Jump to content

Talk:IB Diploma Programme

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Victoriaearle (talk | contribs) at 13:03, 28 June 2010 (→Recent edits: more). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
WikiProject iconEducation Unassessed High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of education and education-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EducationWikipedia:WikiProject EducationTemplate:WikiProject Educationeducation
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sourcing from www.ibo.org vs www.triplealearning.co.uk

I see the point about the IB website (and publications) being a primary source, but I'm not convinced that it's helpful to use www.triplealearning.co.uk (a small UK company) as a source instead. Their website says (here) that "We aim to update our sites regularly, and may change the content at any time. If the need arises, we may suspend access to our sites, or close them indefinitely." Anyway, this is a commercial site set up to sell IB materials, so it isn't really an independent source. If they are just summarizing what the IB's materials say, that would make them a tertiary source anyway. So if there's no objection, I'll restore the links to www.ibo.org in due course. All the best - Pointillist (talk) 23:34, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What's sourced to www.triplealearning.co.uk? I must have missed that. I've only cleaned up the sources, and removed the application that was a MS Word file, which truly is a primary source. Anyway, we should use the best sources, so no problems with removing anything you see as troublesome. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 23:47, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the prompt feedback, Truthkeeper88. Triple A Learning was the reference that remained after deleting the MS Word citation (this diff). I'll try to find a better source tomorrow and then we can discuss if necessary. BTW, have you good people established a central talking point for IB articles? It would be useful to have a note of the major gaps. I can see Group 4 Physics needs expansion so I might attempt that. - Pointillist (talk) 00:15, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you can't find a better one place a {{fact}} there until one is found. I should have noticed that I left a bad one behind, but now have been through the references and see much to be improved. Also, feel free to work on any of these articles. Most of the editors seem to have moved on after last summer's fiasco. I wanted to clean up this one and then consider a review, but it still needs work. Nonetheless, outside editor feedback via a review would be valuable for some of the trickier section, in my view. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 01:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Notability?

In my view this article should not present anecdotes about individual non-notable incidences at specific schools. The sources added by the IP 68 shows information about a discussion to eliminate the IBDP in the future at one school, that 3 IB teachers have been made redundant at another school, and that discussions to eliminate the IB existed at another school. None of the sources show that the IBDP has been eliminated. If the IB is being eliminated due to cost problems (which well may be true) I'd prefer to see a reliable source mentioning such. However, it would be good if we can have consensus here to avoid pulling in information from each and every school unless there is truly notable event. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 18:46, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First, let's evaluate the claims against the sources. The thepilot.com article doesn't say that the IB program was eliminated. The smdailyjournal.com article says "Programs like international baccalaureate or access to art and music will no longer be available" and attributes it to budget cuts. And the roanoke.com article says they have "plans to phase out the International Baccalaureate program" and will instead shift to AP due to the "availability of a grant from Virginia Advanced Study Strategies" and that "Declining enrollment in the IB curriculum prompted school officials to study it."
So based on that, I'd say that "Some school districts across the United States have eliminated the IB Diploma program due to cost saving measures, low enrollment and charges that IB weakens and eliminates Advanced Placement (AP) courses" is a gross misstating of the articles. The articles don't make any judgment about the IB program itself, and they all seem to be due to outside forces like budget issues. As such I've removed this text from the article.
As a side note, 68.194.254.7 is ObserverNY, and there's another sockpuppet investigation open. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 19:08, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, um, this can't keep going on. I've warned the new IP, 68.98.60.87, about 3RR. Honestly I'm not convinced that this is another sockpuppet of Observer. The first number in the IP is correct, but the rest is wrong. And if you do a lookup on both IPs, they're in very different locations. It might be a meatpuppet which is another story altogether. Either way, we can't keep going back and forth on this page. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 04:29, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Declining enrollment IS a judgment of IB, itself. High cost IS a judgement of IB, itself. Because a school district is 'considering' eliminating IB, it's not germane to the article?! I would think someone interested in the IBDP would want to understand the reasons why some school districts might reject it. And it most certainly is relevant to the 'Reception' section of the article. Sorry I must just be a dumb meatpuppet with a gun to my head, but I don't understand your illogical censorship. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.98.60.87 (talk) 15:44, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's faulty logic. The articles don't say "The IB programs were declined because they charge too much" or "The IB programs are being phased out due to lack of enrollment". They point to external forces. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 15:46, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The section needs to be rewritten to reflect the specific sources but the problem is that those three schools themselves don't constitute notabilty. If a independent reliable source is found that verifies a trend exists to eliminate the IB due to cost considerations, then that would be fine to use. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 15:50, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello ObserverNY. I thought you'd be back. It's easy to spot you as you seem incapable of using definite articles and you use capitals for emphasis rather than bold. Both your trademarks. --Candy (talk) 14:52, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you are referring to me... you got it wrong Candy girl. I am not ObserverNY. You do not know who I am. Question is, Do you know who you are? ;) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.98.60.87 (talk) 01:58, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

