Talk:Benet Academy/Archive 1

What the heck?

Who mangled this article? It used to be pretty decent, but it's really sorry looking now.

Alumni List

Anyone have a list of notable alumni that could be added to the page? Thesquire 09:02, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Added some. The graduation year for Jim Peterik is a guess, based on the fact that he would've been about 18 in 1969. Can anyone confirm when he graduated?

The singer of Survivor (Eye of the Tiger et al.) was Tom Doody, who graduated in 1963. Jim Peterik graduated from Morton East.

• Jim Peterik's website and several articles say that he went to Morton West (not Morton East) but Peterik, not Doody, was singer/songwriter/guitarist of Survivor. Tom Doody went to Procopius but was not in Survivor, but rather was a founder of the The Cryan Shames ("Sugar and Spice", "I Wanna Meet You", "It Could Be We're in Love"). -- DS1953 ^talk 15:04, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
• My understanding's always been that whoever wrote "Eye of the Tiger" went to Benet, but if there's no documentation to back it up then that's that. Thesquire 20:29, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
• Jim Peterik wrote "Eye of the Tiger". The lead singer was Dave Bickler, class of 1971. The song earned an Oscar for song of the year when it was the song for "Rocky". —the preceding unsigned comment is by 68.249.187.99 (talk • contribs) 12:04, 29 January 2006 (UTC{})

Have you considered adding the basketball streak to the article??The preceding unsigned comment was added by 38.112.25.6 (talk ? contribs) 15:39, 19 May 2006 (UTC{})

Was it the longest in the state or some such? -- Thesquire (talk - contribs) 20:57, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Persistent Vandal

There appears to be a persistant vandal, 64.53.208.70, who insists on placing inappropriately-worded references to a school discipline incident in the article. In keeping with both the NPOV and Encyclopedic Character policies of Wikipedia, these repeted references are not appropriate and constitute vandalism. Those who contribute or watch this article are encouraged to check it regularly and revert the page as necessary. Thesquire 03:00, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

A new persistant vandal, apparently from the class of 2002, insists on disparaging members of that class within the article and on otherwise posting nonsense. -- Thesquire (talk - contribs) 16:54, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Car accident

Do you think this article should include some mention of the January 15, 1997 car accident that killed three Benet students? (Stephanie Ramos, 14, of Darien; Jeffrey Wirtz, 16, of Darien. Sean O'Donnell, 16, of Bolingbrook) I'm not sure if that's encyclopedic, but it was a pretty major event for the school. (Comment by 134.173.92.223)

Having entered Benet a couple years after that accident, and since graduated, I can say that while the event was major at the time, it's had no real lasting affect on the student body. Most students now only know about it from the plaque in the lobby. It's unencyclopedic. Thesquire 01:30, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Although it was a very depressing incident, that accident has little effect on the student population. Out of all of my friends, only one knew about this incident.--67.173.123.48 05:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

ACT score

I noticed you deleted the recent ACT score as "not notable". I don't see why it shouldn't be up there. Good tests scores are one of the notable things about Benet. Check out the New Trier High School page and you'll see that their test scores are listed.

One, use four tildes (~) after your edits on a talk page so we can see who you are. Secondly, the New Trier article encludes a bunch of stuff not of an encyclopedic nature, including its Senior Prank list. However, if you can get some other fun statistics, like average GPAs, National Merit standings, ACT and SAT scores, then by all means create a separate section/paragraph on that. Thesquire 04:39, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Just added the scores from the class of 2008. I'd consider that very notable. Leiser28 (talk) 21:29, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Hockey

When'd the school administration decide to actually sponsor the Hockey team? My understanding was that Benet didn't want the liability and so wasn't about to sponsor it. Unless someone speaks up in a week or so, I'm going to assume the status quo is still in effect and revert that particular edit. Thesquire 06:42, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Update: Hockey is an approved club sport at Benet. If the hockey club had a website, it would be linked from the benet.org athletic site. Club sports are never financially sponsored but the contention has always been that the club was not allowed to use the school name. When the new principal started a couple years ago, the hockey parents met no resistance in allowing the club to finally use the Benet name...something that was prohibited prior (they were known as "Redwings"). The hockey team now makes the grade evidenced by their inclusion in announcements at 10:25am - their game results, leading scorers and upcoming games are some of the news carried over the school PA from the deans office. The fact that the school even has a hockey club is something not known to the general community in large part because of the refusal in the past to use the school name. Today, the hockey team wears a BENET branded hockey jersey on the ice.Wikime5706 14:39, 14 December 2006 (UTC)wikime5706

The Hockey Club's official website is www.benethockey.com and links to it are found on the Benet athletics website. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.184.9.59 (talk) 13:06, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Famous Alumni

• James McManus, author of the novel "Positively Fifth Street" and recognized poker player, is a Benet alum. I'm hesitant to add his name on the page because I don't know his year of graduation. I will continue to look - but if anyone knows this, please add it! Here is a link to a Chicago Sun Times article about him (check the middle of page two for the Benet Academy reference): Article about James McManus

Thanks! Biomedtechnology 04:34, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

• • The Wikipedia article on James McManus says that he received his undergraduate degree in 1974, so that helps narrow the range. I wouldn't worry about missing the year - someone will surely add it. -- DS1953 ^talk 22:05, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
  • I found the date:1969 :) Biomedtechnology 02:24, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

• • • Additional notable alumni

Joan Biskupic '74...USA Today Newspaper Supreme Court correspondant. PBS's Washington Week guest and author "Sandra Day O'Connor: How the First Woman on the Supreme Court Became Its Most Influential Justice."

Peter Petre '69...Sr. Executive Editor at Large of Fortune Magazine. Author of Norman Schwarzkop's "It Doesn't Take a Hero". Commissioned to write Alan Greenspan's memoirs.

John Lynch, Sr. '60...Media mogul, Pres. and CEO of Broadcast Co of the Americas. Owner of the The Mighty 1090 broadcast home of the San Diego Padres. Former Pitts. Steelers linebacker and father of perennial pro bowler John Lynch of the Denver Broncos.

Mark Obmascik '79...Pulitzer prize winning journalist from the Denver Post - won the paper the prize for: "HIGH SCHOOL MASSACRE Columbine bloodbath leaves up to 25 dead."

Mark Kirasich '78...Deputy Director of NASA's Project Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle - taking man to the moon again under this project.

Robert Conrad '76...Clemson hall of fame basketball star and Rhodes Scholar candidate who lead the Dept. of Justice's Campaign Finance Task Force (2000-01) which examined under oath the President and Vice President of the United States.

