Talk:Trinity Christian Academy (Addison, Texas)

James Barnett discussions

Extended content

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. James Barnett Case This information is not relevant to the school. Would it really make sense to publish every disciplinary decision the school has ever made. If the student violated the rules of a PRIVATE school than he gets fittingly punished. It is not neccessary to have on the Wiki page. Aristotle 15:09, 15 March 2007 (UTC) James Bartnett case i recently added back info about the gay student that was outed to his parents and expelled by the school, but another used reverted it. whats up with that?!Qrc2006 02:31, 12 September 2006 (UTC) innaproproate links Houston Voice article this link to an article in the houston voice about the expelled gay student is wholley appropriate and validated for inclusion. if you have a problem with it please bring it up here and tell my why before removing it again if you feel that is the path you want to go down. i did not recreate the link to my-boi since the site is down for the time being. Qrc2006 01:02, 14 September 2006 (UTC) I again removed the link to the article about Barnett. It belongs in his article, not this one. The link to his article is appropriate and I have no problem with it and feel that it's a good compromise. --ElKevbo 01:36, 14 September 2006 (UTC) I disagere, on an article for san francisco it might mention gavin newsome and gay marriage, i dont think its unreasonable to include a gavin newsome related link. plus the school expelled him, the article is as much about the school, a homphobic school that expelled a gay student, the school expelled him. i dont think its an acceptable compromise.Qrc2006 10:12, 14 September 2006 (UTC) I object on the grounds that you are both inserting your POV into the article and giving undue weight to this event. The links you insist on adding should be used as references and not placed in the "External link(s)" section. --ElKevbo 10:38, 14 September 2006 (UTC) semiprotection ive gone over the pages history and James Barnett has been removed 3 times now over the history, by anonomous users each time, most recently today, i suggest we ask for semiprotection for the time being to avoid information being removed again.Qrc2006 10:13, 14 September 2006 (UTC) You're welcome to request semi-protection but I seriously doubt the volume of "vandalism" isn't high enough to warrant it. I also believe this is more of a content dispute and thus inappropriate for and impossible to resolve by semi-protection. --ElKevbo 10:41, 14 September 2006 (UTC) Removal of OR While I think it would be difficult to find a reference to something "not existing" I don't see that the sentence "Texas has no laws protecting gay people or even straight people from discrimination based on sexual orientation." has a place in this article, and agree with its removal. It is not an attribute of the school, and therefore, while doubtless valid as a statement, does not fit here. It would be very much more in context in the article about the expelled student. Fiddle Faddle 17:24, 14 September 2006 (UTC) I think it's important to include. A reliable list of states with outlaw such discrimination (with Texas not included) would be a good enough source. If we don't say anything, people might assume it was illegal, and making people think the school broke the law (even unintentionally) isn't a good idea - I don't think you can commit liable by ommision, but it's still not a good idea. --Tango 17:39, 14 September 2006 (UTC) Potentially it would be worth reaching a consensus on it, especially since this is a high profile element of the article. I'm certainly not going to revert if it goes back in, but I do think a consensus would be worth reaching first. For what it is worth I would like to register a Weak oppose to its reinclusion with or without sources.Fiddle Faddle 17:46, 14 September 2006 (UTC) If it's truly noteable then one should be able to find a reference for it. In this particular case, I'm sure there are some gay rights groups that have noted this fact (if it's true). I would also imagine there would be some reference to it given the Supreme Court case from a few years ago that, IIRC, struck down some or all of the Texas laws dealing with sodomy. In general, though, your point that "you can't prove a negative" is a well recognized principle and one that I imagine causes problems in Wikipedia. I also note that there is an article about the expelled student but it's currently nominated for deletion. The last time I looked at the CFD it appeared that deletion was certain. If the article is indeed deleted then my stance on what should or should not be included in this article may change. --ElKevbo 17:49, 14 September 2006 (UTC) links anybody thing any of these links are relevant? James Barnett's blog: Life...Power...Pride... Gay.com article: Group gives grant to expelled gay student DailyKos article: Gay Teen Expelled From High School Towerload article: Gay High School Teen Outed and Expelled Towerload article: James Barnett Update NotGeniuses.com article: Gay Teen Expelled From High School opednews.com article: Expulsion Wasn’t End for Gay Student in Texas The Point Foundation article: High School Honor Student Expelled from Trinity Christian Academy in Addison, TX, for Being Gay gaymonkey.com article: Gay Texas Teen Receives Scholarship After Being Expelled DissentVoice article: Expulsion Wasn’t End for Gay Student in Texas Gay.com/PlanetOut network article: Group gives grant to expelled gay student OutletRadio article: Point Foundation Grant Aides Student PlanetOut article: Group gives grant to expelled gay student YubaNet article: Expulsion Wasn't End for Gay Student in Texas gayteens article: Expulsion Wasn’t End for Gay Student in Texas AxisOfLogic article: Expulsion Wasn’t End for Gay Student in Texas kipesquire blog: Gay Student Outed and Expelled for G-Rated Website Buzzflash article whosoever.org article: The Gay Community Has To Blame Itself Too queerday article: Expelled gay teen James Barnett being disowned by parents? HoustonVoice article: Christian school kicked a teen out for being gay to add to the article Qrc2006 09:06, 16 September 2006 (UTC) They may be useful as references but I don't think they belong as "External links." --ElKevbo 09:11, 16 September 2006 (UTC) I think it is possible to overlink a sub-element of an article. There is already one link as a <ref> against the expulsion incident. I think selecting a maximum of two more, as references in the same manner would be acceptable, though really suggest one. My feeling is that, should the article on the student survive, which it ought to, but is unlikely to, the links are more appropriate to the person than the academy. Fiddle Faddle 09:14, 16 September 2006 (UTC) If they are links to blogs or special interest advocacy sites, they aren't secondary sources and therefore not eligible for external links. Most of those are. Exceptions are the Houston Voice article. There may be others. Also most of those links are dupes of each other.