Talk:John Muir High School

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Wanderer57 (talk | contribs) at 22:26, 18 March 2008 (→‎Misc.: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconCalifornia Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis 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
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Notable faculty

There's no indication of why any of the faculty is notable. Unless someone anotates the list, or creates articles about the teachers, I'm going to delete it. -Will Beback 17:47, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Before that, please consider John Zweers. He taught History, and was not only a teacher, we was a magician. Very highly thought of, and he possessed an incredible memory. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.159.204.170 (talk • contribs) 03:10, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What verifiable information do we have about him? Was he covered in any local newspapers? -Will Beback · † · 06:46, 4 December 2006 (UTC)`[reply]

Scandal referencess

Im new to this whole thing, and I hope this works, but someone who knows how should link the citations from the "scandals" section so the accuracy of the quote may be quickly seen. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.200.20.195 (talk • contribs) 07:47, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I've converted those URLs to the ref/cite format. One of the URLs had to be referenced via archive.org, since the current version no longer seems to make mention of the John Muir teacher event. -- Bovineone 03:12, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop removing "NOTABLE" graduates

Without trying to be argumentative, I am putting some names back on the notable graduate list. Just because YOU don't think being a notable artist, composer, or athlete (or criminal) is worthy of your own personal evaluation, but being a rock star is, trashing the list of names could be considered petty. I left out the ones without cites or members of the hall of fame.

If a person is considered "notable" enough to have made major publications, won awards or had the quality for "notable" databases and even being considered "notable" by Wikipedia, please don't just keep dumping names off the list of graduates just because YOU don't like their career choice and/or success. If Sirhan Sirhan is notable because of his infamy, then so is Rodney King, whose case let to one of the most famous riots in history.

A discussion of whether or not simply making an NFL team without any distinguishing career moments is probably worthy, so that point is noted. Bsteph1 (talk) 03:34, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notable

The Rodney King Reference has no sources. And again, just making it to the NFL isn't worthy enough. What if I added everyone who went onto an Ivy League school, like Yale? It doesn't matter what these people have been accepted into, they have to have a record to justify being on there. An Olympic medalist, thats doing something, just making UCLA's track team isn't. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.187.191.219 (talk • contribs) 03:50, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you read my comment, I agreed about just making the team, although I left the door open for items like NFL because making a pro sports team is a wee bit more notable than playing on your college team... more like starring in a movie, playing in a rock band? dunno. My point if you read above is that's another discussion and I wasn't justifying guys who simply made a team.
AS TO REMOVING one award winning composer who isn't in Wikipedia but removing another (didn't you like his hit TV shows or something?), and others who are notable enough for wikipedia, and removing all of the John Muir High School Hall of Fame members... But you leave David Lee Roth? According to your above criteria, he's just a member of a band, so so what?
You can't find anything about Rodney King that makes him notable? Really? If I read your comment right, you're complaining that the outside referenced article(s) don't have cites in them?Bsteph1 (talk) 00:58, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You might want to look here to help sort out this issue. It includes fairly specific criteria of notability for people in various fields including sports, which a lot of the people named below are in.
The singing career of Juliana Gondek seems to be long-term, international, and at a professional level. Notable, IMO.
As regards Rodney King, it is not clear whether the issue is actual notability or a problem of finding sources in support. I think the Wikipedia article on him settles both those matters. Wanderer57 (talk) 18:21, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The long and the short

Long list

For notable alumni graduating 1955 or later, an early February 2008 version seems to have the longest list (28):


Short list

A recent version this week seems to have the shortest (6):


Both copied here for discussion

I copied the two here to aid comparison by the editors involved in the dispute and any third opinion volunteer. — Athaenara ✉ 05:00, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

The extensive list is far too broad. The majority of the people listed aren't even cited and have red or no links. Furthermore, some with links do not support an association with John Muir either. The discussion regarding Rodney King is a fine example of this. While Rodney King is clearly notable, although notability shouldn't be confused with successful, the link provided doesn't support an association with John Muir. It's possible that he attended the school, but the evidence doesn't support the claim. As far as these cases are concerned, there is not argument to be made. Without a creditable source linking an individual to this school, the person cannot be considered to be an alumni.

I've noticed that several of the notable alumni are athletes and assuming that these entries are factual, given the thousands of people who are a part of these sports leagues over the course of five decades, I don't think that merely being an athlete is notable in an of itself. Notability should be relative to the accomplishment of one's peers. If the notable alumni was an athlete and had an outstanding record that is extraordinary, then their entry would be acceptable. The wikipedia guidelines for notability support this. Several wikipedia articles concern porn stars and these guidelines seem to be appropriate to this discussion:

* Has won or been a serious nominee for a well-known award, such as those listed in Category:Adult movie awards or Category:Film awards or from a major pornographic magazine, such as Penthouse, Playboy, or Playgirl, as well as their counterparts in other pornography genres.

