Talk:Saint Ignatius' College, Adelaide/Archive 1

Archive 1

Protected

There is a dispute whether Henry Keogh should be mentioned on this page. Please discuss and present arguments for or against inclusion instead of edit warring. Kusma (talk) 11:34, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Several interesting facts have been removed repeatedly.

I believe that it is of interest that the murderer himself, the Chief Justice hearing an appeal, the original State Prosecutor, and a journalist from a government TV station are all alumni of the same school.

The main arguments against inclusion seem to be that:

1. it will somehow discomfit young people viewing the page.

2. including Keogh's name implies that there are other murderers or potential murderers at the school, a patently illogical assertion.

According to wjs13: "Nothing is interesting when it is upsetting people who go to the school and look up their school to see names of murderers"

This seems a petty argument to me, given that there is a lot of potentially disconcerting material on wiki. I see wiki as an encyclopedia, a collection of facts presented from an npov, not some abridged, bowdlerised collection of pap for children of a nervous disposition.

I have tried to present the facts from an npov. I did not include rumours, for example, that Keogh is referred to by current and former students, and others, as The St. Ignatius Strangler because (a) they cannot be substantiated, unless photographs of graffiti count as citations, and (b) he did not actually strangle his unfortunate victim.

I have also not included the (verifiable) fact that Keogh was allowed leave from prison to attend the funeral of his mother at St Ignatius College. This is probably a step too far for the St Ignatius school page itself, but, I contend, it should be put on the Henry Keogh page.203.122.236.1 15:38, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

To move some discussion from my personal talk page: We do not have to include every verifiable fact about a subject in the article. Do multiple reliable sources about the school (not about Keogh) include that he went to school there? If not, mentioning him here might violate WP:UNDUE. If no sources have mentioned that all these people went to the same school, writing this here would be a violation of the no original research policy. Are there sources about the school that focus on the issue? Kusma (talk) 12:54, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

I did some researching in Yearbooks and his name never appeared once. Unlike that anonymous user here who claims that he was in a yearbook. Year Books 1968-72 don't exist! It does it for five years (1970-1975, 1975-1980 etc) (talk)

Even if that yearbook exists: if the only source for "Henry Keogh attended Saint Ignatius College" is an old school yearbook from before the murder case, mentioning him here will be considered "original research". Are there other sources? Kusma (talk) 09:04, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

I respectfully disagree with the "original research" label, and agree that the yearbook is a sufficient citation. The yearbook would be a primary source, not original research. A yearbook as a primary source does not require a secondary source, because no interpretation of the yearbook is being done; just simple reportage of the fact that was presented in it. Please see WP:PSTS -- Lisasmall 20:06, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

It is not "original research". I have seen the year books with the class photographs. My uncle was in the same class as Henry Keogh. 203.122.236.1 13:25, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

That is a primary source. Are there any reliable secondary sources that mention this? Or in other words: it may be true, but has anybody cared about this information so far? See also our "original research" policy, where "original research" has a precisely defined meaning. Kusma (talk) 13:39, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Include. Although a press release for a school would generally not include a list of criminal attendees, an encyclopedia article should, under the subhead "Notorious" — just as this article has subheads for "In sport" and so on. Notorious graduates are just as newsworthy, and encyclopedia-worthy, as glamorous or popular grads. Asking "does anybody care" isn't a good test; people cannot care about information that has been suppressed. -- Lisasmall 19:52, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

As a tertiary source, we do not typically include information that no secondary source has shown interest in. Kusma (talk) 14:57, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