Patrick Collins '82...Federal prosecutor whose leadership of Operation Safe Road lead to the conviction of former Illinois Gov. George Ryan.

Dave Lytle '68...former NCIS special agent whose real life service inspired Mark Harmon's character, Leroy Jethro Gibbs, on the CBS show NCIS.

Wikime5706 15:13, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I am removing John Lynch from the alumni list. In addition to being unable to find a source identifying him as a Benet alum, the claim that he played in the NFL seems to be false. Nfl.com lists no historic player with that name. Even assuming the first name is incorrect, there was no one who played with the last name Lynch in the approximate era that would fit his 1960 graduation date. If a source is found, please re-add it. LonelyBeacon (talk) 06:27, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

I removed the entry on Greta Salpeter, as it appears that she really isn't a notable alumni. Her wikipedia entry consists almost solely of youtube links and a PETA 'sexiest vegetarian' win, which, while accomplishments, shouldn't raise her to the level of a notable alumni on par with the others listed, all of who have national recognition or have risen to become significant leaders. Basket548 (talk) 14:58, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Athletics

I've put in the big milestones for the athletic department. I think I covered all the basics - if I missed anything of great importance, throw it in there. Theirishpianist 22:51, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Are you all Benet students? People who go to Benet or know people in Benet would be able to acquire this information.--67.173.123.48 05:38, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Alumnus, class of 2000. And strangely enough I never played any of the "mainstream" sports. All of the sports information is also available on the IHSA website, too, FYI. Theirishpianist 05:52, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

The girls swimming team made it to states at U of I this year. I think they finished 19th place. This might be important.--67.173.123.48 05:59, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

They finished in 29th, actually. And it was a poor showing...only one girl made it through to the second day (and she only made it to consolation finals). I suppose you could put it in, if you like. Theirishpianist 23:54, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

A copy of the Benet Herald can be found here. On Page 3 of the December issue, you can see that the girls swimming team made it 19th place in states. So there seems to be a conflict of information here. However, it that is enough to merit a placement on this article, I think that the information on the IHSA website should be used. If you say that the girls placed 29th in states (given that you looked it up on IHSA), then WP:RS says that the IHSA website should be sourced, not the Benet Herald.--67.173.123.48 04:27, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

You're right, they were 19th, not 29th. I think I may have been hallucinating that particular day - not an unusual occurrence sometimes. Still, I don't think it's a notable enough achievement - it seems the athletic milestones section is becoming reserved for state championships, state records, and unusual achievements. Theirishpianist 06:51, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I have to agree - 19th at state is Not Notable -- Thesquire (talk - contribs) 17:15, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

OK...I don't think a 14th-place finish at a state meet (boys cross country) is notable, and I think the girls' third-place finish this year is barely notable (and only for the reason indicated in the article). I'm really stretching with this one, but I implore anyone editing the athletics portion - NOT EVERY ATHLETIC RESULT IS NOTABLE. Use common sense, people. Theirishpianist 15:20, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I couldn't agree more. I recently redid that section, and put the cap at finishing in the top 4. I used that as the cap because typically today, finishing in the top four at state earns you a big ol' IHSA trophy. I figured that if that cut off was good for the State, it was good enough for Wikipedia, and that is the standard I have applied to other schools I have edited. Also: individual accomplishments, unless they are completely unique or nationally significant, are not really worthy of mentioning. LonelyBeacon (talk) 00:25, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Gadfly

Somebody/ies (looks like one is probably Mrs. Brown, from the edit history) keeps removing the link to Gadfly from the external links section. I'm not sure why, when other groups that are affiliated with Benet, but not officially sanctioned (such as the redwing hockey club and the law club) are linked here as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.173.129.236 (talk) 2009-09-23

It's being removed by other editors also, because it's an anonymous newsletter, behind an anonymous domain registration, with malware actively attempting to infect readers until recently, all of which tend to make it inappropriate for Wikipedia:External links. Writing anonymously at a Catholic school is understandable — but having the nerve to re-add ones own webpage to external links, after it's been removed, and after it's clear the site was neglected for so long (or intentionally infected) that it was a hazard to other people, is quite another story. It's a Wikipedia:Conflict of interest to add links you are personally associated with. Surely there are some local outlets for this newsletter, if it's relevant anymore. As for the law club: Looks like that one needs to get canned too, since its main page text appears to be full of inappropriate linkspam to unrelated law-industry advertising. --Closeapple (talk) 07:31, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I agree ... I don't see a lot of difference between this and a blog (I know there is a difference, but in essence there isn't a lot. LonelyBeacon (talk) 14:13, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I was an editor of Gadfly in 2003-2004, but since then I've had no involvement with it beyond providing server space for the website. I don't see that as a conflict of interest any more than other Benet Academy alums editing the Benet Academy page. Realistically, for a small, local article like a high school, most of the edits are going to come from current students, faculty, or alumni--that is, people with a personal connection with the organization. I don't think that automatically results in a violation of the COI policy. That policy (as I understand it) aims to prevent situations where the interests of an editor supersede those of wikipedia. That is explicitly not the case here, I have no financial interest in promoting the Gadfly site, it doesn't even host ads, and no self-promotional interest since I haven't written there in years (if anything, I would probably prefer my inept high school writing was LESS public). I would also note that Gadfly is controversial among the administration at Benet, so there is a potential conflict of interest on the part of some of the editors deleting the link. The administration strongly dislikes the idea of a semi-anonymous media organ published by students who might say things that reflect poorly on the school.159.83.196.48 (talk) 17:16, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Also, regarding the recent malware infection, I apologize for that. I admit I don't do any regular maintenance that site. However, it wasn't a malware host for very long. Google showed it clean as of 9-18-09: http://www.google.com/safebrowsing/diagnostic?site=http://gadfly.whyihateblogs.com and a wikipedia editor found an infection on 9-28-09, which I subsequently cleaned. I've locked down some of the server permissions, and hopefully that won't be an issue again.159.83.196.48 (talk) 17:50, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I would agree that current/prior affiliation with the school/newspaper does not automatically create a violation of WP:COI, but people in those positions need to tread more cautiously.