  • Has made unique contributions to a specific pornographic genre, such as beginning a trend in pornography, or starring in an iconic, groundbreaking or blockbuster feature.
  • Has been featured multiple times in mainstream media.

[6]

There are several active porn stars and yet only a select few are above their peers and should be considered notable. The same can be said for athletes or any other field. The short list seems the most appropriate. Those in the short list are clearly at the top of their field, whether it be writing or athletics or a major assassination. I would also argue that the long list of alumni includes several inductees into the schools hall of fame which while creditable, it is not enough to claim notability by having one's name mentioned once on a rather extensive list.

A major issue plaguing wikpedia is information overload. More information isn't necessarily a good thing. Many articles include every single detail of an event and it severally degrades the quality of an article to surmise a particular topic. [7]

-Wiki Mateo

Suggested List

How about this suggested compromise?

1. This list meets the Wiki notablity for people, here, keeps the John Muir High School Hall of Fame (They determined these people are hall of famers - but we don't agree?)

2. It puts Rodney King back in, because the cite clearly discusses his time at John Muir High School on page 41. However, he left school just prior to graduation, so you may very well feel his is not a valid entry.

3. Puts back a couple of notable professionals that are not hall of famers but are famous within their industries. One example: John Beal has numerous awards, hit television shows and is the most famous composer of movie trailer music in Hollywood's major motion picture industry. My cites don't all seem to be showing, but you can see them in the code.

Notable alumni of John Muir High School (graduating after 1955)
Notable alumni of John Muir Junior College (graduating prior to 1955)


BTW: Who finalizes this? Bsteph1 (talk) 00:50, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've been watching this page since a request for a third opinion was listed. It's good to see the progress toward reaching a Wikipedia:Consensus. — Athaenara ✉ 05:17, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Compromise

The aforementioned compromise seems to be acceptable, although Rodney King should not be included if he did not graduate as he would not be an alumni. Moreover, Rodney King himself did not create any notable change or event; he was not the person who overhauled the LAPD and he certainly didn't choose to be the center of controversy. It would be as if we remembered MLK for being assassinated and not his work. I see no reason why he would be "notable" in that respect, let alone an alumni. Furthermore, your statement succeeding Rodney King isn't objective.

For future reference, any references to the John Muir Hall of fame are sufficed by a link, and shouldn't be mentioned as a part of their "notability". Additionally, any John Muir Hall of Fame people should have some other documentation, other than an honorific mention by a high school alumni association. At the very least, any red linked people, or those with wikipedia stubs should not be included, unless there is some extraordinary accomplishment. Otherwise, there is a case to add every single person that is in the John Muir Hall of Fame.

