Talk:Period (school)

This page was proposed for deletion by an editor in the past.

Education Mid‑importance

	Education portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of education and education-related topics 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.EducationWikipedia:WikiProject EducationTemplate:WikiProject Educationeducation articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Lol, periods are really cool :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.107.177.186 (talk) 06:50, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Free period

While the article is poorly written and of low value in general, the "Free period" section contains an utterly moronic listing of activities. For one, it appears to be mostly a brain-storming about what a student could do that could be trivially replicated by the reader based on the inherit characteristics of a free period. For another, it is woefully incomplete (while the "either" implies an exhaustive listing) and thereby misses the entire point of a FREE period.

Strike the list, make an abstact discussion, and point out the restrictions that can apply to "free", e.g. that students of some schools may still be restricted to the school grounds. (The latter being the only really legitimate point of the original list.)

As a more general rule of thumb: If you have nothing to add that the average reader does not already know or cannot trivially conclude based on "first principles" then you should leave the editing to those with a better knowledge of the subject matter. (Or, as may or may not be the case here, not add because there simply is not much worthy of addition.) 80.226.24.8 (talk) 23:33, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I just looked through parts of the history. It appears that there was an existing article until 01:51, 8 June 2010‎ when a redirection to wiktionary took place. Later the article was started anew without considering the pre-redirection contents. I suggest to either go back to the redirection or to start over based on the pre-redirection contents.80.226.24.8 (talk) 23:42, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Name

Why is it called what it’s called 151.210.161.137 (talk) 18:51, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

lack of citations

There is seemingly zero citations apart from the introduction paragraph, perhaps we can work to fix this? 72.71.225.246 (talk) 19:12, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]