My position stems from the policy on external links. Section 3 was an issue, but may not be anymore (sites installing malware). Section 11 notes the restriction on blogs, and while this is not a blog, I find it to be blog-like (that is an opinion, but I believe it to be in the spirit of the restriction). I think section 13 is pertinent: Gadfly is only tangentially relevant to the school. While there is some commentary, it also deal with various subjects. It is not normal to link to a school's real newspaper website (for the same reason), and I cannot imagine that there is reason to link to an alternative publication. For what it is worth, I have also seen links to blogs and similar from parents/parents groups giving an alternative view of schools. These are one sided non-NPOV sources. School websites are used as sourcing, but must be used judiciously to provide unbiased information (the number of athletic teams, the name of the principal, etc), and to steer clear of biased information (which most certainly can be there). LonelyBeacon (talk) 22:57, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

"Class of" redundant

Stylistically "Class of 19xx" is redundant and therefore not used in other school articles. The class follows the name: "John Smith (bluelinked!), 1999, occupation". An enhanced bio detracts from the school. The article is about the school not the individual. And actually, Wikipedia would prefer that notables be summarized and not listed at all! Ha! Anyway...Student7 (talk) 12:24, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

You note that "Wikipedia would prefer that notables be "summarized". Could you find a policy or consensus that supports that assertion? Also, could you explain how these descriptions in this article are not "summaries", because I would define them as "summaries".

per the article guidelines reached by consensus at Wikiproject Schools, alumni are asked to be listed with some detail. Yes it is ambiguous, but I would hardly think that 2 or fewer lines on most alumni asserting why they are indeed notable is some issue. If I visit this article, and I see "X was an author", I am not compelled to click on the link and see more. If I see "X was an author who wrote A, B, and C", then I might be more compelled to follow up. Certainly you avoid issues with WP:PEACOCK, WP:WEIGHT, and WP:NPOV, but there is no demand that Wikipedia must also be WP:BORING.

Also, it is your opinion that "class of" is redundant, and not used in school articles (it is used in other school articles). Are you certain that just putting the year there makes it obvious to anyone using this encyclopedia (including a lot of non-American nations) that the year by itself represents the graduation year? In some places, that could be the year of birth, the year they entered the school, etc. Stating "class of" is a unique and unambiguous identifier.

I suppose we all have our opinions .... I am not trying to belittle yours ... but from my perspective you are asserting your opinion as policy. If I am wrong, could you please educate me and direct me to where it says you have to do it this way? I may need to work on fixing a lot of articles.LonelyBeacon (talk) 15:24, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

The "summarization" is done by nearly nobody except maybe Harvard, so there isn't much reason to point it out. The old time editors hated notables. I'm not sure I don't agree. There is entirely too much labor being wasted on them and too little on significant stuff in articles. Anyway, the original idea was to summarize notables as "2 Nobel Prize winners, 4 US Senators, 3 Pulitzer Prize winners..." Well, you get my drift. You can find it in WP:UNIGUIDE but why bother? Nobody does it.

I am watching about several hundred schools or so. They all have class year without the redundant words "class year" over and over. Some of these are large schools that have been in existence a long time. They have mercifully forked their lists elsewhere. If you can imagine a list of several hundred people, all with "class of" after their name, you may appreciate that it is tiresome to a reader. World schools mostly follow Western standards. I have not seen any deviation in European schools, where I would have expected differences.

The enhanced individual summaries (the reason the old time editors hated notables) detract from the article's topic which is usually about something else, like the point of the school, for example, which has often been shortchanged so people can be distracted by the notables. So, basically, the reason is WP:TOPIC, like enhancing the "see alsos" so people will want to click on the link (rather than read the current article). Why should they? The old timers would ask, what are the names of people doing there anyway? Too late for that now, but at least we can ensure that the link doesn't become a lengthy summary, then a shortened bio or resume. Student7 (talk) 20:43, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

I suspect that you threw in the term BORING because it linked. But actually contained reasoning against keeping something merely because it was interesting.Student7 (talk) 20:48, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

PR for politicians?

While anyone in the US may run for office, it seems like a poor idea, and, indeed seems WP:PR to place a candidate for office who has not been nominated by a party. Are you intending to say later, if he fails, that he "tried and failed to be elected"? If not, it seems dishonest. Being a nominee for a recognized major party seems notable, but simply running for office does not IMO. Student7 (talk) 12:32, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

I am no fan of politicians ... and I see your point. I think simply listing someone as "current candidate" does not amount to violating WP:PR. It might if it said something like "current candidate with revolutionary ideas" or "current candidate, leading in the polls"..... it certainly might if a link to his campaign were included. I ran across several articles with former presidential candidates who were listed as "current candidate for >insert party< presidential nomination, and later had it changed to "candidate for >insert party< presidential nomination in 2008." As events change with living alumni, their descriptions change. I don't think there's anything wrong with that. LonelyBeacon (talk) 15:30, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Please add stuff!

Hello Wikipedia people!

This article could use some improvement, so I am justifying the edit I just made as instructed. I see that some of you are alumni of Benet, so I shall also provide background info in case you forgot some info.

Benet is a Catholic, and therefore a Christian, school.

It is affiliated with the Benedictine order.

It has an assistant principal named Mr. Brown.

It has a campus minister named Fr. Bob.

A Sun Times article named placed Benet among the top ten schools in the state.

That state is Illinois, so Benet therefore is accredited by the Illinois State Board of Education.

Benet has an Alma Mater. It also has a fight song. Oh, and it has a motto too.

Yes, Benet has a mascot. It is a human-sized redwing.

There is a newspaper called the Benet Herald.

Benet is near three counties, all of which are in the Chicago metropolitan area: Dupage, Cook, and Kane.

Combining sentences makes the article look better.

There is a course offered in Discrete, not Finite, math.

You should never trust everything you see online. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Benny the mascot (talk • contribs) 03:52, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Hiya Benny!

I will respond point-by-point

1. While Catholicism is certainly the largest branch of Christianity, it is a bit unusual to refer to a Catholic school as a "Christian" school, because that term is usually used for non-Catholic schools. I think it becomes confusing to add this ... I think most people know Catholics are Christians, and those who proport otherwise won't be convinced by this.
2. The Benedictine point should be included.
3. Aside from a president and principal, don't include the rest ... they are non notable staff members.
4. If there is a Sun-Times article ranking Benet among the best schools, then that article should be referenced and cited within the article to confirm it. Otherwise, it is an uncited extraordinary claim and should be deleted immediately.
5. No school in Illinois is accredited by the Illinois State Board of Education. The North Central Association is the accrediting agency for Illinois. Include that if it can be referenced and cited.
6. If the Alma Mater, fight song, motto, and name of the mascot can be referenced and cited, these too should be incuded ... if they cannot be referenced, they should not be included.
7. If the name of the school paper can be refernced and cited, include that.
8. The fact that Benet is near three counties is not relevant. If it draws students from three counties, and this can be reliably sourced from a third party source, then it should be included.
9. If there are special courses offered, not offered at most high schools, and this can be referenced and cited, please include that.