⇒ SWATJester Ready Aim Fire! 19:15, 19 September 2006 (UTC) Gay Student Expelled The information included concerning James Barnett is not entirely correct. It might be a good idea to contact the school for the accurate information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.90.14.145 (talk • contribs) 11:28, November 29, 2006 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 16:48, 29 November 2006 (UTC) However, please keep in mind that information should be verifiable with reliable sources that isn't original research. Contacting the school might constitute original research. However, if the school can point us to any sources to use that would be ok. Are there any specific details that you think are inaccurate here? JoshuaZ 16:54, 29 November 2006 (UTC) content a lot fo edits over the past few weeks have been pretty destructive and a lot of well sourced content regarding james barnett was removed, i tried to put it back but i might have been shotty since im bad at /ref/'s and it seems to me it might be the school administration or someone involved with them who is doing it, lots of anonomous users, can anyone find out if theyre comming from addison? lots of POV and semi-libelous stuff has been added aswell, it reeks of vandalism and POV pushing in favor and against the school, i would like it nominated for semiprotectionT ALK•QRC2006•¢ʘñ†®¡ß§ 01:22, 7 April 2007 (UTC) James Barnett I again reinserted the information regarding James Barnett it is notable, the school made national headlines, its well cited, do not remove it without first discussing. Use edit summaries!!!T ALK•QRC2006•¢ʘñ†®¡ß§ 00:08, 16 April 2007 (UTC) Revisit Barnett Does this really need a full section all to itself? The man has his own article, which refers to the school, but the school is 40 years old and doesn't need that. Perhaps Barnett could be listed as "notable" instead? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 22:52, 29 February 2008 (UTC) James Barnett Case RfC Does the controversial case of James Barnett, who accused the school of outing and basically expelling him, notable enough to deserve it's own section on the school's article? Dayewalker (talk) 20:36, 15 March 2011 (UTC) For the purposes of discussion, here's the text [1] of the last section. "In 2004, the school received national media attention when the administration expelled student James Barnett for "immoral behavior and supporting an immoral cause", after a fellow student informed the school that Barnett was gay, and also running the gay dating website my-boi.com." Dayewalker (talk) 20:42, 15 March 2011 (UTC) My involvement with this article started a couple of hours ago. I was on recent changes patrol and noticed the removal of the "James Barnett controversy" section. This had been removed by User:Jstewart2011 with an edit summary of "Removed material because it was outdated". Although the case was in 2004, I did not (and do not) consider that deletion due to age grounds was justified: the incident was widely covered and perhaps the thing that this school is best known for. I undid the removal of the section. After comparing the section to our James Barnett article, I reverted my initial undo. This was because there was disagreement between the section and the article about the exact situation of Barnett's withdrawal/expulsion from the school. I decided that the best action for me at the time was to remove the section in the TCA article and list Barnett as a past pupil of the academy, letting his article do the talking (assuming that as a BLP its accuracy would be more rigorous). As for whether the the case is notable enough to deserve its own section, I repeat my point above in that the section should probably be included if the discrepancies between it and the James Barnett article can be resolved. The Barnett case is probably the only thing that separates this school from thousands of other schools out there. (I'd take out the link to my-boi.com though). Brammers (talk/c) 21:02, 15 March 2011 (UTC) Include. If we can include their parochial-school league volleyball victories, the bar for school events' notability is clearly rather low. Roscelese 19:11, 16 March 2011 (UTC) He belongs here, this incident led the school to get international media attention and became the subject of the news network circuit with a national outcry, he's not just a notable alumni like a football star that later went pro he literally is notable and has an article for this controversy and other endeavors but this school became notable due to this controversy. There is a massive amount of articles about the school and this incident. It is notable and relevant to the topic. That the school has a long history is immaterial. There is nothing preventing more content be added to this article about other topics but the lack thereof is irrelevant to this sections notability.71.142.74.66 (talk) 07:54, 30 March 2011 (UTC) James Barnett The information about James Barnett seems to have as much support for removal as its inclusion, and does the disciplinary action taken years ago really belong here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.252.172.104 (talk) 08:57, 24 June 2011 (UTC) Support isn't the only measure used here. Our guidelines are. In fact 99 out of a hundred users could say Texas sucks, but if one user says it does not and could show that Texas ranked last in the nation for states that suck, it would be that one editor's content that would be added because he would be able to prove that Texas doesn't suck. As for something that happened years ago, it is actually even more appropriate to include old news as this is an encyclopedia. Or else can you imagine, we would end up removing the background on why and when the school was founded since it was years ago as well! This is old news, but it is the current history, so it very much belongs. The only way to remove the James Barnett content is to get in a time machine and make it so that it never happened.Westernstag (talk) 06:19, 7 November 2011 (UTC) At what point does the constant re-inclusion of this along with threats of being