Talk:Polytechnic School (California)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Polytechnic School (California) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: 1 |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.
Wikipedians in California may be able to help! The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
Removal of or Major Edits to "PolyFields Controversy" section
I recommend removal of the "PolyFields Controversy" section (or at minimum substantial edits) because it violates multiple Wikipedia content policies:
- **WP:BLP** – Content must be written with extra care when living persons (including students, staff, or community members) could be affected. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material should be removed immediately.
- **WP:NPOV** – The section editorializes with subjective claims such as *“known for its exclusivity and privilege, is increasingly disconnected from the broader Pasadena and Altadena communities”*, which are not neutrally worded.
- **WP:V / WP:SYNTH** – The single cited source ([Pasadena Now](https://pasadenanow.com/main/altadena-residents-grateful-polyfield-plans-scrapped)) does not support the broad editorial claim. This amounts to synthesis and misrepresents the source.
In addition, the section was originally created by User:Codyeronl, who engaged in clear vandalism on another school article within minutes of adding this material. For example, see this diff at *Saint Francis High School (La Cañada Flintridge, California)*: diff. The same user’s edits (03:53–03:56 UTC, 11 March 2025) created and defended the "PolyFields Controversy" section: relevant edit history.
Given the poor sourcing, POV tone, and problematic origin, I believe the best course is to remove this section entirely. If there is interest in keeping some of the content, it should be rewritten in a neutral tone and supported with reliable, independent sources.
COTL2133 (talk) 18:56, 7 September 2025 (UTC)
- I’ve removed the "PolyFields Controversy" section per WP:BLP and WP:NPOV. The material was added by a vandal account, misrepresented its source, and contained subjective/defamatory language. Per policy, questionable BLP content can be removed immediately; if editors feel some version should be restored, please ensure it is written neutrally and supported by reliable, independent sources.
- COTL2133 (talk) 16:20, 8 September 2025 (UTC)