Talk:Illinois High School Association

Untitled

That's fine, John. I didn't think the conferences belonged under an IHSA entry since they have no official connection to the IHSA -- the IHSA does not organize or approve them. Thanks for getting the entry going. I was surprised to find it the other night. -- Scott

True, but it's a nice easy way to help sub-organize the state's high schools which ARE members of the IHSA. --JohnDBuell 04:16, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

That list page becomes an "orphan" if this page doesn't link to it. Most of the individual conference pages only link to the IHSA page, and none of them link to the 'list of conferences' page. I KNOW there's no official status, but as I said before, it makes it very easy to find the individual conferences in the state. --JohnDBuell 15:22, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, John, I was working from an old copy. I wasn't trying to delete the link. It's a tricky point, really. The IHSA does "recognize" conferences, I suppose, in that there is communication and information passed back and forth. But no one has to fill out IHSA paperwork or get IHSA approval to create a conference, as it is in some states. -- Scott

You might want to fix my wording at the "See also" link - oh and are you going to include anything on how our playoffs are structured? Regionals, sectionals, and super-sectionals in some sports before teams play "at state"? --JohnDBuell 03:54, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

• A note on the IHSA and conferences: The IHSA does use conference affiliation as a criterion for permitting teams into the State Football Series. Football teams qualify for the series first by winning their conference. After that, at-large bids are awarded based on win-loss record. This is the only real connection that I know of between the IHSA and conferences. LonelyBeacon 20:41, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Info box

I like the new info box (I hope it goes on all the state association pages), but the size of the logo is a little overwhelming. Would it be possible to scale it back by about half? Xuehxolotl 19:36, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Done. --JohnDBuell 20:42, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

March Madness

The following information appears at http://www.marchmadness.org/history.htm:

The IHSA tournaments continued to grow and develop. In 1963, the tournament moved to the huge new Assembly Hall on the campus of the University of Illinois and fans witnessed the most famous finish in history, when Chicago Carver beat Centralia on a last-second shot by a substitute named Anthony Smedley. "March Madness" grew as well. Beginning in 1973, the IHSA began using the term officially in its programs and on its merchandise. In 1977, the organization enlisted veteran Chicago sportswriter and Big Ten basketball referee Jim Enright to write the official history of the boys basketball tournament. The result was March Madness: The Story of High School Basketball in Illinois. As media technology advanced, the IHSA and KOST Broadcast Sales of Chicago produced March Madness: The Official Video History of the IHSA Basketball Tournament in 1989. Both the book and video were sold nationwide. During this period, the Illinois High School Association received trademark status for the term "March Madness" and registered the trademark "America's Original March Madness." The spirit of March Madness has subsequently spread from coast to coast, as other companies and organizations, including state high school associations and manufacturers, have been licensed by the IHSA to use these trademarks.

The text above implies that IHSA received trademark status for "March Madness" in 1989, though "this period" is open to interpretation. Is the second trademark worthy of inclusion in the article?

PlaysInPeoria 02:55, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I can add some further trademark information at this point. Xuehxolotl 04:55, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

New Look

I changed the "Recent Times" section around a little to make it read a little better.

Media Usage Restrictions

This new section is not written in an NPOV style. It contains a lot of speculation ("one has to wonder if this will be the next "March Madness" catastrophe for the IHSA. As no doubt larger daily papers in the state will most likely challenge…") Whether something "might" happen is not a story. I also don't see what the link to the article about the Lousiana state association has to do with this entry.

Controversies or "current issues" are fine, but this section needs major cleanup if it is to stay. 63.26.107.170 12:19, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I will remove it until it is rewritten. Xuehxolotl 19:10, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Added a bit

I added a small section (and citations) on the IHSA constitution and policies. I also added a table showing the sports, year first contested, and school with the most team championships. I decided not to do anything with classes because that would have made things far more complicated. LonelyBeacon 20:43, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Suggestions

I'm just copying this over .....

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question. Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.[?]

I checked WP:LEAD. Two pragraphs is fine. I tried my best to better summarize the article to come, though that might certainly be open to interpretation. LonelyBeacon (talk) 16:37, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 440 yard, use 440 yard, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 440 yard.[?]

I think I took care of this. LonelyBeacon (talk) 16:12, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Per Wikipedia: Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, if January 15, 2006 appeared in the article, link it as January 15, 2006.[?]

I think I took care of what this suggests ... LonelyBeacon (talk) 16:27, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

• Please reorder/rename the last few sections to follow guidelines at Wikipedia:Guide to layout.[?]

Definitely done! LonelyBeacon (talk) 03:10, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

• Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
• Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
• As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2][?]

