Talk:Polytechnic School (California)

Colors

To avoid getting into a revert war, I'm asking Kiwidude here to source his or her change of the school colors in the infobox back to orange & white from orange & blue. This picture suggests that orange & blue is correct. -EDM 6 July 2005 00:08 (UTC)

• Not having seen a justification from Kiwidude, I am changing this critical piece of information back to orange & blue. Please don't revert to white without providing a valid source on this page. -EDM 8 July 2005 05:37 (UTC)

I have documents from the school stating that it is orange and WHITE. The athletic team uniforms in this picture http://www.polytechnic.org/athletics/pantherclub/photos/soccer-boys-varsity/images/DSCF0339.jpg the uniform colors are orange and white. this picture suggests that orange and white are correct. the school spirit squad's unifroms are in white and orange. the school wouldn't misrepresent the colors on the cheerleader's uniforms! picture: http://www.polytechnic.org/athletics/pantherclub/photos/spiritsquad/images/DSCF0387.jpg Kiwidude July 8, 2005 21:08 (UTC)

• Notwithstanding Kiwidude's somewhat hysterical tone on this page and elsewhere, he's still incorrect. If the overall color scheme of the school's website doesn't make it plain enough, there's this reminiscence that makes it pretty clear (it's item #2). But hey, whatever. -EDM 8 July 2005 22:14 (UTC)

I have a document saying that the school colors are orange and white. would you like me to send it to you?Kiwidude July 9, 2005 01:22 (UTC)

• Nope. -EDM 9 July 2005 02:51 (UTC)

Heavens to Betsy. The colors are orange and white. (I attended Poly for 12 years.) Ikkyu2 01:04, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

• THank you Ikkyu2 my point is finally proven!Kiwidude 06:15, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
• Use this information only for good, never for evil, Kiwidude :) -Ikkyu2 20:28, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
  • For better or for worse, personal investigations and recollections don't count, whether they're provided by a former lifer or a current middle schooler. Either way, it's original research and non-encyclopedic for Wikipedia purposes. I'm leaving the text at orange and white for now, because my contention of orange and blue also counts as original research pending my (or someone else's) turning up a verifiable encyclopedic source. (Evidently my citation to an old Paw Print article and reference to the school's website's color scheme haven't succeeded to achieve consensus yet.) But sooner or later there will be such a source and we will all be able to agree on the correct text. -EDM 21:04, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
  • And when you do find that source, it will say orange and whiteKiwidude 23:49, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
  • This is frankly hilarious, EDM. I never conducted any original research into what the Polytechnic School colors were. Rather, I was informed - repeatedly, on a daily basis - by that most authoritative of sources, the school administration. For reference, I cite numerous articles, by, among others, John Knox, Greg Feldmeth, Mike Babcock, Carmie Rodriguez, and Jolly Urner, published in the Oak Tree Times 1979-1990. The Oak Tree Times is a private publication of Polytechnic School, 1030 California Avenue, Pasadena CA 91106, a non-profit educational institution. I would also cite numerous personal communications, but I'm sure you'd question their provenance.  :) -Ikkyu2 03:10, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

    I'm not quite sure what you're calling hilarious. Information you heard from personal communications—even from demigods like Mike Babcock—is "original research" under Wikipedia definitions. Reread the pages on original research and verifiability. If personal communications and personal knowledge were all it's about, we'd be even, as I'd pit mine (which dates from when you were apparently in diapers, and Kiwidude wasn't even a glint in Kiwidude Sr.'s eye) against yours and that would be that. -EDM 03:41, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

    • Is English not your first language, EDM? I specifically didn't cite personal communications because of my certainty you'd question their provenance. You went ahead and questioned their provenance anyway, despite the fact that I didn't cite any. I cited the Oak Tree Times. In any event, your contentious tone and disparaging reference to my diapers has irked me. I demand that your next reply cite what would be considered an acceptably authoritative source for your needs. I will then obtain it and provide it to you. (The reason navy blue is included in Polytechnic clothing, by the way, is because folks convened in general synod and decided that orange wasn't very fashionable. It's not a color that everyone can wear well.) -Ikkyu2 16:21, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Also, when a person donates to the School, somewhere below $1500, they are placed in the "ORANGE & WHITE" Donor club! And again, I refer you to the sports uniforms, the links are above. They're orange and white.Kiwidude 06:06, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Pictures

• are the pictures in the article ok? its the best I could do. Kiwidude 02:17, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

  They're not bad, though they're kind of long distance. (Which is probably a good thing for a picture that would otherwise include identifiable people.) I bet you could get permission to use a picture from OTT or other literature though. Thanks for putting them up. -EDM 04:14, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

ASB Pres

• I seem to have run into a disagreement with my edit/removal. I removed an addition of a list of ASB presidents. I believe that the information is not necessary. Other school articles don't include ASB presidents. Thoughts? Kiwidude 17:30, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Student body officers change every year, so the information is too variable to include in a long-term project. Furthermore, and no offense to anyone, ASB officers are not terribly notable. -Will Beback 21:04, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Quick Facts

Anyone think the "quick facts" that were added are encyclopedic? they can be found on the external link i added. Kiwidude 06:25, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

• I think they're a bit redundant, esp. since they take up the whole article. Is it possible that some other stuff could be added about the school instead of just statistics? --RabidMonkeysEatGrass 00:00, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Wiseman Clan

should the wiseman brothers be permitted to use this article as a personal self-promotion vehicle?

Credo

I'm not sure if this is the case, but it seems like the credo is being displayed as four separate ideals. In reality, it is one four line credo. Again, I'm not sure if this is the case, just how it looks visually to me.