The key, of course, is the whole "referencing and citing" thing. You sound like someone who has an affiliation with the school ... if these references exist, you should be in a good position to find them. I wish you the best of luck in doing so and in improving this article. LonelyBeacon (talk) 14:15, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll get started asap--Benny the mascot (talk) 21:38, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Just out of curiosity, how does this referencing and citing thing work? Benny the mascot (talk) 02:22, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

My first piece of advice is to look in the article under notable alumni ... I'l pick Diablo Cody as a random person. After clicking to edit, take a look at what comes after her entry. You will see a citation within a pair of tags that look like this:<ref> and </ref>. To find the templates for the citations, check out WP:Citation templates. If you scroll down on that page, you will find some copy and paste templates for the citations.

As far as finding sources, you will have to do some scouring. I would suggest checking out the policy on reliable sources, to make sure that when you find a source that it meets Wikipedia's criteria as a reliable source. LonelyBeacon (talk) 03:12, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Will a Lisle history page work as a reliable source? I want to revise the history section. --Benny the mascot (talk) 20:21, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

I think this would be a good start. One piece of advice ... always be careful about saying things like "School X has a wonderful reputation" or something similar. Instead back it up with facts (for example, if you could find that article listing Benet as one of the top X schools in the Chicago area, that would carry more weight than just a general opinion from one website).

Having edited school articles before, I know this is not always the easiest thing to do. I encourage you to keep going! LonelyBeacon (talk) 21:22, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I have access to a lot of sources that I might need, so that won't be a problem at all. It's very frustrating, though, that I have to enter in a security code every time I add new external links to the article. :( oh well... Benny the mascot (talk) 03:42, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

I didn't format my references properly; do you know how to fix them??? Benny the mascot (talk) 03:06, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Using Benet sources

Are Benet sources considered to be compliant with Wikipedia:Reliable sources? Benny the mascot (talk) 23:06, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

It depends. I think if you are referencing the current principal, the number of staff ... basically anything non-controversial or extraordinary, then it is an OK source. If you are sourcing something like ACT scores, athletic accomplishments ... it is not so much a good source. LonelyBeacon (talk) 02:27, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

How about this page? I'm starting to realize how valuable this is in providing historical information. Benny the mascot (talk) 00:27, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

This certainly doesn't appear to be a Benet Academy source, so it appears to be a neutral third party source. I think it will work, but I would advise caution ... if there is anything that is based on an interview or newspaper article, make sure to phrase it as such. In many cases, it may depend on what exactly is being claimed. LonelyBeacon (talk) 01:41, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

I found more info here. I'll incorporate all of the new research eventually. Benny the mascot (talk) 03:34, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Pictures

Thanks, LonelyBeacon, for posting the Benet logo in the article. As for the pictures in the history section, should we just get rid of them? We really don't know where they came from, and I've found more informative pictures (with captions and everything) online. Benny the mascot (talk) 15:42, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

The problem is, if you found them online, they're likely not free, and usage of them would be restricted. It would be better—at least for pictures of the current campus—to have somebody take pictures now and license them under Creative Commons. —C.Fred (talk) 15:43, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

C. Fred is right ... a vast majority of photos on line are not usable. What I am really not sure about (C. Fred might know this) ... is that some of the (current) photos might be old enough to use because of their age. I think that there might be a date which, any picture taken before that, is usable because of a lack of copyright. I am not 100% certain, and my attempts to find this have not been fruitful. LonelyBeacon (talk) 15:52, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

I can get pictures of the current buildings, but I was actually asking about historical pictures. Can we claim fair use on those? Benny the mascot (talk) 16:19, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

If it's a historical picture, then yes, it's possible to use it under the non-free content guidelines, within certain limitations (low-resolution image, cannot be replaced with a free image, germane to the discussion/presents an idea better than a text description would). —C.Fred (talk) 04:15, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll try to find good historical images to use, then. LonelyBeacon, I found the following rule on Wikipedia:Image use policy: "Under United States copyright law, all images published before January 1, 1923 in the United States are now in the public domain, but this does not apply to images that were created prior to 1923 and published in 1923 or later." Does this answer your question? Benny the mascot (talk) 04:31, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

You just beat me to it ... I was coming to leave that. 1 Jan 1923 is the magic date ... any photograph published before then is fair game. I am not sure how this applies to these images, but it seems you are on top of things. LonelyBeacon (talk) 04:37, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I can't establish publication dates, so we might have to stick to non-free licensing. :( Benny the mascot (talk) 04:46, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

It might take me a while to finish my research into Benet's history, so I don't think I can even get pictures in the near future. Sorry this is taking so long. Benny the mascot (talk) 16:52, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

I've submitted a question regarding the use of a historical map on this article. Benny the mascot (talk) 18:58, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

It seems that the request won't be fulfilled soon. I did, however, manage to put together a campus map. Benny the mascot (talk) 05:06, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

"Unrest" in Eastern Europe

The statement about "unrest in Eastern Europe" is footnoted and cannot be challenged per se. But I am not finding "unrest" enough in either Bohemia or Poland in the 1880s or 1890s. Any ideas? Student7 (talk) 19:18, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

The source says "war". Perhaps the Austro-Prussian War? Benny the mascot (talk) 01:00, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

new history stuff

You should have noticed by now that I've expanded the history section. I plan to add more about Sacred Heart's history and the new buildings that were built after the 1950s, but before I do, do any of you have suggestions on how to make the section flow better? Personally, I think it could be divided into subsections, but I'm not exactly sure how... Benny the mascot (talk) 04:44, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Assessment

I am giving this article a provisional assessment of "C" and retaining its "Mid" importance rating for the school project. I am basing the "C" one the general improvements to structure and referencing over the past month or so. I think the "Mid" importance rating is a good one given the school's history, academic performance, and list of notable alumni which neither incredibly long, but goes beyond a couple. I am listing this article for an assessment check at the school's project to get a confirmation of this. LonelyBeacon (talk) 00:46, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I can't wait for the assessment check... Benny the mascot (talk) 01:23, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

This generally takes a few weeks .... in the mean time, keep going ... the article really is looking much better. LonelyBeacon (talk) 03:26, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry for the ambiguous statement I just made. When I said "I can't wait...", I wasn't indicating impatience. I meant to say "I'm so excited to see what the results of the assessment are!" It seems that I have to be more careful in writing my messages next time. Benny the mascot (talk) 04:43, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