unofficial certificates programme

Removed the whole part and replaced it with a simple factual statement. An "unofficial certificates program(me)" not mentioned by the IB apperas the me to be original research. --Candy (talk) 23:16, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Good article nominations

FYI - the article has been nominated for GAN. As the work here was a group effort I'd like to add other editors as co-nominators, but I don't know who is around to add. Those of you still reading, and willing to help take this through the review process, let me know here and I'll add names to the nomination. Cheers. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 14:54, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Am still around and reading :) I can try and help your through. --Candy (talk) 21:12, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Truthkeeper and Candy--I am still lurking and have some time now to help out if you need it. Just let me know what needs to be done. Cheers! La mome (talk) 23:45, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Good to hear from both of you. When the review is opened by a reviewer I'll add co-nominations. Review comments will be posted here to the talk-page. I think it's a good idea to get another set of eyes to this article, and to get some feedback. We'll see what the comments are and then decide what needs to be done. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 12:16, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
TK, okay, I'm in. I'm not around a lot and, when I am, I'm usually doing anti-vandalism work. But I'm happy to help, when possible. Give me another month, though, and I'll have plenty of spare time. ;) Regards, • CinchBug • 21:36, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
According to Jay Mathews, your information on Harlan Hansen is WRONG. Fix it! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.108.21.254 (talk) 10:55, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This edit [1] in February created a problem with the chronology, recently fixed. Presumably that's what you mean. If not, please be more specific. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 14:47, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quick update: there's a bit of a backlog at GAN, so I've delisted this for now, but will most likely relist again in a few weeks. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 13:13, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect History

1964 Reference to Harlan Hansen removed - incorrect as per author of Supertest - Jay Mathews: "As for Harpo, it looks like the Wikipedia guys misread the book. I just looked at that part and it says Harpo and co. got the Ford loan in 67." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/community/groups/index.html?plckForumPage=ForumDiscussion&plckDiscussionId=Cat:a70e3396-6663-4a8d-ba19-e44939d3c44fForum:5093b309-eb0a-47e2-b777-ea68b9dd478eDiscussion:3111f4d7-129f-4e52-b0cd-a2603a7dda15&plckCurrentPage=1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.194.254.7 (talk) 00:31, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • The history is not incorrect. According to the reliable sources that verify the information, ISES was established in 1964 and Harlan Hanson was involved with the establishment of ISES. The sentence you changed does not mention a loan. The loan information is further down the section, because it was secured at the end of 1966, and the information is reliably cited, although not to Mathews. The link you've posted is to a blog, and not considered a reliable source.
  • Moreover, the information you've added about special needs is in this section, to avoid having an overly long table of contents, per WP:TOC. Now it exists in two places, and thus is redundant. Will another editor who watches this article please revert the IP's edits, as I've already reverted once today. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 00:53, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Since I had to revert manually, I think I accidentally switched the order of Hanson and Petersen. If this is a problem, please change it back to the previous order.
Looks like ONY is back at at as an anon IP.Tvor65 (talk) 02:24, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Shouldn't make a difference. Will fix if it's a problem.Truthkeeper88 (talk) 02:38, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In order for something to be "redundant", it must appear in some other location in the article. There is no mention of "special needs" anywhere in the article, therefore it cannot be "redundant". Do you have something against children with special needs, Truthkeeper? Does that make the IBDP look bad if children with disabilities can take it? As to the "blog" - it is Jay Mathews' blog, his post, from the Washington Post, and he is the author of the cite you incorrectly extrapolated from. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.194.254.7 (talk) 12:02, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have something against children with special needs, Truthkeeper? IP, that's not WP:CIVIL. Please comment on contributions, not contributors. TFOWR 12:06, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
...and note that you are at WP:3RR - discuss your proposed changes, reach a consensus, and then make the change. TFOWR 12:08, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:IB_Diploma_Programme&oldid=370594078"