blocked become cyber bullying? Because the people who want it in are more insistent, then all arguments listed here count for nothing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.252.172.104 (talk) 01:52, 27 June 2011 (UTC) It is not constant reinclusion. It is procedural restoration. No one is allowed to remove content, unless it violates the policies of wikipedia. Most could oppose the JB issue from being included just because they don't think it merrits inclusion. However it would still be allowed for even one person to put it back if taken out. Why? Because wikipedia maintains a neutral stance (see: Wikipedia:Neutral) and that includes information that you may dislike. The information about JB is attested in reliable secondary sources (see Wikipedia:RS) and that makes it so that it meets the bar. Also as a matter of culture when something can be proven as the issue with JB and someone, most often person's clearly related to the subject of the school try and remove it constantly over years, we don't take kindly to it. Wikipedia is not censored (see Wikipedia:NotCensored). To answer your question, at no point does restoring valid sourced material become bullying of any kind. Removing it is not bullying per se, but it is Valdalism (see Wikipedia:Valdalism) and the punishment for vandalising wikipedia or damaging the project and making nonconstructive or disruptive edits is to be blocked. You must come into agreement with editors on this talk page to remove any controversial content from the article and have this rationale be based in policy. However removing the material on JB can not be based in out policy and if you read the links to the essays on our policies you will see why. This is a warning you should head, don't remove content. Content removal after it has been decided that it should remain is considered vandalism, repeated removal is considered edit warring. It damages us, misinforms our readers, and uses up our resources (every edit summary is saved in full and that means more money spent on servers and spent on electricity by a nonprofit with just a few hundred servers and 43 staff members). My best advice if you are concerned about the school's reputation is to add positive information about the school. But you can't just write it based on what you think, that is a primary source (independent of the subject) [not the school paper]. No. You must find positive mentions of the school in any newspapers, magazines, or books. Those are secondary sources and material from there is legitimate to add here. And remember its about honestly, policy, sourced material, and anti-censorship, not insistence. The most insistent people will be blocked too if they violate the tenents of our project.Acdcrocks (talk) 10:21, 30 October 2011 (UTC) Could we have an editor take a look at the fact that this information has now been deemed so important as to merit being moved up the page as well as inclusion in the headline now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.252.172.104 (talk) 22:22, 4 December 2011 (UTC) Looks good to me. Brammers (talk/c) 12:44, 23 May 2012 (UTC) Barnett not expelled So I was reading this and went to the Barnett page where it explicitly states that barnett was not "expelled". Instead it was "mutual agreement". Anyone want to change this? BlueworldSpeccie (talk) 13:43, 21 April 2015 (UTC) BlueworldSpeccie, first I would like to thank you for cleaning up the mess that I left by marking all of the "dead links" in this article. I am new to wiki, and unclear about the rules, within this forum, regarding correcting anything so I erred on the side on simply marking rather than deleting. First a quick question, followed by a long pretext in support of my opinion to agree with you. Question: Why was the "dead link" tag removed from Mr Barnett's website given that the website no longer exists? I have children that have attended Trinity and were in attendance in the 2004-2005 time frame so I have first hand knowledge of the general parents' reaction to the cited event, while I am not privy to the administration's event specific point of view, nor do I know Mr. Barnett or his parents. Frankly, my recollection of the event was that we felt pain for the Barnett's and prayed for them and their son to find Godly wisdom. It was not a prolonged issue on the Trinity campus and I believe that we all understood that the news media was blackmailed by, or in bed with, the very small militant gay agenda driving element to over state the Trinity/Barnett situation in order to keep this issue in the news as long as possible. At Trinity, a Bible based, Christian, College Preparatory School, students enter into a covenant with the school that is binding to a set list of expectations and resulting consequences. This covenant is designed to be consistent with Bible teaching. As Christians, we, by definition, acknowledge our sinful nature in order to accept the grace and mercy extended to us by our sin-free Savior, Jesus Christ. The Bible teaches us that homosexuality is a sin. The Bible also teaches that sexual activity outside of marriage is sin. When faced with the publicly flaunted, non-repentant, sinful actions of Mr. Barnett, how could the Trinity administration remain consistent with its faith and allow the hypocrisy? According to news reports, Trinity showed grace to Mr. Barnett and allowed him to withdraw from the school rather than suffer from an expulsion on his transcript. I believe that I speak for all at Trinity when I say that we love the Barnett's and we love Mr Barnett -- that having been said, we hate the sin of homosexuality, and we hate the sin of sexual relations outside of marriage, as we hate all sin. Mr Barnett was not the first person who was asked to leave Trinity because of their conflict with the Trinity Covenant, and he was not the last person asked to leave. BlueworldSpeccie, sorry for the lengthy pretext but I agree that the more honest way to characterize the closing of this event is to call it a "mutual agreement" rather than an "expulsion". Supporter of truth and logic (talk) 15:01, 28 April 2015 (UTC) First off I removed the dead link tag from his website because it is not a reference or external source. Dead link tags are used in order to mark a page for cleanup and not to inform readers that the site is dead. And secondly I am not sure how to reword the paragraph. Would you like to do so? And last is this "covenant" legally binding? BlueworldSpeccie (talk) 16:50, 28 April 2015 (UTC) References The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Is this really all there is?