I think this was all set. I checked all of the footnotes, and those at the end of a sentence were all post-punctuation. LonelyBeacon (talk) 16:46, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]
• You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, APR t 03:22, 18 January 2008 (UTC)LonelyBeacon (talk) 05:02, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Descriptions of notable medalists

I think we should be very cautious about not adding too much about notable person listed here to avoid getting into a WP:WEIGHT situation. The listing includes the sport/place, and why they are notable (in the Wikipedia sense). I think these lists will get very unmanageable if we start listing high school awards and records. This is very much in line with listing alumni in school articles. Those honors/awards/records can be noted on the athletes' individual article page. For example, Jon Scheyer is (for now) notable for his Duke career. He is not notable for being the 4th leading scorer in Illinois, nor for his "Mr. Basketball" award. LonelyBeacon (talk) 00:40, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Undue weight? That, IMHO, is absurd. Undue weight to reflect that the ballplayer "was the 4th-leading scorer in Illinois state history and named Illinois Mr. Basketball"? Is that a joke? You only have four people in history who are in the top four of scoring in Illinois history. You have only one ballplayer a year who is named Illinois Mr. Basketball. This is about Illinois high school basketball--and these are hallmarks, in fact the highest hallmarks one could have, in an Illinois high school basketball career. Reflecting this information is completely appropriate, and deleting it is INSUFFICIENTWEIGHT (I may have made that last phrase up, but imagine it gets across the idea).--Epeefleche (talk) 00:45, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

I beg to disagree, this is not about Illinois basketball, this is about the Illinois High School Association, which does not give this award. It is an opinion that this is this highest honor in Illinois high school basketball.

Since we are at an impasse, I will list this for comment. LonelyBeacon (talk) 00:50, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

I've no problem w/your listing it for comment, of course. But just to clarify -- Scheyer is reflected on this Illinois high school page because he played Illinois high school basketball, and his notability in that regard relate to: a) his being the fourth-highest scorer ever in Illinois high school basketball, and b) his being considered the best high school basketball player for one year that he played Illinois high school basketball. Why you would seek to delete that small sentence fragment reflecting those two salient facts under the guise of "undue weight" escapes me.--Epeefleche (talk) 01:02, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

I must disagree with you again. There are many people listed in the article that never played basketball. Jon Scheyer is listed because he has achieved notability. His notability has nothing to do with his high school career (he would not have an article here for that reason). His notability/article is very much about what he has accomplished at Duke.

If you are unsure as to why I am trying to toe a line, please read my reasoning in the RFC below. This article is about the IHSA, not about Jon Scheyer. He is listed here because he won a medal in an IHSA sponsored event, and then became notable later. This follows principles that are followed, generally, in schools articles: keep the description of listed alumni short and to the point; researchers can go to the article for more indepth information. When editors begin slowly editing in more and more information ("Mr Basketball", Conference player of the year to a notable conference, 4th leading scorer in state history, leading scorer for a notable school, etc where does it stop? That is where the "undue weight" issue comes in .... start listing more and more information about the individuals, and soon the article becomes as much about them as its true subject. Since it can be listed in his article, I don't see this as a censorship issue, nor is it a loss of information from the encyclopedia. I hope this clarifies my position. LonelyBeacon (talk) 01:17, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

RFC: Should lists of notable medalists carry more than minimal information?

Though I am not sure that a list of notable medalists is itself proper, the question is: Should the descriptions of notable medalists carry information beyond a brief description of their medal won, and the reason for their Wikipedia notabiility, or should there be a more open interpretation to include other high school honors the medalist has won? LonelyBeacon (talk) 00:54, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

• Remove - This article is not about individual athletes, nor is it about basketball in particular. I believe that lengthy listings of information bout individuals violates WP:UNDUE. While this is not strictly a "schools" article, the general principle for listing alumni is to include a brief summary of why they are "Wikipedia" notable. In this case, additional notation of their medal is given. To expand beyond this, especially to awards/honors that do not figure into the individual's notability, and are not given by this organization, creates listing of information about each individual's high school career that is, IMO, not relevant to this article about a high school association, even though it may be notable to the individual. LonelyBeacon (talk) 01:07, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
• Keep the sentence fragment in question (whether in this article or another article that the list is moved into). This isn't about "removing more than minimal information". It's about including minimal relevant information -- specifically, a highly relevant sentence fragment of just a few words that for some reason Lonely is inspired to delete. To give the above question context, it relates to the discussion here, and is being presented to address Lonely's assertion that he must delete the sentence fragment saying that player x (already listed, w/a descriptive sentence in the article) "was the 4th-leading scorer in Illinois state history and named Illinois Mr. Basketball". The article relates to Illinois high school, and the player is apparently already listed because he played Illinois high school basketball. I contend that his notability in that regard certainly relates to: a) his being the fourth-highest scorer ever in Illinois high school basketball, and b) his being considered the best high school basketball player for one year that he played Illinois high school basketball. Why Lonely would seek to delete that small sentence fragment reflecting those two salient facts under the guise of "undue weight" escapes me.--Epeefleche (talk)

I would ask that you strike any comments about me, and focus your comments on the article you are commenting on. LonelyBeacon (talk) 01:20, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Note to all: As I thought would be apparent, my above comments are not about Lonely. They are about the article, the policies, the positions he has taken vis-a-vis the two, and his edits/rationales in that regard ... but none are meant to (nor did I think they did) relate to the editor himself personally. I do not know Lonely as a person, but am sure that if I did I would have only laudable things to say about him personally. I do, as indicated above, question his edits/rationales/reasons for deleting the indicated sentence fragment. I apologize if I inadvertently said or implied more than that.--Epeefleche (talk) 01:36, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

