Talk:First Colonial High School

Parent of underage student

Do not post personally identifiable information of currently enrolled students who are juviniles. It is potentially dangerous, and parents don't want this. The school probably doesn't want this either. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Njrotcparent (talk • contribs) 20:41, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Notable is the invitation on our alma mater's Facebook® page to edit it as can only be done on WP.

@Donner60: Can you enlighten me as to the real reason for the reversion on the First Colonial High School page? There is a very clear invitation on the sister FB page, limiting alumni edits on FB to WP. It is inappropriate for WP to govern content on FB. You will note the said invitation in the image I've linked here.

If the real reason you do not wish alumni to identify themselves (all of us are adults, incidentally, by definition), is because of storage and bandwidth issues (and I suspect it is, having had numerous discussions with the creative commons admins), then you should just say so.

This section was not subtitled "Notable Alumni" WP:BIO We already have Mark Ruffalo in that section. So WP:BIO doesn't apply.

And, beyond that, if it's proof you need... neutral and all that NPOV stuff, it is proof you shall have. (I resent your implication of vandalism by appending WP:TW to justify your rollback.)

Now, for a little... WP:NPOV [WP:NVNF] WP:INTREF sourcing...

First, there's an (unofficial) list of my own Class members.

Then, there's the list in pdf format of the scanned pages of my class from the official FCHS 1997 Alumni Directory, shown here. We refer to the list, fondly, as the "Toilet Paper List."

Then, there's the irrefutable yearbook, itself. Look closely at the bottom of this page, and you'll be able to see me... albeit 36 years ago. President of the School's What? National HONOR Society...? Oh, you know who they are... the people who are, um, I dunno, uh... honorable? And here is the cover of the reliable secondary neutral source. And here is the first proof positive page you seek... And here is the second, indicating publication by Hunter Publishing, Winston-Salem, NC. Oh lookie, I believe I am on the staff!

Now, while this may not be a scholarly article, nor one, even meriting notable mention as an academic paper. By WP's own admission in numerous places, WP:WINARS WP:VER etc., not to mention the unimportant rating of this article's stub class... it seems clear to me you didn't even try to search for any proof of reliable sources.

Now... @Bgwhite:. Whatever am I going to do with you WP competing Admins? Please read the notice to Donner60 about kidnapping our school's page on FB. (I though user space and domain name squatting was made a violation of federal law about 13 years ago. Am I wrong?)

So... Yes, we can and will - yes, I can and will, create an FB page which sorely deprives you of your next targets, but, in the meantime, I would implore you to remove the invitation to edit, since it is false and misleading. (The said invitation is in the image I've linked here.) If you have authority to control what the alumni publish on the school's [squatted on] facebook® page, please provide it.

For your information, I knew both Barbara Owens and William (Mitch) Miller well. I was there when they showed the school alma mater, which IS POSTED ON THE OFFICIAL WEB PAGE CITED. It is in the public domain, or it would not be a school song, now, would it? If you'll look at an FB page you cannot control... or one, say, which shows our teachers who have passed on, you'll see the writer of the lyrics and, when I get a chance to post his image on the memorial page, the writer of the music. You've cursed yourselves because they would have loved nothing more than to have their composition displayed on WP. (Maybe now they'll think better of their heavenly thoughts.)

So, if you describe music as without a score and appearing as poem, duly credited, by the way, then I'll make art out of it an post it. It wasn't cited because it comes from the same source as everything else YOU POST on our page, and under the same copyright restrictions, such as you claim exist (and they do not).

It's not enough that I went to high school with our Mayor (look him up under our notable alumni section) and his sister, Barbs, either of whom I could solicit to make an appeal to FB to have WP free up the namespace for its real alumni. I also know 4 members of our school board... one of them, as a friend in church and socially, the other three because they are my patients.