Extended content

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. The article is really short and lacking in material if you discount the large quote at the start and the item about the gay lad who was expelled. It looks like the only reasons for notability are because: It is a high school, therefore notable because it is a high school It hit the news because this kid was kicked out. Aren't there any content experts here who can flesh this out? I know it says "Stub", but it could surely be expanded quickly? Fiddle Faddle 11:24, 14 September 2006 (UTC) i went on the school website and looked up a bunch of information updated the scool stats added the fax number, changed founding date, student population, added some body to the school section etc.Qrc2006 14:38, 14 September 2006 (UTC) Amazing what can be done simply. I've sorted the various references out to make it read easier. Fiddle Faddle 14:49, 14 September 2006 (UTC) Thanks, and you're right literally just skimmed the schools webpage and copied and pasted the facts and just added The schools studnet body is... It was founded in... and now there a lot more meat to it, thanks for cleaning ;-) Cholga 17:17, 19 September 2006 (UTC) The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

October 2022 Requested Updates to Page

Extended content

I am an employee at Trinity and would like to make suggestions to update this article so it is more in accord with Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools/Article advice. I have also followed the structural examples of similar articles, as instructed by the Manual of Style. Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Layout. These include the Good Articles (the date they were approved) for Scarborough Day School and Briarcliff High School I am following the recommended format at Template:Request edit. 1. Specific text to be added or removed: Please add a new second and third sentence to the lead: The academy is co-ed and serves students in Pre-kindergarten through twelfth grade, with 1379 students.The school has a 10.5 to 1 student to teacher ratio. Reason for the change: Basic school description and statistics consistent with the structure and content of similar articles, including the Good Articles for Scarborough Day School and Briarcliff High School. Also consistent with the the type information recommended by Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools/Article advice. References supporting change: , The number of students changes regularly and is not really useful in the lede. The grades are appropriate. Jacona (talk) 13:33, 28 October 2022 (UTC) NCES is preferred over US News as a source. Jacona (talk) 13:33, 28 October 2022 (UTC) 2. Specific text to be added or removed: In the second sentence of the lead please change: The school was founded in 1970 during the racial desegregation of public schools as a segregation academy. to: The school was founded in 1970 during the racial desegregation of public schools and it had no black students as of 1972. Reason for the change: The source, from the AP in 1972 does not say TCA was established as a segregation academy. In proposed edit #4, there are quotes from the 1972 headmaster in which he denies the school was set up for the purpose of segregation, but acknowledges uncertainty over busing increased interest in the school and that there were no black students at the time. But he said the school intended to set up minority scholarships when it had the money. The AP story brings up white flight as one reason why religious academies were thriving in Texas, but it also mentions general disenchantment with public schools and the desire for religious education. References supporting change: I updated this to indicate the school was founded when all the seg academies were forming, enrolled no black students, and added some quotes by the head. Jacona (talk) 14:18, 28 October 2022 (UTC) 3. Specific text to be added or removed. Please add two new final sentences to the first paragraph of the lead: As of 2021, the school’s minority student enrollment is 17.5%, according to U.S. News & World Report, with 6.4% Asian or Asian/Pacific Islanders, 5.7% Hispanic/Latino, 4.4%, Black or African American, 0.7%, two or more races and 0.3% American Indian or Alaska Native. As of September 2022, Jeff D. Williams was the head of school. Reason for the change: Highly relevant contrast between the school’s founding as an all-white school and its current student body, 52 years later. Without this contrast, it appears that the school might still be the same way. Current schoolmaster consistent with GA for Scarborough Day School. References supporting change: I added something similar, using NCES rather than US NEWS. Jacona (talk) 14:18, 28 October 2022 (UTC) 4. Specific text to be added or removed: In History, in the first paragraph, first sentence, please change it from: The school opened in 1970 as a segregation academy amidst the racial desegregation of public schools. In 1972, the school's enrollment surged. The headmaster, David Coterill, attributed the enrollment increase to "parents [who] are unsure and afraid of an unsettled situation". Coterill claimed that the school was not intended to be a "escape hatch for segregation", but also acknowledged that interest in private schools like Trinity "was initially stirred up by the busing situation". to: The school opened in 1970 amidst the racial desegregation of public schools. In 1972, the school's enrollment surged and there were no black students in the student body. Although