Talk:Deerfield Academy

Impressive alumni and good start articleVictuallers 19:34, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Contact Deerfield Communications?

All: I'm Deerfield's Director of Communications. David Thiel '91. My understanding of Wikipedia guidelines is that I should not be editing the Deerfield Academy entry on the site (even if I declare a COI, it still doesn't seem like a good idea). That said, I'd be happy to answer any of YOUR questions or point you to public resources the school has available. For example, I could provide high quality images, or point you to our Flickr page, or provide up-to-date statistics and whatnot. My email is first initial last name at deerfield.edu. If this is not okay to post here, please delete. Thanks Davidthiel (talk) 22:42, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Pop Culture Reference

As per Exeter's talk page, it's silly to have a list of references where Deerfield is mentioned only in passing. Additionally, the one which has here gotten its own section in the article is certainly not the only one (I can think of a couple off my head, but we shouldn't get into this again.) Mjl0509 04:28, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Clean up needed

I've done some reversions of the Vandalism that has been added over the past few days, as have SeanMD80 and ElKevbo, but it still needs a big clean up. Preferably by someone that knows that subject and can go though the list of alumni and other issues. For example... after 666 years of service, Frank Boyden retired in 2008, and In 2467, the Academy reestablished co-education, which Boyden had discontinued during the 2000s. --Xagent86 (Talk | contribs) 05:45, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

No doubt this happened during "Choate Day", the largest sports event between DA and Choate. There was some vandalism by DA students on the Choate page, and it's only fair to assume some was done to the Deerfield page.

That, I can tell you right now, is not a picture of a DA girl rowing. And Deerfield's colors are green and white, rather than maroon.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Drannkirk (talk • contribs) 17:46, May 14, 2007

Thank you for your suggestion! When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the Edit this page link at the top. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to). The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes — they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. --ElKevbo 22:53, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

ElKevbo, I wasn't trying to vandalize the page. I was trying to delete the picture. I have some good pictures of Deerfield's crew program, should you want it. How would I go about deleting that picture of the maroon colored uniform girl?

list of headmasters

I've merged the list of heads of school in here. On its own, that article had no value and the article here is short enough to incorporate this. Pascal.Tesson 21:24, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Deerfield Seal.gif

Image:Deerfield Seal.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 14:03, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Added Image:Deerfield Seal.png

I have uploaded and added the image Deerfield Seal.png for use in this article. Please visit the image description page to view the Non-free / fair use media rationale and licensing info. --Runnermonkey (talk) 21:56, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Applying for Study

Hi I am From Afghanistan and I finished my School in 2010 and I want to study in The Faculty and I am from one of the poor people if it is possible please register me in this Faculty Best Regards Ahmad Rafi From Afghanistan Country --175.106.50.221 (talk) 08:37, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Lacrosse success

How does the lacrosse team's winning one year make it an instant "perennial contender" for the title? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Beatnik Party (talk • contribs) 09:57, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Sexually peccant former faculty

Should the brouhaha over former faculty having sex with students be included? If so, how much weight does it deserve?

Reilly here. Making National news may allow it here. That doesn;t mean it belongs. Deerfield has made the news frequently. This is hardly a full history of the school. "Death Be Not Proud" has no mention, for example. Finally, it is too soon to judge whether this story will seem at all significant to the school's history even after some time has passed and perspective gained. I leearned this from every history teacher I ever had, Elijah. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mpreilly (talk • contribs) 22:10, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Editor Mpreilly (welcome--glad to see a new editor with a sense of balance) wants it deleted, for being "bad pr." His better argument is that just because it's in the news does not make it significant in the larger scheme of things.

First a little history. When the story broke somebody perhaps a little over-excited inserted a full paragraph, including names, dates, charges, and feeble defenses, making that the largest single topic on the page. Yours truly reduced it to a couple sentences, with footnotes. Editor Mpreilly further reduced that reduction, and after second thoughts, deleted it entirely.

The consequence was that anybody who typed "Deerfield" into a search engine encountered lurid newspaper and TV news articles about faculty having sex with boys--and a Wikipedia article that averted its eyes. If anything that made it worse.

Is it notable? The head of school and chair of the board of trustees--rightly or wrongly--thought so. They sent out a first-ever "Important Announcement" and invited the press to follow up. An outsider might question whether this was good judgment. But certainly the media accepted their invitation, and thought it notable enough to generate ink and TV stories. There may be further consequences, as the question of criminal investigation remains open. So for the time being, it seems an event of significance.

What about the larger scheme of things? Time will tell. Let's revisit this in a while and see. I think the two sentences it currently gets are about right, given that anybody who wants details can follow the footnotes to news articles and the Deerfield annoucement.