No need for apology ... you are hardly being impatient. I think you have every right to be excited about your work. LonelyBeacon (talk) 16:23, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

What can I do to make this article B-Class? Benny the mascot (talk) 04:09, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment: If you go here, there is a table of the assessment classes, and a small pull down menu with the six criteria to be met for a "B" class. LonelyBeacon (talk) 04:59, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

I am assessing this article after a request at WP:WPSCH/A#R. Overall I am giving it B / Mid. This is a well written article that is coming on nicely, and is good enough for B-class. There are some interesting alumni and history here, though probably not quite enough for more than Mid-importance at this time. For WP:GA the lead needs expansion, it should summarise the article per WP:LEAD, it is currently too short. The history section is good length, is there more material from beyond the 1960s that can be added? The article is generally well referenced, though there are a few gaps that need filling in alumni and athletics. The article as a whole feels it could be a bit longer, there may be some less important missing sections that could be added, see the section list at WP:WPSCH/AG#S for ideas. Camaron · Christopher · talk 19:14, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the assessment! I will certainly try to fill in those gaps that you pointed out. Benny the mascot (talk) 22:39, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

I am currently adding more stuff to the renamed Activities section. Benny the mascot (talk) 15:36, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Detailed history

I just found a new source for a LOT more historical material, but I'm worried that it might be too long. Exactly how much info is too much here on Wikipedia? Benny the mascot (talk) 03:05, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I've also found additional sources of hisorical info here, but the info isn't necessarily connected to a history of Benet itself. How far back do you think I should go in the research? Benny the mascot (talk) 03:16, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

You want to be careful to not let the article stray from the topic ... focus is important. Aside from that: detail is good, but avoid trivia. If I could make a suggestion, check out Oak Park and River Forest High School. The history section had to be split off as a separate article. This may give you an idea as to a possible direction to go. LonelyBeacon (talk) 05:02, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Ok, thanks! I've been adding more information every few days, but feel free to revert or discuss here if you see any problems. Benny the mascot (talk) 05:23, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

The history section started to get unwieldy, so I've split it into more manageable subsections. Benny the mascot (talk) 18:56, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

I think I've managed to put together a comprehensive history section. There's nothing else I can think of adding. Benny the mascot (talk) 01:42, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Reassessment

I've asked WikiProject Schools to reassess the importance of this article and determine whether Benet is, or will ever be, deserving of High importance. Benny the mascot (talk) 05:25, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Here's my opinion:

Going off of what I find at Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools/Assessment (Quality Scale), High Importance articles meet at least some of the following:

N Such schools will usually have a long list of notable alumni. I have seen many articles with longer lists of alumni who are not High importance.

N They are often amongst the oldest or highest performing schools in their particular country. In terms of age, it is problematic for schools which are not in the old colonies to meet this criterion. Certainly, there is some evidence to support Benet being a high performing school, but likely not enough compared to the very top flight schools in the USA.

{{MAYBE}} They will have received substantial media coverage and multiple sources will be available to aid the expansion of the article. There is certainly a great many media sources, but I would still be concerned that some of the academic information is self referenced, and not from a secondary source.

N Schools which feature in other encyclopedias such as Microsoft Encarta or Encylopedia Britannica are included in this category if they are not already of top importance. I do not know this for a fact, but just based on a gut reaction, I think there are few Illinois high schools that would be featured in another encyclopedia .... perhaps IMSA or some such school.

Going off of this list, I would think that there is little chance that Benet will receive "High" importance as an article. However, I think the article is probably closing in on getting to GA status .... for what its worth, I think it is vastly more important to reach GA than to be "High" importance. LonelyBeacon (talk) 05:32, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. I'll take a second look at the academics section, and after expanding other sections I will definitely try to reach GA status. Benny the mascot (talk) 03:38, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Benet Gadfly link

I've been reverting recent attempts to edit out the Benet Gadfly link, mostly because I felt there was no compelling reason to remove it. However, I'm now starting to think that the link doesn't fit WP:EL, since it really doesn't provide much educational information. Any thoughts?

FYI, the user that's been removing the link is probably Linda Brown. I think she's a social studies or computer science teacher at Benet. Lies dangerously close to violating WP:COI, yes? Benny the mascot (talk) 03:59, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

I will say this:

1. If any employee of Benet has been editing this cite, the ethical thing to do would be to create an account and identify themselves as an employee. If they have a problem with what is included in this article, they should open a discussion on this page.
2. My reading of the external link guideline is that this link violates the spirit of point #11. While it may not be a blog, per se, it seems to follow a similar structure. Please note, this is how I am reading this, and I am not claiming this as an absolute interpretation. My thoughts are that it does not belong. Having said that, this does not excuse the behavior of an individual who is engaging in edit warring rather than engaging in communication, whether they are a staff member at Benet or not. LonelyBeacon (talk) 01:52, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

FYI, in the spirit of COI, I am officially declaring that I am affiliated with Benet in some way, but I'm sure you already knew that... As for the Gadfly link, I'll get rid of it for now and consult other editors. Benny the mascot (talk) 02:20, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Is it possible one is outdated vs. the other? In any event, paralleling issues of conflict of interest, please see WP:BOOSTER which is specifically geared toward academic institutions, and why editors with connections to the school (students, staff, alumni) need to be even more careful than usual about finding reliable sources to support claims about what could be seen as trying to support a prestige piece instead of writing an encyclopedia article. LonelyBeacon (talk) 22:11, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do to remove any bias from the article. Are there any specific boosterisms that you're concerned about? Benny the mascot (talk) 03:54, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

(indent) I don't see any ... I was just dropping this in response to your concerns about editors potentially inserting one-sided information. LonelyBeacon (talk)

Ok, thanks! Benny the mascot (talk) 04:54, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth agrees with you on the Gadfly link. Benny the mascot (talk) 00:35, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Potential conflicts in information

The Daily Herald reports that Benet normally hopes to accept 40% of its applicants, yet this Benet page says 70%. Benny the mascot (talk) 02:51, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

The Daily Herald article was published in 2005. I still can't figure out which source is better, though. Benny the mascot (talk) 00:05, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Ghost section

I know this might sound ridiculous, but there are many websites mentioning ghost stories from Benet: [1] and [2], for example. This website is quite thorough and is already being used as a source in the History section. Does anyone think we have enough info to mention these rumors in the article? Benny the mascot (talk) 05:06, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