Lastly, @Bgwhite: and @Donner60:, we, the alumni of First Colonial High School do not countenance nanny state behavior. If you will not restore the sections as I had edited them, and as alumni will edit them in the future, then you must remove the invitation advertised falsely on FB to do so. This request will be monitored and sent to WP:ARB if not resolved to my satisfaction. I am more than happy to properly cite the additions, but it seems at once redundant, since the source is already amply provided as a URL on the article page itself. Thank you.

Dr. Hogendobler (I will direct all FCHS FB group page members to this one.) Why must you frustrate people so? Triflin'! Dr. Hoo (talk) 09:44, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

I am undoing the edits so I may (1) copy the code and (2) add the citations. I am NOT undoing the edits to be defiant. Thanks... Dr. Hoo (talk) 09:46, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

FYI: http://www.firstcolonialhs.vbschools.com/aup.htm Dr. Hoo (talk) 09:51, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

OK, I am done undoing. Please advise next time before you do anything like that. And please undo your stranglehold on our FB page. Does FB know you're rewriting their edit policies? Dr. Hoo (talk) 10:17, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

• Hello Dr. Hoo. One problem with the alumni listing is that Wikipedia requires all named Alumni to be "Notable", which basically means here, that they must already have a Wikipedia article about them in order to be listed. This is not "nanny state behavior", but rather the policy of Wikipedia. See the aptly-named WP:ALUMNI for the policy on including Alumni. Lastly, the Facebook Page you linked mentions Wikipedia as it seems the creator of that page used content from here, which is fine. Yes, it does say "Edit on Wikipedia", which is an invitation to anyone to make useful contributions to the page (for example, did you notice that the opening sentence is a run-on-sentence?). As with any page, edits must be in alignment with policies, and in this case, alumni listing themselves goes counter to that. Electric Wombat (talk) 10:25, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

• • Hello @Electric Wombat: and thank you for your kind and actually meaningful reply. So, I get the alumni thing. I don't get the link to FB. It is highly unusual that a page like it is not editable on FB. The invite is not just a courtesy; it's a necessity. Nothing can be edited on that page in FB except on WP. But I did notice that none of my changes on WP resulted in any changes on FB. So it appears to be a spaceholder used to direct people right to WP. Now... you tell me, who benefits from that? A person? FB? or WP? Can you escalate this for me? I'd appreciate it. Matt "Dr. Hoo." Ha. Dr. Hoo (talk) 11:05, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
    • There's really no official link between FB and here. Facebook has an ability to link to Wikipedia articles when the FB page is created. I don't know if that is a dynamic thing, or if it just pulls the content as it appeared when the page was created. The FB page's content is completely out of any Wikipedia control. Whoever owns that particular Facebook profile has control over that page, including the ability to lock the page so nobody can edit it, which appears to be the case here. Electric Wombat (talk) 11:14, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
      • Roger, that. Thanks! Dr. Hoo (talk) 11:16, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks to Electric Wombat for explaining this so well. I left a slightly longer comment in the Copyright section below but I realized that I should put my thanks in this section where you left your comments. Donner60 (talk) 01:31, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Last admin to read Section 2 (and named therein) gets the notable honor of deleting sections 2 and 3...

With my thanks. Don't all jump at once! Thank you all... Dr. Hoo (talk) 11:18, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Copyright

Per, Wikipedia:Copyright FAQ, "The absence of a copyright notice does not mean that a work may be freely used. If in doubt, assume you cannot use it."

Government identities in Virginia have copyright over all their works. Some states don't, such as Washington. If you have your photo taken for a year book, the district owns the copyright to the photo. As the lyrics have been published, it is automatically copyrighted (see Wikipedia:Copyright FAQ#What is copyright?). Only the author can change copyright status or renounce the copyright altogether. The school district has to ask for permission to use the song lyrics and they cannot change copyright status. So, any song lyrics, music, photos or video that have been published in the United States is copyrighted unless published otherwise. Virginia Beach school system follows the same copyright rules as Wikipedia. Section I states, "Because the extent of copyright protection of certain works found on the Internet is unclear, users will make a standard practice of requesting permission from the holder of the work if their use of the material has the potential of being considered an infringement."