at the time, the school headmaster David Coterill denied the school was intended to perpetuate segregation, and the school’s founding documents and marketing materials don’t mention segregation, Coterill attributed the enrollment increase in part to "parents [who] are unsure and afraid of an unsettled situation". He also that interest in private schools like Trinity "was initially stirred up by the busing situation." He said the class included no black students because applicants did not pass preliminary testing or could not afford the tuition but the school intended to set up minority scholarships when it had the money. In 2020, Trinity Christian Academy director of student development Matt Lambro said the school has since made concerted efforts to diversity, including changing its financial aid process and launching a diversity committee of faculty, staff and administrators. Reason for the change: This summary, which is slightly longer, is a closer rendering of the sources. Neither source says Trinity Christian Academy was a “segregation academy.” The first source from a 1972 AP story does not use these words and presents the school’s explanation as to why there were no black students enrolled. The implication is similar but not exact. The nuance is historically important. The second source, from Andscape.com in 2020, says the contemporary director of admission was told the school appeared on a list of such schools, but does not give any details about this list. This is pure speculation on my part but the Andscape story might be referring to a this Wikipedia article: Segregation academy#List of schools founded as segregation academies, which includes Trinity Christian Academy. But Trinity’s inclusion on the Wikipedia list is based on the same 1972 AP story discussed above. This is circular. References supporting change: 5. Specific text to be added or removed: In the History, section please remove the last sentence of the first paragraph, which reads: “In the 2020–21 school year, 58 of 1,442 students in grades 1–12 were black.[1]” and replace it with: As of 2021, the school’s minority student enrollment is 17.5%, according to U.S. News & World Report, with 6.4% Asian or Asian/Pacific Islanders, 5.7% Hispanic/Latino, 4.4%, Black or African American, 0.7%, two or more races and 0.3% American Indian or Alaska Native. Reason for the change: Provides a more comprehensive look at student diversity than the cherry picked statistic from a less well-known source; the replacement is also more recent (see footnote at the bottom of U.S. News page for dates the data was collected.) The source being replaced provides data from 2019-2020, it says, not from 2020-2021 as the Wikipedia article incorrectly states. The repeat from the lead is consistent with information from the lead needing to summarize only info from the body of the article. Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section. References supporting change: 6. Specific text to be added or removed: In History, as the new fifth paragraph (assuming the paragraph above is added), please add: As of September 2022, Jeff D. Williams was the head of school. And please change the headmaster in the Infobox From David Delph to Jeff D. Williams Reason for the change: Supports standard information for a school profile and school infobox. Repeat from lead consistent with information from the lead needing to summarize only info from the body of the article. References supporting change: Done 7. Specific text to be added or removed: In History, as the new sixth paragraph, please add: During the 2021-2022 building of a new Middle School, students in engineering and robotics classes received instruction on the construction site. As of 2022, the STEM program at the academy was led by a former engineer, Lisa Wong; advanced classes included practical applications such as building tools for a child with spina bifida. Reason for the change: Curriculum activities are part of the recommended content from Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools/Article advice. Reliable press coverage for both sentences. References supporting change: Looks kind of like promotional press release material. Are these sources truly WP:INDEPENDENT {{WP:RS]]? 8. Specific text to be added or removed: Under History, please add a new section called “Extracurricular activities” and under it a subsection with the title “Sports”: Extracurricular activities Sports The school sports offerings include boys cross country, football, golf and girls cross country, golf, volleyball, dance and cheerleading. The boys tennis doubles team won the Texas Association of Private and Parochial Schools state championship in 2021 and 2022. The boys golf team won its fifth straight Texas Association of Private and Parochial Schools state championship in 2022. Reason for the change: A section on extracurricular activities is part of the recommended content for secondary schools, as is Sports. Other activities should be added in the future, which is why it’s a good idea to set up the title and the subtitle to start, even though there’s only one. Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools/Article advice. References supporting change:,, Lkspears (talk) 21:10, 27 October 2022 (UTC) Lkspears (talk) 21:00, 27 October 2022 (UTC) Listing all of a school's sports is going out of style, it's trivial. Has the school won any state championships? Are there some professional athletes that have their own wikipedia articles? Jacona (talk) 14:18, 28 October 2022 (UTC) References