OMG!!! There's a book on ghost stories, including those from Benet! Benny the mascot (talk) 23:04, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

hahaha I find it hilarious that serious research has been done on ghostlore in Chicago! Since the book you saw happens to be in the University of Chicago library, I should be able to add new material soon! :) Edge3 (talk) 04:12, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Note to self -- sourcing fixes

Things I need to do/look at on a PC (I'm using a mobile at the moment):

• narrow down page numbers for the Herbermann source
• read this source on a better screen --Benny the mascot (talk) 13:35, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
• read this Benny the mascot (talk) 13:49, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

COI declaration

Hi there! In the interest of compliance with WP:COI, I just wanted to let everyone that's interested know that I'm a Benet alum. Since I served as one of the Law Club Publicists during my senior year last year, I am also the author or co-author of three of this article's references (currently 93, 95, and 96) and the photographer for the photo currently in the Demographics section. I tried my best to maintain WP:NPOV. If there are any concerns or objections, please let me know. Edge3 (talk) 16:56, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi all, In the interest of compliance with COI, I just want to let everyone who's interested know that I'm employed by Benet Academy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Beaner2200 (talk • contribs) 17:51, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

road to FA

I see that there is quite a bit of interest from a few editors in getting this article to FA. As an alumnus of Benet Academy and a current student at the University of Chicago, I am willing to help out in any way I can. I might not have enough time to polish the prose and do the proper copyedits, but I think I can best contribute by improving the sourcing in the History section. (Karanacs had a concern about that during the FAC). I'll see what I can do... cheers! Edge3 (talk) 15:49, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

removing Google books links

What is the rationale for this edit? Those links provide an easy way to verify the information provided. Edge3 (talk) 04:03, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Only that I have been advised in the past to remove them at FAC. You don't normally see books sources linked. And it tends to create the impression that the editor did not actually read the book and therefore the references lack context. There was criticism to this effect in the last FAC. It is a matter of taste, I am sure, but the links will invite critique. Feel free to revert if you feel strongly. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 14:38, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

I don't feel too strongly about it... in fact, I just removed a similar link! Edge3 (talk) 19:14, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Here is a valid replacement for the Digital Past archives for A Century of Benedictine Life: http://www.idaillinois.org/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/lislelib001&CISOPTR=435&REC=1. This link should be uncontroversial if you want to use it. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 20:26, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Admissions and logo info

I love the fact that so many different editors are interesting in improving this article! However, I disagree with Beaner2200's removal of the statement that "Benet pledges to accept the top 40 percent of applicants each year" from the Admissions section. I wasn't involved in the drafting of this article in its earlier stages, so I took a look at the source article by Kmitch; it clearly states that "Larger schools like Benet hope to accept about the top 40 percent of the approximately 650 prospective students tested Saturday." Furthermore, Kmitch's source was James Brown himself, the Assistant Principal and Dean of Admissions! Surely this level of sourcing surpasses the threshold of verifiability.

However, I concede that admissions criteria may have changed since 2005; after all, Benet didn't have a formal admissions department when I was in eighth grade! Perhaps it would be a better idea to reflect such changes by saying: "Though Benet pledged in 2005 to accept the top 40 percent of applicants each year, between 2004 and 2009, 70 percent of all applicants were accepted."

The more I read this claim, the less I understand it. Is it saying that Benet hopes to accept only applicants scoring in the 60th percentile and higher and admits 70 percent of all those who apply? Those seem to be very different (and non-conflicting) claims. The 70% they admit may simply all have 60th percentile test scores. The way it was worded was confusing, but I see no need to delete it. If it could be clarified and made to read more faithfully to the source (Benet "hopes", it does not "pledge"), it should stay. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 21:27, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Lastly, I also disagree with the recent addition of the "Identity Standards" section, as I don't think information on the school's logo is of encyclopedic value. What do you all think? Edge3 (talk) 23:19, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

I agree that a whole section is way to much for a logo. If it merits mention at all (I tend to think not), it should a footnote at best. If, however, the new logo is the official one, it should be the one used in the infobox. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 21:27, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

I've implemented a combination of the suggested changes; is this something that we can all agree on? On a related note, are we legally able to display Benet's new logo on Wikipedia? The current policy on use of the logo clearly states that "Benet's logo may not be placed on social networks, the internet, or any other location by anyone other than Benet Academy official staff." However, I acknowledge the existence of fair use laws and am wondering whether you, Nasty Housecat, are protected under those laws. Edge3 (talk) 04:24, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

I tweaked a bit more, which I hope makes it still clearer. Please revert if you strongly disagree. Regarding the logo, I think it is clearly fair use under WP:LOGO. I don't see any problem. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 15:09, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Alumni list proposal

I believe the notable alumni would be better as prose than a bulleted list (see WP:EL). I propose moving the list to a separate list article and summarizing it with a paragraph here. See Stuyvesant High School for an example FA. I am happy to make the edits, but will await comments here first. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 16:30, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

I agree that the notable alumni section would look better as prose, since it would allow us to group the alumni by what they have in common (such as profession). However, I disagree that a separate article is necessary. While Stuyvesant has over 100 notable alumni, Benet currently has only 22. I'm not aware of any precedent for a list as short as the one you're proposing. IMO it would be better to convert the list to prose and keep the content on this article. Edge3 (talk) 17:03, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

School for Creative and Performing Arts has a similar short list. Long prose lists gets clunky, but we can try it. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 17:28, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

On second thought, perhaps we can add a list of principals and presidents, similar to the list for School for Creative and Performing Arts. ([3]) That would make the list long enough to stand alone. Edge3 (talk) 20:06, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Check out Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools/Article guidelines#Style of entries. The overall consensus on school articles is that unless the list is very short, it is more difficult on the user to have a lengthy list of alumni. I have to say that the work on this article has been phenomenal .... this is one of those things I wouldn't change (IMO). Splitting the alumni list may not be the way to go ... I'm not sure it is long enough (check out List of New Trier High School alumni for an idea on length. My only suggestion: you might consider shrinking the Diablo Cody picture a bit. A list of principals would be a nice addition, if it can be supported. LonelyBeacon (talk) 22:08, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

(Addendum) As a side note, you can also look at WP:SIZERULE which seems to suggest that while the article is approaching a size to split, it is not at a size where splitting is a major issue. On top of that, I am not sure that any one section of the article would be enough to be a standalone (that is more an opinion that anything I can back with any guideline or policies). LonelyBeacon (talk) 22:15, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