The links you gave does not mention copyright. Disclaimer page doesn't mention it. Offsite links page only covers external links found on their webpage. It does not cover external links found on other sites, such as Wikipedia. The about link only says who wrote the song, not the song's copyright status.

Until permission is given by the authors of the song, it cannot be on Wikipedia. The authors must contact Wikipedia personally to grant permission. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for information on how this is done. Bgwhite (talk) 18:27, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, seriously, for taking the time. I made a photographic artwork of it... can I use it? It's my own creation... Dr. Hoo (talk) 20:03, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Barb and Bill died years ago... so you're saying that no one can publish our high school's alma mater? HUH? Dr. Hoo (talk) 20:04, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

The words are still on the image, so you can't. Welcome to the wonderful world of U.S. copyright law where Happy Birthday to You is still copyrighted, even though the authors died in the 1940s. The rule of thumb is anything published or copyrighted after 1927 is locked up. There are exceptions. If Congress hadn't changed the law, then everything from around 1954 and earlier would now be in the public domain. The law is often called the "Mickey Mouse Protection Act" because Disney was throwing money around to pass the law. Mickey Mouse was created in 1928. Now, we have to wait till 2030 for things to start to expire. For works by people, the law states, "copyright would last for the life of the author plus 70 years." My favorite act of stupidity is Martin Luther King's I Have a Dream speech. His kids hold the copyright. Bgwhite (talk) 21:26, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks to Bgwhite and Electric Wombat for their explanations. Wikipedia certainly does not have relationship with Facebook nor does it control what anyone puts on Facebook. So these comments are astounding to me. As is pointed out, the control is coming from somewhere else, not from Wikipedia. Furthermore, Wikipedia has its own notability requirements which must be met and cannot be overlooked just because someone has restricted access to a Facebook page that Wikipedia has no relationship with or control over. Donner60 (talk) 01:21, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

I should add that Mark Ruffalo is notable. If his name was reverted it was either not linked to his article or was caught up in the reversion of some non-notable names added at the same time. Donner60 (talk) 01:24, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

THIS IS A BORING PAGE.

Dr. Hoo (talk) 20:06, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Work with me people,... Work with me.

Some ideas to shoot down...

1. What if I remove their names (which, you note, is not on the high school's own webpage) -

2. What if I craft it in paper mache', make it into a pinata and take a picture of it so all the words show on the pig's sombrero?

3. What if I were to find the copy Mrs. Owens typed up for me and scan it into a jpg?

How is the school system using it? Is it possible the school now owns the rights or do I slap them with a big lawduit on behalf of the cherubic copyright holders?

Wow. Can you even say publish Mark Ruffalo's name without violating some law...? he's a great guy, by the way. Was a wrestler. ````

Thanks to the other two admins here, too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PresidentistVB (talk • contribs) 21:42, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Ownership of this article and general info on how to edit high school articles

Please understand that this is not the school's article on Wikipedia; rather, it is Wikipedia's article on the school. Simply put, what that means is that current students and alumni have no greater right to edit this article and no greater say in it's content than anyone else. In extremes, which the discussion above is approaching, editors connected with the school as students, faculty or alumni could be said to have a conflict of interest when it comes to this article.

All articles on Wikipedia have their content decided based on consensus. There have been some consensuses already formed about the content of school articles. These have been incorporated into a guideline and can be found at WP:SCH/AG. Among those consensuses are we do not include the lyrics or music of Alma Maters.

I have a considerable amount of experience working on school articles. I will be working on a re-write for this article over the next 15 or so hours. The recent edits for the most part can be termed as WP:SCHOOLCRUFT, so my starting point will be back in April. If the authors of the recent edits would like to talk about the content they would like to see, I will be happy to discuss it with them. Frankly, all I see is an article that was pretty poor just being made larger, not any better. The writing in this article is atrocious. I will be happy to clean up the run-ons, the rotten syntax, etc. Referencing will need to be improved and I am sure there are some content issues still. Please bear in mind that any discussion of content will need to focus on references and Wikipedia policy and guidelines.