Talk:Lawrence Academy (Groton, Massachusetts)

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Schools

	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: Massachusetts 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.
	Massachusetts portal This article is supported by WikiProject Massachusetts.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

National Register of Historic Places Low‑importance

	National Register of Historic Places portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S. historic sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places 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.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Student Media

I edited this section a bit, mostly for clarity. I removed the Lacademy Sun link (the page is dead). I regret removing information about new writers joining the Spectrum, but I feel such statements should be augmented by numbers. Anywho, I hope the edits are acceptable to everyone. By the by, someone should throw down some info about WRLA - our radio program is something we ought to be proud of. Riselikehelium (talk) 06:15, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted the material on the independent student publication. A publication that existed for three years is not notable in the history of a school that is more than 200 years old.Paratrooper450 (talk) 14:55, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lawrence Academy at Groton

Is this the school's official name? I don't see any record of that on their website.

Yes, this is the school's official, business name; however, it's usually shortened to Lawrence Academy. "At Groton" signifies ties with the Groton Academy, which changed names to 'Lawrence' in the 1850s. (Currently, Governor Dummer is doing the same thing, changing names to The Governor's Academy, although retaining Governor Dummer's as a business name.) I imagine that adding "at Groton" might engender confusion with The Groton School, so Lawrence downplays it. 71.234.216.249 15:43, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I added a reference to the act of the Massachusetts legislature that changed to corporate name of the school from "the Trustees of the Groton Academy" to "the Trustees of the Lawrence Academy at Groton." Paratrooper450 (talk) 14:56, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

To the user who delted "at Groton" from the article's lede as being "unecyclopedic": that is the school's legal name, as referneced in the article itself. This is nt a matter of style. Paratrooper450 (talk) 18:56, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

downtown runs

this section is so trivial. on top of that, cumbuys isnt there anymore

re: The section is not trivial- although the term '2li run' was not coined till 2003, the practice has been a tradition for at least nine years and remains a fond memory for dozens of alumni. And, although it's true that 'cumbuys isnt therrr anymur,' 'Cumby's' is an acceptable nickname for the Country Farms store in downtown Groton.

this seems to have lots of commentary and not a lot of fact. I don't see any citations or references for any of these traditions. Surely if they are such great traditions for the school, they would be referenced on the school's website, in alumni magazines, yearbooks, newspapers, etc. if people are citing something that is a fond memory for dozens of alumni, can we at least get a reference to an alumni who is reflecting on it fondly? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.154.228.83 (talk) 18:06, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

notable alumni

antione wright was actauley expelled in his sr year

How is Amos an alumnus of a school he founded?

Did you read the article? Amos' father, Samuel Lawrence, helped to found the school, (called Groton Academy.) Amos donated considerable funds to it, and thus the Academy re-named itself after the Lawrence family.

Chase Hoyt clearly wrote that page about himself. Ridiculous. The notable alumni section is for alumni who are actually notable.

Swapped Laurie's link, as it doesn't appear that Laurie Baker went to Lawrence or won a Gold medal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.3.1.253 (talk) 16:13, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

LA Football

I deleted the section on football because it has nothing to do with traditions at the school and I hate football. Also what was written was for all intents and purposes an ad for the football team. Thefirechild 03:22, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Lawrence.gif

Image:Lawrence.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 ensure 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, 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) 22:14, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Athletics

I took out the portion discussing how Lawrence Academy dominates in athletics. A quick glance at the athletics portion of the school's official website reveals losing records in the following sports: Cross Country, Field Hockey, Men's soccer, Volleyball, Wrestling, Baseball, Golf, Boy's Lacrosse, Girl's lacrosse, and Boy's and Girl's Tennis. Many of the other sports have records hovering around .500. This would not qualify as "domination." ~~jhd —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.154.228.83 (talk) 15:45, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unique academic programs

This section reads like it was copied from a prospectus, it is unencyclopedic in tone and entirely unreferenced. It should be deleted.Theroadislong (talk) 20:45, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disclosure

I am an alumnus of Lawrence Academy. As such, it could be perceived that I have a conflict of interest. However, I firmly believe the institution deserves a Wikipedia article that accurately and fairly describes the history of the school, as well as its current curriculum and offerings. I will properly source every edit I make, and I invite the Wikipedia community to monitor, comment on, or modify my edits. Paratrooper450 (talk) 16:23, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

National Register Reply Comment

I don't see anything in the article about NRHP status. It also does not seem to be on the list of properties on the county list. Is it only one building on the Register, or could this be an error? --‖ Ebyabe ^talk - Union of Opposites ‖ 21:29, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lawrence Academy at Groton. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120717041458/http://www.boardingschoolreview.com/oldest_founding_date.php to http://www.boardingschoolreview.com/oldest_founding_date.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:14, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Badly written 'Scandal' section

There seems to be a developing edit war over content recently added to this article by Optimistaverdad. I noticed their 'Scandal' section had been deleted a number of times as being 'inaccurate'. If serious accusations against individuals and organisations are to be inserted, editors need to learn how to write neutrally and to cite their sources correctly. All inline hyperlinks to external websites should be removed, and the Cite template used to support each and every statement. See WP:REFBEGIN if you need guidance.

I don't believe this section should be reinserted in its current form, and I ask all editors to refrain from edit warring and to re-assess, re-edit and re-format these recent contributions, and not simply reinsert them without thinking when they get deleted. In addition, even if valid, I don't think it's acceptable to put a section on 'Scandal' so high up in the order of content, as this suggests POV-pushing by one or more editors here. Nick Moyes (talk) 01:47, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

___________________________

I have only noticed the removal being marked as "unhelpful". This is the problem. The information - which is verifiable and cited correctly - is helpful to parents, alumni and students. It is currently "unhelpful" to school leaders who are using their assets and clout to hide important safety information for families.

If you are able to offer specific examples where edits need to be made, I will consider them.

Optimistaverdad (talk) 16:43, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Optimistaverdad: it was too long, and too detailed, certainly given the sourcing. Wikipedia is not here to be helpful for parents; encyclopedic information must be neutral, concise, and well-verified. Decent but local sources are alternated with links to an advocacy website (?), and the entire thing ... well, you asked above how this should be rewritten, and I say from start to finish since I really can't make heads or tails of it. Pinging Julietdeltalima and Nick Moyes as well. Drmies (talk) 00:55, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Drmies has just removed the section, right before I was going to do the same thing. That section was poorly written, excessively long and contained irrelevant detail. Optimistaverdad, you need to gain consensus here on this talk page before adding any such content back into the article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:00, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]