To be absolutely honest, having some 'notorious' thing on the school page makes it look like the school influences children on their future outcomes and therefore become murderers. Henry Keogh decided to kill somebody however it has nothing to do with/influenced by the school therefore it should not be included. I do know some people who have attended the school and have made a, lets put it as 'big name' (they aren't murderers like that user's uncle's friend). But it has nothing to do with the school in any way; it has zilch when you talk a bout the academic thing that has made him have this 'big name'. The school has no influence on what it's old scholar's decide to go and do - whether murdering someone like Keogh did or just simply, for example, becoming big as a radio announcer. If something has something to do with the schools influence or teaching style, for example academically Saint Ignatius' College do teach their students at a high level, it would have an influence. But Keogh murdering someone clearly does not - it is not academic that Henry Keogh killed someone (at this school and every other school they don't teach you how to drown people) and they don't teach you how to become a radio announcer. Whatever Henry Keogh had going through his mind when he murdered his innocent victim was not to do with "hey I remember back 10 years ago to that time when I was taught how to drown peole" (I am being sarcastic) and therefore decided to use it. He must have had something mentally inside that made him want to kill his innocent victim, not saying that what people think is always right, especially in this case. Henry Keogh should not be included on the alumni section - why doesn't everybody just listen to the admin - Kusma. I am sick of this and the users who keep changing it back - to be honest with you get a life other than just sitting at your computer adding information to drag down reputation of a school to make it look like some awful place. How about you revert your ideas before reverting the rubbish you are putting on this page.

It's not an attempt to disparage the school. Other schools have lists of reputable and disreputable alumni. For example the Unabomber's schools are mentioned. Hitler and Wittgenstein attended the same school, a fact mentioned in a wiki page.

The argument that the school creates murderers (or that the inclusion of Keogh's attendance suggests it) is as stupid as claiming that the school creates paragons such judges, journalists and sporting stars. Incidentally, none of the less notorious alumni have supporting evidence for their attendance. Excluding Keogh is just bias; an attempt to make the wiki page an advertisement instead of a repository for facts. Shame on you for vandalising the page because some facts discomfit you. 203.122.236.1 14:41, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

You would not believe how furious I am at you. How about you just stop doing this, nothing the school did to him had an influence on him going cuckoo unlike some people like judges where the education the school gave them made them have a good top judge. Unlike you, 203.122.236.1 whose job is to sit around all day putting names of your friends in notorious sections on the school page - you honestly think that I might not be as angry as you categorised it as 'notorious'. Absolutely amazing how addicted you are at putting a murderers name on a page which it had no influence to him on killing people.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 219.90.223.234 (talk • contribs) 07:55, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm just adding facts to an encyclopedia. You are just another wiki vandal.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.122.236.1 (talk • contribs) 02:34, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

You just removed a lot of information about the school that is far more relevant than whether or not some murderer has attended it. Please do not add the Henry Keogh stuff again without a reliable seconsary source about the school that mentions him. Thank you, Kusma (talk) 07:18, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

I have an interest in criminology and, in particular, the personal histories of notorious murderers like Henry Keogh. I support the inclusion. The person (Jesuit?) who argued that it damages the reputation of the school is being over-sensitive. Anyone who thinks the school is a breeding ground for criminals because of the actions of one former student is ignorant beyond belief. I.I. Munro 11:18, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Re-included Henry Keogh reference under notorious as supported by Lisasmall and Maelgwyn as it is a good wiki compromise. BTW, I have never heard of him being referred to as The St. Ignatius Strangler, only as The Bathtub Murderer. Would it be useful to have disambiguation reference from Bathtub Murderer to his page and to the Saint Ignatius page? I.I. Munro 11:31, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Include. It's not enough that the CIA has been vandalising wiki, now we have creepy religious morons removing interesting facts from school pages. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by A. Klapaucius (talk • contribs).

Alumni section removed

I have removed the alumni section, which did not cite any references at all (the only external link did not show that the person in question had attended this college). Kusma (talk) 13:18, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Alumni section restarted

I have included a former student for whom there are substansive references. It was a good decision to remove the others until they can be verified. Well done! A. Klapaucius 06:05, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

There seem to be no reliable secondary sources about Keogh attending this school, though, just the yearbook reference, which doesn't really hold up to our standards and is probably quite hard for anybody not in South Australia to get and verify in their library. Kusma (talk) 18:44, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Attention annoying people

I have had enough of the people who continue to add notable alumni to the school's page when the person's outcome did not have anything to do with the college. I don't sit on wikipedia all day constantly adding names of my uncle's friends but appose against this and every day or so come and scream at the idiots who are causing this mess. To be honest with all of the people who insist on having facts that are not reliable secondary sources you are amazing - I have never ever met anybody as annoying as you. Listen to Kusma, the administrator in this whole affair, and take down the fact's that she is saying. I feel like creating a page called 'Idiots who put down names of murderers on school's pages' and adding some alumni to you saying that your friends with vicious murderers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.49.134.174 (talk) 06:10, August 25, 2007 (UTC)

1. Your personal happiness is not an issue on wiki. A majority of the people on this discussion page seem to favour the inclusion.