REILLY: I would say leave it out and let time tell. If the school is fundamentally changed by this over the next ten years, then it should be added.

I take the time to explain my reasoning so that a good new editor is not discouraged. In the long run Mpreilly may prove to be right, and this may recede into the category of trivia less Wikipedia-worthy than last year's lacrosse team record. On the other hand--as between the dedication of a science building several years ago, and this--which deserves more bandwidth?ElijahBosley ^{(talk ☞)} 15:18, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

PS-looked up Death Be Not Proud, the movie (there was also a Law & Order episode named that). Mpreilly's edit summary asked why it isn't included. I could not figure out its relevance to Deerfield, but then I don't know anything about the movie. If it has relevance, certainly we could include it in an "In Popular Culture" section, together with any other movies or TV shows that mention Deerfield.ElijahBosley ^{(talk ☞)} 12:09, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

PPS--Curious, I checked out of the library Gunther, Death Be Not Proud. About a boy fighting a brain tumor who it seems was a Deerfield student--but more, loved the school, and in his civility and clarity and determination to achieve, represented the school at its best. Perhaps the proudest, brightest moment in the book is when after missing a year at Deerfield but nonetheless keeping up with his studies, while the deadly tumor steadily ate away at his brain--the dying boy walks straight down the church aisle for the graduation that Deerfield's headmaster was careful to say he had earned, on his own, by right. I do think this book needs to be included. I will try to think of a way to summarize it this and and McPhee's description of headmaster Frank Boyden. That was of course a different, simpler, maybe nobler era. ElijahBosley ^{(talk ☞)} 22:01, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

REILLY: John Gunther, the dying boy in the book Death Be Not Proud, was a DA Student. His hope before dying was to graduate. Robbie Benson played him in the film which was made in part on the DA campus. It meets the criteria. I am not saying it belongs here. Not everything that makes the news is of historical significance. People are excited about this scandal because it is sensational and salacious. Let it go.

Just a note: two reverts within 24 hours is considered edit warring which though it does happen, is discouraged (three results in a block). Mpreilly is an intelligent new editor who shows promise, so I won't call him on it. On the other hand this item about sex at Deerfield which (though it does happen at any school, is also discouraged)--needs more consideration. Looking at the history of the page I see at least a half dozen other editors who have also discussed this language. What I will do in the next day or so is compose a section to discuss McPhee's book and Gunthers book, both of which put Deerfield in a positive light which I expect and hope will be agreeable to editor mpReily. I will leave the page unedited until then. In the meantime I will refer mpReily to recent accounts of what was going on at Horace Mann, and at the Boychoir School, and ask him to reflect on whether the language "Deerfield addressed" is by comparison fairly mild, and historically accurate?ElijahBosley ^{(talk ☞)} 22:35, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Reilly: I wrote that sentence "...deerfield addressed..." and I find it accurate, concise and sufficient, but to add that the police are presently considering what they might do tomorrow, stay tuned.... That is newspaper talk, and belongs in your blog. The sentence I wrote is the only one I would use — except I would not use it, as it is not historical or significant in the long run. At least, there is no present reason to think that it will be. Mpreilly (talk) 23:01, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes I know who wrote it, and I endorsed it, and we agree then on that admirable sentence: "accurate, concise and sufficient." I am happy to wait until the police charge somebody to discus the police charging somebody. Meantime, I will work on the Gunther and McPhee thing. I'll compare it to other pages to see whether it fits. Meantime, the right thing to do is: nothing. Let a little time elapse. Go get a scotch. Kick back, pat the dog on the head, and consider the transience of all things. Especially Wikipedia pages. That is one aspect of WikipediaI I confess I never get used to: no matter how hard I work, how diligently I research, how carefully I phrase and footnote some article--next year some high school kid is going to upend everything. ElijahBosley ^{(talk ☞)} 23:59, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Sexual Abuse and Deerfield's Response

Okay--two years later they have decided not to charge anybody. But they have also broadened the allegations. Now it isn't just one aberrant faculty member. It's four, and abuse going all the way back to the 1950's. Also, a $350,000 settlement by the school. New York Times and multiple Boston Globe articles. So I'll insert a section titled as above.ElijahBosley ^{(talk ☞)} 19:52, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

In Books and Popular Culture

Responding to editor MpReily's remark about a book that was not in the article, I read the book, and concluded that it ought to be. Other schools (dare I mention Choate?) include an "in Popular Culture" section in their Wikiarticle. So I have added one. This is just a start of course. Doubtless there are other memoirs, TV shows, movies or plays that mention Deerfield. Whether the connection with Deerfield is prominent enough that they deserve inclusion has to be judged case-by-case. The last citation is an example of a connection with Deerfield which is attenuated and may be a candidate for deletion. I note Choate cites virtually every instance its name is mentioned in some third rate movie, which is perhaps overdoing it.ElijahBosley ^{(talk ☞)} 12:38, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

"Prestigious?"