• Remove - I would actually go a step beyond LonelyBeacon and suggest that the individual awards might be served better in a different article altogether. A quick survey of the other NFHS articles shows that they do not generally include *any* individual awards. Where they include awards at all, they are awards given to *schools* for excellence of some kind. Which would follow. If the article is about an Association, it is the schools and not the athletes who are members. I wonder if the student awards don't belong in a list article of some kind (although I would look for similar articles of that nature first before I went that route). Some of these awards (Illinois Mr. Basketball for example) already have their own articles with lists of winners. There are probably others here if we look. I do not want to discount the effort that went into compiling this list. But it does seem out of place here, given what one finds in the similar articles. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 03:08, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Two thoughts. 1) Wikipedia:There is no deadline. Just because other articles don't have the info, does not mean that it should be stripped from here, rather than inserted there. 2) I care less as to where the information is (happy to abide by any consensus--I see Nasty is just suggesting that the list be made into a separate article, rather than it be deleted from wp), than I do about the inclusion of the sentence fragment that Lonely is aggressively deleting. 3) The fact that Illinois Mr. Basketball has its own article just indicates that it is notable; that does not suggest of course that reference to it elsewhere is not appropriate. Though indirectly, that suggests there may be an issue as to whether other information on that list is notable enough to exist in any article. But of course, that's not the issue here, which is already getting moved from the main issue -- whether the sentence fragment that Lonely is seeking to delete MUST be deleted.--Epeefleche (talk) 05:35, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

I again ask that you maintain a discussion on the article, and not the editors. You continue to attribute motive ("aggressive deletion", "under the guise of undue weight"), and I again politely request that you remove comments about me from your current statements, and refrain from commenting about other editors in these situations in the future.

That Illinois Mr. Basketball article is uncited and unreferenced, and I have doubts that it meets the verifiability policy, given that, except in naming the winners, there is likely very little written about the award itself. Since articles about the winners do not directly address the subject of the award, I suspect the article is in contravention of the verifiability policy, making the award non-notable. LonelyBeacon (talk) 05:53, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Huh? "Aggressive deletion" refers to the ACT of repeated deletions without much time between them of a sentence fragment, despite discussion that IMHO legitimately leaves little room for viewing it as anything else. That is a comment on an ACT. "Under the guise of undue weight" refers to the proffered RATIONALE for the act. You the editor, I am certain, are a fine upstanding person, of strong moral fibre, and likely quite cute as well. As to your getting-off-the-track comment, notability is not measured by coverage reflected in a wikipedia article, but whether it exists, which I expect you will have little difficult finding in the hundreds of article here and here and the books here.--Epeefleche (talk) 06:02, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

I was unaware that "2 hours and 56 minutes constituted "without much time". When you say "under the guise", you are attributing motive, as in to say that I am acting in appropriately, and I further don't take kindly to the "likely quite cute as well" statement" as it comes across as condescending. If you disagree with me, so be it, but do not subtlely or overtly accuse me of anything. We each made two reversions, yet I brought this to the Talk Page. You did not. I am well versed in notability, and because you are a highly experienced editor, you know that G-hits are a poor argument for notability: none of your proffered links led to anything more than passing references to the award in the context of an individual winning it. This does not confer notability on the award. LonelyBeacon (talk) 06:21, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

I've redacted the offending comment with regard to cuteness. (It was, of course, an effort at mild humor -- the list that it was part of was simply a list of positive characteristics of people, and of course I have no idea whether you are cute, just as I have no idea whether you have the other characteristics I alluded to.) I only intended to discuss rationales when discussing "under the guise", and not the editor's personal characteristics. The hundreds of ghits do contain within them articles that I believe evidence the awards notability, and you are correct that the number of ghits itself is not the key factor here, but answering that in greater detail would again, I am afraid, be me taking the bait and following another line of discussion that is extraneous to this one -- the issue here being whether policy requires that the sentence fragment at issue MUST be deleted (whether that sentence appears in the article in question or is moved to a new article).--Epeefleche (talk) 06:47, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for redacting the comment. However, I also must disgree with your characterization of this RFC ... the question is not so much if policy requires deletion ... there are (overall) very few things that must be deleted from Wikipedia by policy, and I have no dout that there is no policy requiring this deletion. The question is: is the community consensus that the list should be added to in such a way(I think the term thrown around by some editors is "cruft", but I have not liked that term), or should it not. LonelyBeacon (talk) 14:04, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

• RemoveI believe It belongs on their own article pages. Clovis Sangrail (talk) 05:59, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
• Keep it as the way it is This section is like a list of "notable players" on Orlando Solar Bears or list of "notable alumni" on List of Syracuse University people, in that it serves the purpose of showing notable winners who have moved on to notable and significant careers. There are obviously going to be some people missed, while I wouldn't be entirely opposed to having an entire list of award winners, there's IMO no need to do such. This is a High School Basketball Association not the National Football League, most of the awards and winners themselves are not even close to being notable. However, these 20 or so listed are notable and stating their award won, year they won it and their notability is all that's needed.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 19:13, 17 March 2010 (UTC)