2. Kusma is not the authority on this matter. He is clearly biased because he allows the inclusion of an Islamic terrorist on another school's page, but not an interesting group of facts (i.e. judge, accused and journalist from the same school) on the St. Ignatius page. He also ignores the fact that other schools pages include unflattering alumni, e.g. Hitler, Unabomber etc. Kusma's administrative style seems to be to allow unsourced statements when it agrees with him, and to disallow them when it doesn't. Logic, interest by other parties, and good faith don't yet seem to be part of his editing repertoire. 203.122.236.1 13:02, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I have not commented on any other page specifically. I have no personal interest in the dispute here. I was only trying to enforce that statements that have been objected to should be backed up by good sources, and I don't see that here. Kusma (talk) 15:00, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

• Kusama has withdrawn from the discussion and has no more interest in the dispute. Protection is not an endorsement of any specific revision. Please direct your energies towards improving the article. Thank you. ~Kylu (u|t) 15:06, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I am really annoyed that people still put un-related to the school fact's on the page, even though Kusma is saying that they should be backed up by good sources and that she doesn't see that here - nor do I. I also think that I know any names of school's were Islamic terrorist's come from and if I did I would be fighting the same argument against removing the names - the awful things that they did in their adult life was not because of the school therefore it is totally unrelated. You can keep the names of the school's on the murderers page because that is a fact but when you put it on the school's page that is what I apose against. So please, loners who sit on Wikipedia creating 5000 word speeches on why something should be included and reverting everything every single minute, get a life. I only come on wikipedia every now and then and try to make this encyclopedia less corupt and less full of wrong information. And stop creating terms on Wikipedia like a 'Wiki Vandal' because I can find millions of word's to describe people like a murderer's friends nephew/niece such as 'Wiki Maniac' and 'Wiki Loner'.

I am withdrawing from my ongoing argument to remove Keogh's name. I have really thought about this and anybody considering to send their child to this school would not use this redundant and inaccurate encyclopedia to research anything where they would have to pay that much for their children to go there. Maybe keep the murderer's names on schools where parents and children don't care whether they grow up to be murderers or not.

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 10:33, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:SICLogo.jpg

Image:SICLogo.jpg 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 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) 05:05, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Fixed. DuncanHill (talk) 06:19, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Use of language like "one of", "best" and "most expensive"

User 122.49.137.93 added the comment: "St Ignatius is often regarded as one of the best schools in South Australia and also, one of the most expensive." Please note that Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a bulletin board, a blog, nor a social networking site. Encyclopaedias contain verifiable facts - see WP:NPOV for a better description.

122.49.137.93 says:

• "St Ignatius is often regarded ... " - What does that mean? "Often regarded" by whom? Why only "often" regarded?
• "one of the best schools" - What does that mean? What is the definition of "best"? How does one measure "best"? Who measured? When did they measure? (What did they measure?) What were the results? Where are/were the results published?
• "one of the most expensive" - similar questions.

In fact, 122.49.137.93's addition doesn't really say anything much at all. Editors need to use specific terms, and/or define the terms that they do use. If they are quoting statistics, they need to state whom/what they are quoting. If they are making assertions, they need to provide evidence to support the assertions. For example, when one asserts "one of the most expensive", as a minimum one needs to supply a publicly accessible reference containing the schedule of fees, and preferably (but not necessarily) other information too, so that other readers can determine for themselves what "one of the most expensive" actually means.

Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 03:25, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

I asked the college what their fees are. The fees of the most expensive schools in Adelaide are at least 50% higher. I don't think this makes St Ignatius "one of the most expensive"! Pdfpdf (talk) 16:49, 28 August 2008 (UTC)