Talk:San Mateo High School

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the San Mateo High School article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

California Low‑importance

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California 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.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Thivierr removed the link that acknowledged that San Mateo High School students were members of "The Junior Executives," a punk rock era band that was "connected" to other better-known bands at the time, and whose founding member M. A. Lucas went on to release influential music anthologies and also founded the popular San Francisco band "The Phantom Sufers" in later years. Perhaps Thivierr didn't recognize the band as being well-known enough to retain recognition at the SMHS Wiki entry, but evidently this person is not an SMHS alumnus, and assumedly doesn't know the context or significance of the band. I will re-introduce this brief acknowledgement when I'm able and would truly appreciate it if Thivierr and others would kindly respect the entry and not take it upon themselves to censor according to their own personal preferences or lack of perspective. The entry was hardly an irresponsible blight on the page, nor was it a prank. Thanks for your respectful understanding. - D. E., class of 1981 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.157.228.170 (talk • contribs) 19:40, 19 December 2005 64.157.228.170.

Curriculum

The list of classes in this section belongs to a class registration form, not Wikipedia. Skyscraper Phoenix 02:33, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 14:09, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Quiz Kids

personally i think we should put the Quiz Kids section as there is a marching band section—Preceding unsigned comment added by Estarrol (talk • contribs) 01:09, 8 May 2008

Yeah your right!!! 76.14.36.111 (talk) 01:09, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That would be interesting, Tenten-senpai (talk) 01:21, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just because there's a marching band section isn't a good reason why a Quiz Kids section should be added. I'm not against adding one but there should be sufficient material to explain why QK is significant at the school (winning awards, winning streak, civic role, etc.) as verifiable against reliable sources. Adding the names of team members, captains, or teachers is generally unsuitable (Wikipedia is not a directory particularly of non-notable names) – Zedla (talk) 02:09, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

July 2012 Assessment

I am assessing this article after a request was made here.

This is the version being assessed

The editor Robert.Harker (talk · contribs) requested assessment of this article.

These are the B-Class criteria:

B	The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations. It has reliable sources, and any important or controversial material which is likely to be challenged is cited. Any format of inline citation is acceptable: the use of <ref> tags and citation templates such as `{{cite web}}` is optional. The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. It contains a large proportion of the material necessary for an A-Class article, although some sections may need expansion, and some less important topics may be missing. The article has a defined structure. Content should be organized into groups of related material, including a lead section and all the sections that can reasonably be included in an article of its kind. The article is reasonably well-written. The prose contains no major grammatical errors and flows sensibly, but does not need to be of the standard of featured articles. The Manual of Style does not need to be followed rigorously. The article contains supporting materials where appropriate. Illustrations are encouraged, though not required. Diagrams, an infobox etc. should be included where they are relevant and useful to the content. The article presents its content in an appropriately understandable way. It is written with as broad an audience in mind as possible. The article should not assume unnecessary technical background and technical terms should be explained or avoided where possible.

1. The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations where necessary. - N - The majority of the article is unreferenced including some contentious points. In addition some of the references link to pages that no longer exist.

2. The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. - Y - The article appears to cover the topic well, there are a few sections that could be added as per the WikiProject Schools article guidelines but they are more adding value, rather than their non-presence being an omission.

3. The article has a defined structure. - Y - Although see above.

4. The article is reasonably well-written. - Y - There is the odd grammatical/spelling mistake however on the whole the article is well-written. There are also a few areas of MOS non-compliance, e.g Several inline links. The full MOS can be found here: WP:MOS.

5. The article contains supporting materials where appropriate. - Y There is an info-box and a couple of photos. A plan showing the layout of the campus would be a nice (although not compulsory addition) along with some more photos to better illustrate the article.

6. The article presents its content in an appropriately understandable way. - Y

Overall I think this is a good, well-written article and I am therefore assessing it as "C/Low" . The referencing lets it down substantially and is currently keeping it at C-Class. To advance further (apart from referencing) the article could be expanded with more content as per WP:WPSCH/AG and the Extra-curricular section should be shortened and any award claims referenced with suitable 3rd party references.

If you need any further clarification or help with the article or disagree with any part of my assessment, please contact me on my talk page. Thanks Glanis^Talk 09:23, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on San Mateo 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:

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} 16:23, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]