Talk:Ingraham High School

	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 articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

United States: Washington / Seattle Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Washington.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Washington - Seattle.

Untitled

I have reverted this article's contents again, since the alternate version seems full of content that is either unencyclopaedic, or at least irrelevant to anyone reading this article who does not attend the school. For instance, while I'm sure Tracie Huffer is a very nice person, and is important to the people of Ingraham H.S., she probably isn't notable enough to warrant inclusion in a Wikipedia article. In fact, most of the content that I removed falls under this category - I'm sure it's important to those within the Ingraham community, but not to the world at large. Cheers. --P e ruvianLlama^(spit) 07:06, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Lang: I think you have a basic misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is for. I agree that much of the "lore" that you've added would make Ingraham's Wikipedia useful and interesting. Sadly, Ingraham doesn't have its own Wikipedia - there's just one, and it's for everyone. This article should be one befitting an encyclopedia. A list of your friends as "notable students" is by no means encyclopedic. If you really want a place for this, setting up your own wiki for your high school could be great fun - my college dorm has a wiki with all sorts of fun things on it. However, you can't take over Wikipedia's article on Ingraham for this purpose.

This does not mean all your changes are bad. I was more-or-less willing to let them be until I saw what you did to that rival high school's page, which showed bad faith. A section on the school newspaper could certainly be notable, and the candyman might be (I'm dubious since I suspect strongly that you or one of your close friends is he), but they stand to be purged along with your list of "notable students" and other unencyclopedic vanity sections. ^L_Wizard @ 10:16, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Lizard. Well said.

What on earth is a International Education department? Is it an office at the district's headquarters? A cubicle? the sentence it's in makes no sense. 88.244.245.47 (talk) 17:39, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lang.mc

Mike Lang, Please stop adding vanity content about yourself (Haymarket, war protest article, etc.)

..

just because the objects of interest do involve lang.mc does not qualify them solely as vanity content.

mc.lang's problem with vanity

Please see the vanity guidelines at

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vanity_guidelines

As a general rule, if the content you add is about yourself and is added because nobody else thinks it is noteworthy to the topic, it is vanity based.

from Talk:Haymarket herald

whoever flagged this page...why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Misszimmerman (talk • contribs)

I did. It is a school magazine founded last year, with three published issues. The question is how that is important to the rest of the world? Has there has been anything written about the magazine in larger newspapers, for instance? You need independent sources to make the article verifiable to people not directly concerned or involved. Otherwise it constitutes what is called original research, which is against policy. (Check the links - those are key Wikipedia policies!) Is the magazine itself even available in larger libraries, such as the Library of Congress or the major U.S. university libraries?

I am probably not going to nominate this article for deletion, as it is pretty harmless, but I expect somebody else will. You may consider merging it to an article on the school, as articles on schools are hardly ever deleted. But the issue of verifiability remains. u p p l a n d 07:32, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Haymarket

This "Magazine" doesn't appear to even be a school publication. It looks to be just another "underground" rag.

Reintroduction of the Candyman section

Since it seems as if the debate as to whether or not the Candyman section was vanity or not took place before this article was published, I have reintroduced the Candyman section mainly on the basis that it is noteworthy, since it was published in a secondary, unaffiliated source (The Seattle Times).Immortal Wowbagger (talk) 08:47, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

24.22.146.101's revert of your changes was uncalled for, especially since they didn't use an edit summary. Reverting with the default edit summary is supposed to only be used for vandalism, not for removing something they disagree with. Since the Candyman thing is cited, I don't see why there's a problem with it. The only suggestion I'd make is to shorten it a bit (for example, don't list the amounts of money raised). Somno (talk) 04:11, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To all who feel like deleting the Candy Man section

I know this has caused heated controversy among the many editors of this article, but first off, these are not vanity edits. (I believe the first few incarnations of the section may have been vanity edits, but that is irrelevant). To quell any future debates, I have made sure that this section follows the notability guidelines. Since it is notable, it is also verifiable, as demonstrated by the two Seattle Times articles.

In response to those who argued for more "actual content," I have included a section on some of the school's notable clubs and organizations, namely the Rocket Club which was featured in the Seattle P-I in the spring of 2008.

Hopefully other editors can add more information to contribute to this article, such as information on perhaps athletics or musical accomplishments. But in the future, please refrain from deleting the Candy Man section. It is an important part of the school's recent history and culture and is one of the things Ingraham has become known for throughout Seattle. Immortal Wowbagger (talk) 06:35, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Ingraham High School. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20051031055221/http://www.seattleschools.org:80/schools/ingraham/school/files/about_school.pdf to http://www.seattleschools.org/schools/ingraham/school/files/about_school.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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} 03:41, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]