As for finalization, wikipedia is never finalized, so it would seem that it's a moot point. I'll make the changes now. The difference from what you've proposed will be the removal of Rodney King, as he was not an alumni, and the removal of Renee Tajima-Peña, unless someone can produce a citation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki Mateo (talk • contribs) 03:04, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We do have the reliable IMDb.com cites but you indicate IMDb is no longer a credible reference. Really? It's the reference used by Hollywood and is no longer like the old days when postings went up randomly. You say Wikipedia is not credible for notability?  ;-)
1. Renee Tajima-Peña Her honors include an Academy Award nomination for Best Feature Documentary, a Peabody Award, a Alfred I. duPont-Columbia University Award, the James Wong Howe “Jimmie” Award, the Justice in Action Award, and an International Documentary Association Achievement Award, the Media Achievement Award from MANAA, the Steve Tatsukawa Memorial Award and the APEX Excellence in the Arts Award. She has twice earned Fellowships in Documentary Film from both the Rockefeller Foundation and the New York Foundation on the Arts. Her works have been broadcast around the world and premiered at the Cannes Film Festival, Hawaii International Film Festival, London Film Festival, New Directors/New Films, Sundance Film Festival, Toronto International Film Festival, and many other venues.)[11][12]
2. Richard Bellis Emmy Award winner for the mini-series Stephen King's "IT"[13], former President of the Society of Composers & Lyricists, former governor of the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences (Emmy Award), USC professor, and composer for numerous TV movies.[14][15]
3. John Beal Two Key Art awards, two Film Music Critics awards, two Readers Choice awards, Golden Score award, Emmy Award certificates, selection of his music for President Bill Clinton's Air Force One, former governor of the National Academy of Recording Arts & Sciences (Grammy Award), numerous hit TV series[16] , and for nearly thirty years the best known composer of music for Hollywood movie trailers.[17][18][19][20] [21]
Thanks! Bsteph1 (talk) 18:34, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Just a couple of comments. Rodney King might be mentioned in the article, though not the alumni section. He seems to be one of the best known people to have attended the school. Someone may create articles for the redlinks, changing them to bluelinks. Wanderer57 (talk) 03:41, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see how Rodney King could possibly integrated into the article without comprising quality. An attendee section, solely for him would be pointless and he does not qualify as an alumni nor does he fill in any particular section of the article. Also, as I understand it, the school has a poor graduation rate, and quite easily several attendees could be added as a result. If his time in John Muir was at all a major factor into his controversy maybe a section could be dedicated to him, but it isn't. If any association is mentioned at all between Rodney King and John Muir, it should be on Rodney King's article, not John Muir's. Keep in mind, the point isn't to file an article with random facts and associations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki Mateo (talk • contribs) 03:57, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You're confusing "alumni" with "graduate". If King, et al. were registered students for even one day they would be considered alumni. – Zedla (talk) 19:57, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What about the simple qualification that if a person is notable enough to support his/her own article on Wikipedia, then the WP:BIO notability constraint has already been satisfied and is deserving of a cross-link from here. Obviously this means that redlinked articles are candidates for being delinked, but not necessarily immediately. -- Bovineone (talk) 21:37, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'll buy your argument that if someone has their own article in Wikipedia, this means that some Wikipedians have decided the notabilty criterion is met.
On the other hand, if someone who is named in an alumni list is red-linked, that might mean several different things, as follows:
  • They are very notable by Wikipedia standards, but have been overlooked to date.
  • They are so un-notable that they do not even belong in the alumni list, or anywhere in Wikipedia.
  • They are not highly notable but they are (for example) the "most notable graduate ever" of the Mossy Bank Memorial Collegiate Institute of Wakegon, Rhode Island. And thus they ARE notable in the context of an article about the said Collegiate Institute even though they do not 'qualify' as notable for their own Wikipedia article.
I'm not sure I have covered all the cases. Wanderer57 (talk) 22:59, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And the three names I inserted above in this same section? I did some research on them, updated their descriptions above - and they sure seem notable by all standards. Can we agree they merit inclusion? Bsteph1 (talk) 06:26, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. IMHO, they are clearly notable; indeed very impressive. (I made a few small tweaks to the wording.) Wanderer57 (talk) 14:21, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Those are along the lines I was thinking, but I intentionally was ambiguous about red-linked articles because I didn't want to enumerate those. But I do think that point of allowing the WP:BIO standards be used to justify the existence of the subject's own article is important and probably sufficient for our needs here (as long as a reference of school attendance can also be sourced). -- Bovineone (talk) 16:03, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FYI - Alumnus

In some definitions, an alumnus is a graduate of a school. In other definitions, a graduate or former student of a school.

??? Wanderer57 (talk) 11:52, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a credible source and given that for the majority of the population, being an alumni implies graduation, it would be deceiving to add Rodney King. Given that the John Muir Alumni Association has chosen to not recognize Rodney King, and mind you that the nearly all black alumni association would be more inclined to do so, there is no reason wikipedia should either. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki Mateo (talk • contribs) 19:16, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I gave the Wikipedia link because it was convenient. My Merriam-Webster dictionary and my Oxford dictionary both say that an alumnus is a former student of a school, college, etc, regardless of whether they graduated. Wanderer57 (talk) 21:03, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w "Hall of Fame". John Muir High School Alumni Association. Retrieved 2007-04-12.
  2. ^ "Sirhan Sirhan". Crime Library. Court TV. Retrieved 2007-06-18.
  3. ^ a b "IMDb - John Beal". Cite error: The named reference "Internet Movie Database - John Beal" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
  4. ^ a b c "IMDb - Richard Bellis".
  5. ^ "Sirhan Sirhan". Crime Library. Court TV. Retrieved 2007-06-18.
  6. ^ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability
  7. ^ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability
  8. ^ [1] Lou Cannon. Official Negligence: How Rodney King and the Riots Changed Los Angeles ISBN 0813337259
  9. ^ UCLA
  10. ^ "Sirhan Sirhan". Crime Library. Court TV. Retrieved 2007-06-18.
  11. ^ [2]
  12. ^ [3]
  13. ^ [http://imdb.com/title/tt0099864/
  14. ^ Official Site
  15. ^ IMDB
  16. ^ [4]
  17. ^ [5]
  18. ^ Official Site
  19. ^ IMDB
  20. ^ SoundtrackNet
  21. ^ Review - Coming Soon CD

Misc.

  • The article is looking better.
  • Odd capitalization. I notice in the sections History and Current that it says White, Asian, Hispanic, and black. In the latter part of the article, they are all lowercase. I think all lower-case is probably what it should be.
  • It occurred to me that if all the notable alumni listed are actually graduates, they might as well be described as "Notable Graduates."

Wanderer57 (talk) 22:26, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:John_Muir_High_School&oldid=199199060"