The following is copied from my talk page, as it belongs here instead:

Hi ElijahBosley,

I was editing the Deerfield Academy Wikipedia page, and noticed that you removed the word "prestigious" from the description and said it was an opinion rather than a fact. However, anyone who knows anything about US boarding schools knows that Deerfield Academy is one of the most prestigious boarding schools, along with Phillips Academy Andover, Phillips Exeter Academy, St. Paul's School and the Hotchkiss School. On the Phillips Academy Andover page the word "prestigious" is also written without a footnote. So I don't understand why the Deerfield Academy page can't have the word "prestigious" on it without being removed. Sorry, I'm a bit new at this and I just want to understand how this works. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.82.189.144 (talk) 14:55, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, welcome to Wikipedia, and thanks for your question. First let me congratulate a good new editor on finding material to document assertions. You rightly responded to "footnote needed" posts with good, dependable, objective citations--for which, a pat on the back. As to the word "prestigious," Wikipedia is about fact, or at least widely agreed, verifiable assertions. "Highly selective" can be considered fact, if a school has an acceptance rate of 13%. But "prestigious"? First--what kind of prestige are we talking about? There are ladies' finishing schools that have prestige among those who care for decorous tea party manners. But Deerfield might well be be insulted, if we were to call its prestige that of a finishing school. There are not very academically challenging schools that have horse riding programs, with prestige among those who ride to the hounds. Once again, Deerfield has other priorities, and would rather not be considered prestigious for other than academic reasons. To give you an example of a highly selective school that has little or no social prestige at all--the Milton Hershey School. Ever heard of it? Yet their acceptance rate is the same as Deerfield's. Perhaps different criteria. Philips Academy should not be calling itself prestigious either, and for the same reason: that's opinion, and self-congratulatory opinion at that. After all, you would not want somebody with a different opinion to write "Deerfield is not nearly as prestigious as Choate--" or, more ominously, "after a recent sex scandals Deerfield's prestige is on the wane." I will go look at Philips Academy's page and see what support they offer for that "prestigious" remark. Meantime, may I suggest you edit under a Wikipedia log-in name? There are lots of advantages, described here.ElijahBosley ^{(talk ☞)} 15:34, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

PS--You are right that Philips Academy makes the same mistake on their page. I put a "Fact needed" marker there, which you can add by typing {{fact}}. If they come up with an objective list of prestigious schools, however prestigious is defined, maybe that list can support the same word on Deerfield's page.ElijahBosley ^{(talk ☞)} 15:44, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the speedy and informative reply! It looks like you know quite a lot about preparatory schools as well. And I'm sorry for creating another post with the same content; I thought my comment didn't save properly when I posted. I look forward to creating a Wikipedia account! Once again, thank you for your reply!

115.82.189.144 (talk) 15:50, 3 June 2013 (UTC)Justin

You're welcome. I note that this post was signed with a first name. When you create the account, I'd recommend not revealing much personal info. There are strange people out there. I've been stalked, tracked down based on personal information on my Wikipedia login page (since deleted) by a guy angry about one of my edits. For a while it was an open question whether I'd have to get an injunction. There's safety in anonymity, which is another good reason to get an account, so your IP address is hidden. Best wishes,ElijahBosley ^{(talk ☞)} 16:30, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

PPS-on the subject of the word "prestigious," Philips Academy has now supported the use of that word on their Wikipage with a footnote: a newspaper (the New York Times) did call Philips Academy prestigious. So I checked to see if any paper has called Deerfield prestigious. Yes, it turns out. Newspapers and TV stations reporting the scandal of sex between Deerfield faculty members and students started several reports with "Deerfield, the prestigious New England school;" the Boston Herald says it twice in the same article. But citing them would run afoul of another editor who wants the scandal buried and forgotten. He says it doesn't qualify as history (see above). For now I will just sit back and let others decide whether they want to use the word prestigious, at the risk of opening the can of worms that comes with it.ElijahBosley ^{(talk ☞)} 19:48, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Deerfield Academy. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060313111702/http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/03/01/news/prep.php to http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/03/01/news/prep.php