I initially supported converting the list to prose because I wanted to be able to group the alumni by their profession. However, Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools/Article guidelines#Style of entries already says that "Alumni should be categorized according to the field that made them famous: e.g. Politics, Medicine, Academia. It is acceptable to list someone in more than one field, provided that this is mentioned in a side note. Add something like: '(Also listed in Sport)'." What would you think about splitting up the list like that? I would divide the list as follows:

• Sports and recreation: Baumgartner, Johnson, Lee, LeFevour, McCareins, McManus, Schaus
• Arts: Bickler, Cody, DeCarlo, Doody, Stone, Fay, Geraghty, Murphy, Salpeter
• Media and journalism: J. Biskupic, Lynch
• Politics and law: S. Biskupic, Conrad, Proft, Ryan Edge3 (talk) 23:48, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

The problem is not the size. The problem is the embedded bullet list. That will just not fly at FAC. I think your suggested groupings are spot on. I will try to do it in prose and we can see how it looks. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 01:53, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

I think breaking them up by profession is worth a shot, given the length of the list. [[4]] passed FA, and has a bulleted list of alumni, so I would think it is at least possible to keep them as a list without jeopardizing the article moving forward. If it went up for FA review, and the reviewer claimed it had to change, then that might be another story. LonelyBeacon (talk) 02:19, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi, Lonely. Great to see you back. The article got dinged on the bullet list in its last FAC, as have all of the school and university articles I have followed there lately. I'm not sure I agree with it completely (I think the Baltimore City College example is perfectly fine), but I am sure the current crop of reviewers don't like those lists. I took a shot a rewriting the list as prose, which required simplifying some of the entries. Let me know what you guys think. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 03:53, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Looking at the whole thing again, the bullet list in the Sports section should probably be revised to prose as well. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 04:03, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

I appreciate the effort, but I really don't think it improved article quality. To quote Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools/Article guidelines#Style of entries, "The WP:Embedded list guideline invites consideration of whether information might be more appropriately presented in list or prose form. As the notable alumni of a school typically form an assorted group with little in common, describing all of them in prose would be clumsy. Unless there are very few notable alumni, lists are recommended as the most accessible way of presenting all of them. Adding a prose summary is encouraged, particularly if the list is split off as a separate article." I agree with that guideline, and it is very much supported by WP:EMBED. As Benny the mascot pointed out in the FAC, Plano Senior High School and Amador Valley High School are both FAs and use lists in their notable alumni sections. Must we acquiesce to current FAC trends, or could we successfully defend the list format in the discussion? Edge3 (talk) 04:28, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Also, why did you remove Doody and Stone from the list? Edge3 (talk) 22:04, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Both of those examples are older, and standards do change. See The Judd School for another very recent example. I agree with the prevailing view at FAC, actually. In my opinion, alumni lists tend towards undue weight and detail. The article is about the school and not the alumni, who should be more of footnote than anything. Which is why I think if there really has to be a list, it works best in a separate list article. But I am not all that adamant about it. If you feel the list is worth fighting for, feel free to revert, but I believe it will be a losing issue at FAC.

Doody did not have a linked article, which raises the question of notability. I must have overlooked Stone. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 00:52, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Ok, so what do you think about a stand-alone list? Would it be considered notable? Are there enough alumni to justify a brand new article? If not, then would adding a list of principals and presidents help? I can also dig through more magazines to check for other alumni, if that would help.

As for Doody and Stone, they don't have their own articles, but they were founding members of The Cryan' Shames, which is a notable band. Edge3 (talk) 20:13, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

I agree that the prose version is unlovely and I think a standalone list may be the best idea, with a summary here listing the most notable of the alumni. Most of the folks on the list meet the WP:GNG of significant coverage in reliable independent sources. I don't know about Doody and Stone, so that's up to you. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 20:34, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Well since we both agree that the prose version is "unlovely", let's not make it unlovelier by adding the statement on Doody and Stone. :) Creating a standalone list should be quite easy; I'll try to pull out a few more references this weekend. Edge3 (talk) 02:57, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Looks like you beat me to it... thanks! :) Edge3 (talk) 04:36, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

External links

Looking at WP:ELNO, all but the first two external links should really be deleted. The second one could go either way. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 04:01, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

I think all but the first should be deleted...anyone can arrive at the second through the first. Edge3 (talk) 20:15, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Parking alumni list here for the time being

• Steve Baumgartner, 1969, is a former professional American football player who played defensive end for the New Orleans Saints and the Houston Oilers.
• Dave Bickler, 1971, is a Grammy winning rock singer and former lead singer of the group Survivor, who also sang the rock star role in Bud Light's award-winning ad campaign Real Men of Genius.
• Joan Biskupic, 1974, is a USA Today journalist who covers the US Supreme Court and wrote biographies of Sandra Day O'Connor and Antonin Scalia.
• Steven M. Biskupic, 1979, is a former US Attorney for the Eastern District of Wisconsin.
• Diablo Cody, 1996, is the author of Candy Girl: A Year in the Life of an Unlikely Stripper and Oscar-winning screenwriter of Juno.
• Robert J. Conrad, 1976, is the Chief Judge of the US District Court for the Western District of North Carolina.
• Mark DeCarlo, 1980, was an actor in The Adventures of Jimmy Neutron: Boy Genius and hosted the game show Studs.
• Tom Doody, 1963, and Gerry Stone, 1962, were the lead singer and guitarist, respectively, of the rock group The Cryan' Shames.
• Meagen Fay, 1975, is an actress and former The Second City comedian who has appeared in various television programs like The Drew Carey Show.
• Marita Geraghty, 1980, is a television and film actress, cast in productions including CSI: Crime Scene Investigation, Seinfeld, and The Luck of the Irish.
• Nancy Johnson, 1992, won the gold medal in the women's 10 metre air rifle at the 2000 Summer Olympics.
• Mike Lee, 2005, is a boxer who participated in the Chicago Golden Gloves competition and was undefeated in his weight class.
• Dan LeFevour, 2005, was the quarterback for Central Michigan University. He later played for his hometown Chicago Bears but was waived and now plays for the Cincinnati Bengals.
• John Lynch, 1960, is the president and CEO of the Broadcast Company of the Americas and a former linebacker for the Pittsburgh Steelers.
• Justin McCareins studied at Benet only as a freshman during the 1993–1994 school year and later played as a wide receiver for the Tennessee Titans and New York Jets.
• James McManus, 1969, is a professional poker player and author of Positively Fifth Street.
• Ben Murphy, 1960, is an actor best known for his work on the television series Alias Smith & Jones.
• Dan Proft, 1990, is a political commentator and unsuccessful gubernatorial candidate for the 2010 election.
• Jim Ryan, 1964, is a former Illinois Attorney General and unsuccessful gubernatorial candidate for the 2010 election.
• Greta Salpeter, 2006, is the lead singer and pianist for the band The Hush Sound.
• Molly Schaus studied at Benet only when she was a freshman during the 2002–2003 school year and later went on to compete in the US women's ice hockey team in the 2010 Winter Olympics.