I have gone to Poly for 14 years and recited the credo every morning for a number of them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.144.203.234 (talk) 23:39, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Wiseman Bros.

I deleted the Wiseman brothers from the list of "notable alumni." It is a self-promotional move and advertising should not in any way be condoned here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eddy23 (talk • contribs) 04:02, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

New Picture

Someone, if possible, should change the picture. It has been up for a while and is somewhat outdated with regard to the look of that part of the campus. -Eddy23

Ezra Gosney

Please stop removing the references to Ezra Gosney being a eugenicist. I know that this fact may not be something the school is proud of, but his work as a eugenicist is much more historically significant and much more a part of his legacy than his philanthropy. Gosney was a eugenicist and, for better or for worse (though clearly for worse), that is a part of Poly. And yes, he was an inspirtation to the eugenics movement in Nazi Germany, and Hitler cited his work on a number of occasions. The school shouldn't be editing this page for its own means (see jyenpoly's edits) - it should be a page like any other. Stop removing these links simply becuase they might reflect poorly on Poly. It defeats the objectivity of this page. Thank you. Eddy23 (talk) 02:07, 7 May 2009

• What does Ezra Gosney's historical position on eugenics have to do with Polytechnic School? Nothing, that's what. Leave this highly emotional and controversial topic out of this article; it's irrelevant. 75.15.120.244 (talk) 05:01, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Actually, it is absolutely a part of the history of the school. When we discuss the founding of the University of Virginia, we mention Jefferson's association with slavery. When we discuss the Constitution, we bring up the bigoted positions of the founding fathers (at least in present times, and I am assuming that you have evolved as as an individual as society has evolved, though given your position I cannot be sure). The background of founders are those who establish are always valuable when discussing the institutions they were central in funding or creating. Clearly, in this case, Gosney's background in eugenics provides an encyclopedic value of great importance, and the dichotomy between what Poly stand for now and what Gosney stood for then is substantial and represents the progress that the school has made in moving away from his ideology. It is in every way relevant to note that there is a building named for a man who funded the school nearly a century ago and a man who also wrote books that personally inspired Adolf Hitler. This is a historical dark-mark of the school which is absolutely worthy to be on the wikipedia page for Poly. Furthermore, it is clear that you don't think his entire background is irrelevant (as you left in his "citrus tycoon" qualifier), meaning you only think his eugenics background is irrelevant, proving your bias and the inconsistancy of wanting to remove that second qualifier. And if you decide write a rebuttal, please do not do so under the anonimity of an IP address; it is cowardly and it is clearly a measure to disassociate yourself from an indefensible position. Thank you. Eddy23 (talk)
    • The way you have it, Eddy23, it might as well be called the Eugenics Polytechnic Polyeugenics School Of Eugenics Historical Interest. As far as anonymity, there are a lot of reasons people like to be anonymous on Wikipedia. Go read about it. As far as eugenics having anything to do with Polytechnic School at all, that is an interesting assertion and you have provided a lot of your personal opinion about it. I will be stripping everything related to eugenics out of this article, however, until you provide a citation or reference to show that even one other person has ever come to the same conclusion you have. 24.180.10.129 (talk) 06:21, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
      • I did not realize that Ezra Gosney's role in the eugenics movement was a "personal opinion." Thank you for enlightening me. And I suggest that you read the Wikipedia pages of the articles I referenced, which (unless you selectively edited them out, of course) will mention the negative aspects of their establishment and of their founders. This indeed would seem to demonstrate that other editers have come to the same conclusion I have. Unlike you, I can respect the opinion of others; however, in this case you opinion is entirely off-base and so cleary biased that it is a conflict of interest for you to be editing this page, given that you are probably an employee or somehow at or otherwise connected to the Polytechnic School. And as for anonimity, I am not asking you to reveal who you are or any of your personal information. Obviously, I do not do that. What instead I do is use an account so I can communicate with other editors (or, in your case, "editor") in a constructive and efficient manner. As it stands now, it is clear that you are afraid to do that because you know that you are fundamentally wrong and that, anonymously, you can unduely protect the institution with which you are affiliated in a way that you could not otherwise do if you had the courage to stand up to a real rebuttal.Eddy23 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 01:05, 31 January 2010 (UTC).
      • To he who responded to Eddy23's points, I completely and utterly agree with Eddy23 (so there's your one person that you mentioned earlier). You are indeed far off base in your assertion that his Eugenics past has nothing to do with the school. It is by no means his "personal opinion" (and it is interesting to note, as Eddy23 did in his first post, that you kept the citrus magnate qualifier. As someone who has done a fair amount of research on him, his greatest impact on human civilization was the establishment of the Human Betterment foundation which lead to all of the sterilizations, not his citrus growing. Don't spit on the name of objectivity). Gosney is, by all accounts, a blemish on the school. If I were a prospective parent and learned that a major auditorium were named after him, I would (in all honestly) think twice about sending my child there. So please stop saying that it has nothing to do with the school. It is indeed pertinent. As a final note, (along with your fairly laughable "Eugenics Polytechnic Polyeugenics School Of Eugenics Historical Interest" - after all, Eddy23 added one phrase and a picture), is that although you would disagree, ignorance is not bliss. It's just closing your eyes, plugging your ears, and hoping the problem goes away. And though you (clearly) fail to realize it, your and Poly's doing this does no good and perpetuates the greatest blemish and instance of utter hypocrisy in the history of the instutituion. Sof6692 (talk) 01:38, 31 January 2010 (UTC)