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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} 00:51, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Deerfield Academy. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070717152127/http://livingwell-magazine.com:80/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=61&Itemid=40 to http://livingwell-magazine.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=61&Itemid=40
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121106010054/http://www.som.com:80/content.cfm/deerfield_academy_koch_center to http://www.som.com/content.cfm/deerfield_academy_koch_center

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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} 20:39, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Saul Bellow

Under Heritage Award it is implied that Saul Bellow was an alum. It does not appear to be the case that he was. Swliv (talk) 13:16, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Demographics

I noticed that there is no demographics section of the student body and couldn't find any on their website. I found these two sites A B, but have no knowledge of their reliability. I would really love to have this information added to the article if nobody has an objection. The two sites are pretty close in percentages, with A having more precise percentages. Ayzmo (talk) 20:14, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Peacock term

@Jahaza I recently reverted the characterization of Deerfield Academy as an "elite" coeducational boarding preparatory school; I know you've been advocating for the label, so I thought to bring it up in the talk page. Elite is a value-laden label which gives a generally positive connotation that embellishes the school's reputation, and as such ought to be avoided per MOS:PUFFERY. Moreover, its not a necessary description of the school's character (i.e. Phillips Academy has no adjective). The school's accomplishments should speak for themselves, and as such I think it would be better to compromise by mentioning that admissions to the school are generally selective, as most other private schools similar to it state in the lede. An overt term like "elite", however, is excessive in my opinion. GuardianH (talk) 04:39, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

You may want to look at the Phillips Academy article again. "It has been referred to by many contemporary sources as the most elite boarding school in America." Jahaza (talk) 06:17, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

That use of the term is more appropriate since its giving commentary on what sources say rather than giving the label itself; if sources similarly say things for Deerfield, it would be better to mention that they do rather than putting in the label (i.e. In a 2022 article in The Washington Post, [author] characterized the school as "the most elite school in Western Massachusetts). GuardianH (talk) 16:33, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

You do realize that you're changing your argument though, right? You said that it wasn't in the lede section of the other article, but it was. Jahaza (talk) 02:07, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

The article for Philips Academy never used the term as an overt characterization like it was in the Deerfield article. Instead, it states that "It has been referred to by many contemporary sources as the most elite..." and not "is a elite co-educational university-preparatory school..." GuardianH (talk) 04:18, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Due weight of "elite" descriptions

The descriptions of Deerfield Academy by various news outlets as an "elite" institution is material that definitely belongs in the body, but not in the lede. Doing so comprises the article's neutrality, and is a pretty standard example of WP:UNDUE and WP:BOOSTER. GuardianH (talk) 19:34, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

WP:BOOSTER is an essay, not a content guideline. The article does not have the length required to cleanly divide the article into a lede/body in the way you want to. Jahaza (talk) 22:57, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

The article is 29k bytes, thats 25k or more over the length required to cleanly divide the article into a lede/body. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 23:27, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

If that is part of the lead, the article, being 29k bytes, may have it be appropriate to mention the schools reputation near the top, per WP:HIGHERED REP, which actually says that schools with exceptional reputations can have that reputation mentioned in the lead. Neither of you has actually disagreed with the characterization, only its position.

We can restore the (pointless) division of the article so that the reputation statement is in the same place in the article, but not in the "lede". Jahaza (talk) 23:33, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

HIGHERED REP appears to say "adhering to a neutral point of view, including: by avoiding boosterism and puffery (which can come in the form of undue weight). by using a descriptive, encyclopedic (rather than promotional) tone." Yes its lead not lede... But its weird to start making an issue of it when you've used lede up until this very moment and I was only using it out of deference to you two. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 23:53, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

I'm not making an issue of "lede," I just happened to type it with quotes in that comment to acknowledge that it's jargon. Please AGF rather than thinking something entirely inconsequential is "making an issue of it" when I didn't in fact say anything about it.

You can't just assert that it doesn't adhere to a NPOV, you have to establish it. Saying that something is described as elite (which is what the article now does, after objections to a straightforward characterization), is not boosterism by itself. Avoiding boosterism and puffery doesn't mean we can't talk about things as they are. The small part of the article (balanced by a large sexual abuse section!) is not undue, it's typical of identifications of the institution in the press. Jahaza (talk) 00:07, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Furthermore, you've completely passed over the fact that HIGHERED REP says that the reputation of schools is sometimes appropriately mentioned in the lede of the article. Jahaza (talk) 00:08, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Yes it is sometimes appropriate to mention, but "elite" isn't specifically about reputation its a bit more than that (it does not appear to be being used by the sources in an entirely positive way). "Prestigious" would be about reputation. I concur with GuardianH that "elite" is appropriate for the body, but not for the lead. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 01:12, 15 September 2023 (UTC)