Improving article from attack piece to standard school page

I’d like to start a discussion about this article now largely constituting an attack piece, focused solely on historical controversies. WP: Attack. Yet this is an article about a real school with more than 1,200 students (with a 20% minority student body). In addition to controversial content, the page should give a well-rounded article about the school as it is today, following Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools/Article advice, as well following the article structure of the many Good Articles about secondary schools. MOS:STRUCTURE. There are plenty of good sources available to make this a more standard school article, such as the GAs for Arlington Senior High School, Auburn High School (Alabama), duPont Manual High School.

Since I have a COI, I have tried to use Talk to suggest content to make this article better, Talk:Trinity Christian Academy (Addison, Texas)#October 2022 Requested Updates to Page but after the review by User: Jacona, the situation became worse in several ways and only marginally improved in others

1. In the lead, it now says “...as of 2020, 4 percent of the student body was Black” but the body of the article gives the fuller context of diversity of the student body: “In the 2019–20 school year, 1101 of 1,379 or 80% of students in grades PK-12 were White, 85 or 6% were Asian, 76 or 6% were Hispanic, while 58 of 1,379 or 4% were Black, .”

By choosing to highlight only the recent Black student population in the lead, right after a statement about the discriminatory 1971 history, it gives the false impression that the current student body is 96% white. A 1971 to 2019 comparison is not something being paraphrased from press coverage - it’s an editorial decision by an editor, based on primary sources. While use of WP: Primary is probably valid for these types of statistics since these are very straightforward, being selective in what stats to show, and contrasting it in a sentence with historical press coverage, adds a layer of impermissible WP: PRIMARY analysis.