Image problem

The image File:Mock trial team - Benet Academy.JPG is sourced to a dead link, which means that the licensing cannot be verified. If a verifiable source cannot be found, the image should be removed. There is already a photo of the law club, abnyway. It would be nice if an image of a different student activity was available. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 18:23, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

I just corrected the link. Since I have the original email that gave me permission to use the image in the article, I'll send it over to OTRS to avoid this in the future. Edge3 (talk) 18:43, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

And to address your second point, I might be able to contribute a photo or two. All of my high school pictures are in my home computer, so it'll take me a while to get them. Edge3 (talk) 19:03, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

The photo cleared OTRS. Edge3 (talk) 17:54, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

New pictures added. More available upon request. Happy Thanksgiving to you all!!! Edge3 (talk) 20:58, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

I've also uploaded File:Benet band.jpg, which is a picture of the Symphonic Band. It could be used instead of the marching band parade picture, but I personally find the parade picture to be much more appealing. Edge3 (talk) 05:37, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Copyedits and suggestion

I have finished a first pass at copyediting the article and have made quite a few changes, all meant to be cosmetic. Please correct me if I mangled any part of the content.

The Christmas Drive section was criticized in the last FAC. It has been reduced since then. I suggest it be either removed completely or reduced to a line or two in the clubs and organizations section. It does not seem to merit a full section -- it is not all that different from the fundraising lots of schools do. I will leave it to those closer to the content to decide, but I think it needs to be changed. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 23:04, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your edits! IMO the Christmas Drive info should be kept, mainly because it is one of Benet's few achievements that has consistently received local news coverage over the past few years (perhaps after sports and test scores), and because Wikipedia:WikiProject_Schools/Article_guidelines#Sections_of_the_article states that specific traditions could be mentioned in the Activities section. I don't think we can easily merge it into the "Clubs and organizations" section as it currently appears, since the Christmas Drive solicits donations from not only clubs, but also individual students, classes, and teachers.

Since we're already on the "Clubs and organizations" section, I'd like to discuss the following the following clause: "Benet sponsors 30 extracurricular clubs and organizations." I don't think such a high precision is called for; determining the exact number of student organizations requires quite a bit of speculation. Furthermore, Benet's Activities and Clubs website] and Website directory don't make any distinctions between sports and clubs, and a lot of the activities listed overlap. For example, "Band" is listed as an activity, but so is "Concert Band", "Jazz Band", "Pep Band", "Wind Ensemble", etc. I don't even understand why daily prayer and holy days of obligation are listed as activities!

Lastly, Benet's reorganization/redesign of its website has given us a lot of dead links. What do reviewers at FAC tend to think about this? Do we have to get rid of all of the info that we can no longer verify? Edge3 (talk) 23:52, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Quickly for now: yes, the dead links will have to be repaired or replaced. If they cannot, it is possible to link to an archival version, like waybackmachine.com. If live sources cannot be found, the material the dead links support will have to be looked at. But I have to think the new website will have most of this content. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 01:22, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Dead links

I have fixed most of the dead links now, except for the links to the history pages at BU. It is not obvious where those were moved or if they are even available at all anymore. I will have to dig some more later. In the meantime, if there are alternate sources available for any of that material, it would be good to start including them. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 19:07, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry I haven't been around that much to help you fix refs; I'm getting swamped with a lot of homework! I see that you've obtained a copy of the Mizera source, and that you've already been able to get rid of a lot of dead links... good job! I'd be happy to do a bit more research/look through sources if that would help (I found a lot of interesting books to be borrowed through ILL on WorldCat), but at the same time I don't want to hold you back if you're trying to meet a deadline. Edge3 (talk) 16:17, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

No deadline, but I think it is close to FAC ready now. The sourcing looks pretty good to me (although you can never do too much research). I think with some careful proofing, checking of citations, and a double-check that all the previous FAC issues have been addressed, I would be comfortable listing it at FAC again. If you can pitch in with any of that, it will definitely help. And we should ping Benny again just to make sure he does not have strong feelings about another FAC nom. We will list him as a conominator regardless (unless he asks not to be). It is really his work. I've just been cleaning up a bit. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 17:26, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Sounds good! Over the next few weeks I will continue to look through some book sources and check citations. I've also found very promising resources to check out on this list; would you by any chance happen to be familiar with school evaluations? I've been wavering on whether I should submit ILL requests for one or two North Central evaluations. And the scrapbook of press clippings might be fun to look at...

And thank you so much for providing me this opportunity to work on an article of so much sentimental value! I think I now have an idea of how Benny felt when he/she worked tirelessly on this article; there is nothing as thrilling as uncovering so much information about something personally important to you! Edge3 (talk) 20:56, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

The North Central Evaluations are probably highly narrative and could be very descriptive and full of interesting things. The more recent ones and/or ones from periods where there is little written history could be very useful. The scrapbook could be a real goldmine, as long as the clippings can be sourced correctly. In past projects, documentation like evaluations and old clippings have been some of the most revealing things I found. That and dissertations. All great stuff. In some of the current sources, I noticed that there are lots of details and nuances that did not make it into the article. I wish they would. They make really interesting reading and make for a much better article. Glad you are having fun. I think too much work has gone into this by people who care about it for it not to get a fair shot at FA. So I am happy to help where I can. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 22:57, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Looks like we'll have to do without those seeming wonderful sources; the BU catalog says that those books are currently held in the archives, so I'm assuming that I can't get them through ILL. :( Edge3 (talk) 06:17, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

One dead link remains in the history section, and the info it sources doesn't seem to exist in the two books I've looked through. The Procopian Chronicle has some info on athletics in the 1920's, however. The other source in the alumni section is a news article, which IMO can have its dead link removed. Edge3 (talk) 15:21, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

I removed the dead news link. I can't find anything on Bauer, either. Unless it can be sourced to the Chronicle, that content will have to be removed, it seems. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 19:13, 14 November 2010 (UTC)