, because most likely very few people around the world will ever know of the incidents. But as there are news sources supporting these claims, I think that should warrant their inclusion. If the sports and clubs are important enough to be mentioned, I think such incidents should also be included. Regarding the naming, I believe it was the server that was compromised. Netalarmhappy holidays! 03:13, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any news mention of the 1st server break-in, only hack database entries.

As to the news... wp:NOTNEWS. Having adequate sourcing is generally required, but being wildely documented in the media doesn't mean it belongs in an encyclopedia. On the "what makes it notable?" question... I haven't killed them because I don't know either. :) One touchstone could be "Does the event have or qualify for an article?" if not, then it isn't. - Sinneed 03:43, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Meh, so again it requires clarification of guidelines... If only we had clearer guidelines, everything would be much easier. Netalarmhappy holidays! 04:05, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not really, no, we don't need clearer guidelines: in a very real sense, we the editors are the guidelines. If someone feels strongly, and feel the existing guidelines allow their edit, the wp:Be Bold and do it. If someone objects, they wp:revert, and then if people are interested, discuss and reach wp:consensus. If that can't be reached, then they either wander off or gather input from the community.- Sinneed 05:09, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I like that =D "We are the guidelines". I think we should keep it for now, unless there are some major objections. Netalarmhappy holidays! 05:22, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Article Reference

I referenced an article to http://www.mysuburbanlife.com/huntley/sports/x1681294163 but could not find an author. The site seems to be an online newspaper site headed by Huntler Farmside located in Downers Grove. I hope the reference is good enough. Also, I left a reference to a Hinsdale Central District 86 website author-less because the organization (District 86) is implied. UsAkh (talk) 04:41, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The reference is good enough without the author information. I'm more concerned with the importance of the turf field itself, as it has not been covered by multiple third party sources. Netalarm^talk 12:52, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Words used at central

I added a list of common terms used at hinsdale central. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.15.16.217 (talk) 01:11, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Section about student language

I am including a section about language used by students, specific to central Please do not revert these edits Also, included with these edits is information on recent renovations, do not delete these thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mortman69 (talk • contribs) 01:45, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

None of that is supported by reliable sources, and some of would not be encyclopedic even if supported. Materialscientist (talk) 01:54, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Boys water polo and more thorough athletics

There is not enough information about other sports. For example there is an entire section on specifically Football alone. I will be personally adding a section on the boys water polo team. I think we all understand how truly outstanding Hinsdale Central athletics are. For anyone that didn't hear, in the Fall season of 2014, Hinsdale Central captured 5 state titles. They have a superior athletics program and people should know about it. I encourage anyone that knows about other sports should add information to the page to make it more informative.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Hinsdale Central High School. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:42, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]