The school now actively promotes and practices diversity. Not giving a misleading impression of the current makeup of the student body is very important since there is also prominent emphasis in the lead about the school’s origins, 50 years, as an all-white school.

The body of the article should also have its own paragraph about the diversity stats today rather than the stats being placed as the last sentence of the very long first paragraph about History. A repeat of info from the lead is consistent with Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section which says that the lead is a summary of important information from the body of the article.

2. In the lead, a general description of the school as it is now constituted should precede a description of controversial historical events from 50 years ago. Basic school description and statistics are consistent with the structure and content of similar articles, including the Good Articles for Scarborough Day School and Briarcliff High School. Also consistent with the the type information recommended by Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools/Article advice.. Here’s a suggested new, well-sourced second sentence.

The academy is co-ed and serves students in Pre-kindergarten through twelfth grade, with 1379 students.The school has a 10.5 to 1 student to teacher ratio.

The size of the student body and student-teacher ratios are usual facts given in the lead for secondary school articles. It’s not in every school article but it’s well-sourced and moves the article away from being an atack page. Yes, the stats fluctuate, but not dramatically and can easily be updated. Furthermore, this information should be repeated in the body of the article, as per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section

3. The section about the historical origins of the school as an all-white academy is no doubt important. But it’s now filled with excessive detail given the length of this article and the fact that it is about a large, functioning school with a student body of 1200. It’s also not accurate – what the headmaster said 50 years ago was awful enough that it does not warrant exaggeration. The article does not quote him saying Black students couldn’t do the school work – he said the “pathetic situation” was the testing scores were bad. I read that to be a commentary on public school education being bad, not a statement about the abilities of Black students.

4. I’d also ask that editors discuss requests #7 and #8 in Talk:Trinity Christian Academy (Addison, Texas)#October 2022 Requested Updates to Page. The first request used local editorially-credible newspapers to add current History. Yes, it’s not as exciting as the controversies but this type of history - new buildings, new academic programs, sports teams – is the majority of most good articles about schools. Content like this is very much needed to keep the article from just being an all-out attack. Many more changes can be made to make this article into a better article, closer to the standards or what secondary school articles should be. Sports team championships, academic awards, course offerings, etc. I’d be glad to discuss other ideas and make more suggestions. Lkspears (talk) 16:05, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Calling it an "attack piece" seems silly, but there's some interesting history behind the school, for sure. tedder (talk) 18:01, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Lkspears, The school has certainly come a short way in a long time, so far as diversity is concerned! I think the article would surely benefit from expansion, if sources are available. If you would like to see the article improved, perhaps you could provide some independent, secondary reliable sources. Just cutting and pasting the URLs would help. We all want the article to be better, but not everyone is interested in accuracy - the Wikipedia article should not look like the school's website, which tells this fairytale about the school's founding. It makes me very sad to see racial discrimination equated to "the glory of God". Since you're connected to the school, perhaps you could encourage the administration to publicly acknowledge their founding and demonstrate how they've grown despite of it, rather than claiming that very sordid beginning to be glorious and divine. — Jacona (talk) 20:26, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Lkspears, After reviewing what I could find on newspapers.com, it appears that the notability of this school rests almost entirely on it's being founded to preserve segregation. The article would probably not exist if it were not for that. — Jacona (talk) 22:38, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

A further, more personal response may be found at User talk:Lkspears — Jacona (talk) 14:01, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Demographics of Addison, Texas: 48% White, 23% Hispanic,16% Black. Demographics of TCA: 80% White, 6% Hispanic, 0.7% Black. If this article were an attack piece, it would likely dwell more on how this school was founded to perpetuate segregation, and successfully continues that mission today. — Jacona (talk) 15:19, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

References

ANI

Editors following this page may be interested in this discussion at ANI [2] — BillHPike (talk, contribs) 20:40, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

POV tag

I thought that Twinkle would automatically make a talk page section, but I guess not, so I will make one myself.

I have added a {{POV}} tag here after seeing this article brought up on AN/I; it seems like the article is giving WP:UNDUE focus to scandal and controversy (i.e. the majority of the "History" section is quotes from its principal... in 1972). There is also a paragraph of unclear relevance, that talks about a Ponzi scheme perpetrated against some relatives of people who went to the school (In 2012, a ponzi scheme led by relatives of a teacher at Trinity took 80 fraudulent investments for their scheme related to a VOIP company named Usee. The inctictment stated they were "Focusing their securities offerings on evangelical Christians".). I may be missing something here, but it doesn't seem like this has much to do with the school. jp×g 02:58, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

JPxG, As far as the Ponzi scheme, I agree with you wholeheartedly. As far as the history, it would seem the circumstances of the founding of any institution would be some of the more important information about the institution. Any history of the United States for instance, is likely to include a lot of quotes from the declaration of independence and the constitution, I would probably expect more quotes about Washington, Jefferson and Adams than about the ten most recent presidents combined. — Jacona (talk) 01:24, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

lead

Got here from the ANI. I have to say that the second sentence of the lead:

The school was founded in 1970 when racial desegregation of public schools prompted the creation of many segregation academies which enrolled only white students.

Seems at best synth. Valereee (talk) 14:06, 3 May 2023 (UTC) Valereee (talk) 14:06, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

References

I don't really think WP:SYNTH applies here. The cited source is about the rise of segregation academies (private schools that only accept white students, so that they can avoid integrated public schools), and it cites the representative of a newly-opened private school that has only accepted white students (...you get where I'm going).

I think the source supports the claim. At the very least, Trinity Christian Academy took advantage of white flight from public schools. A representative of the school called it "an escape hatch" from integration. Contemporaneously, all-white private schools criticized for circumventing desegregation efforts. I guess you could say "...in 1970, at a time when racial desegregation..." if you really wanted to, but I don't think that's necessary. Wracking ^💬 06:58, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

The source does not say any of those schools opened because of this, and I think having this in the lead is WP:UNDUE at minimum. I'm really working hard to even see how it would be included in a background section. Unless someone is out there saying "Trinity Christian Academy, which opened in the 1970s as part of the segregation academies movement", it looks to me like synth.

It doesn't really matter that we all know that it was part of the movement or that TCA took advantage of white flight. Someone needs to be saying it, or we shouldn't be saying it. Valereee (talk) 10:03, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

TCA said they benefited from white flight from integrated schools; they said their student body was all-white. Whether it's WP:UNDUE in the lead is a different question from whether it's WP:SYNTH, which I don't believe it is. It's a huge omission to not mention segregation academies at all, especially when the school was part of contemporaneous discussion of the topic. Wracking ^💬 17:35, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

We say what sources say. The best we can do from this source is say "TCA was discussed in an article about private school enrollments increasing during the period of desegregation." Which really doesn't provide any useful information to readers. Valereee (talk) 17:51, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

There's definitely more we can say. For example, "As of 1972, TCA had only enrolled white students." The source says that. Wracking ^💬 17:55, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Well, it says they've had Black applicants who couldn't pass the admissions test...I'm not sure that's enough? Another editor has added a source that says "When Trinity Christian Academy director of student development Matt Lambro discovered his suburban Dallas school on a list of segregation academies, he cringed", though. So we could say that sometime after 2016, TCA's director of student development found the school on a list of segregation academies. Valereee (talk) 18:11, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Ah, it's kind of hard to follow the flow of the article, I may have been looking at a section about another school. So maybe something like "In 1972, a representative of the school said that black students who applied did not pass preliminary testing." would be more accurate. Thanks for sharing that other source; if we could find when/where that list of segregation academies was made, that would also add clarity. Wracking ^💬 18:33, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

I agree with Wracking, it's not SYNTH nor OR. While we don't see the exact words "segregation Academy" in the sources, the school is the very definition of a segregation academy. The school was founded with all white students as an "escape hatch" to avoid integration. We don't see the exact words, but that's OK, we're not supposed to plagiarize the sources, we're supposed to state the text in our own words. We also see sources from this timeframe that say "negro" and "colored", and when we put it in our own words, we say "Black". That's not SYNTH, nor OR either. And stepping into the statistics, one could see an element of SYNTH in putting in the (reliably sourced) facts that the school currently has only 0.7% Black population in a city that has 16% Black population and a majority minority....but those facts deserve to be in the article. The paid editor wants to whitewash the article, but the school was clearly created as a segregation academy, and continues to function in that way today. — Jacona (talk) 00:54, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Directly comparing the student body's current racial makeup with the racial makeup of the city/county it is in without a secondary source doing such would be WP:SYNTH. -Indy beetle (talk) 20:16, 5 May 2023 (UTC)