From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 10:17, 10 November 2007 (UTC) reply

A Note on Scandals

I removed a (referenced) section about a former teacher who was arrested recently in a different state for having sexual relations with teenagers. Although it is a substantiated claim and qualifies as a scandal, its relevance to this article is questionable. Unless any of the behaviors can be linked to (referenced) behaviors while the teacher was affiliated with the school, it does not belong in this article. This is the second "scandal" I've removed from this article. The first had something to do with cheating on exams (or something like that). Again, while this is somewhat scandalous, especially within the school's own community, whether or not it is notable is debatable. Every school has its discipline issues; few of these issues belong in an encyclopedic article about the schools. Please, let's keep things as NPOV as possible. Mitchell k dwyer ( talk) 06:40, 12 November 2009 (UTC) reply

I strenuously disagree and have recreated the section. You specifically state that information on scandals do not belong in the article "unless any of the behaviors can be linked to (referenced) behaviors while the teacher was affiliated with the school." Therefore, according to your own criteria, at least the 2012 sex scandal merits mention in the article because it directly satisfies your requirements; the teacher was a bona-fide employee at the time the sexual relations were alleged to have occurred, with news sources indicating the sex acts were themselves performed at a school sanctioned religious camp event. Furthermore, the coverage that the 2012 incident received on the local news media was not insignificant, especially in light of the confluence of LGBT issues with a deeply conservative religious school.
In addition, the 2009 Duffer incident is arguably notable for the direct public response that then-President Richard T. Bento made on the matter, rather than the more withheld response of the HBA administration to the 2012 incident. Moreover, the combination of the 2009 Duffer information and the 2012 incident arguably establishes a notable occurrence of similar events in a relatively short span of time, if not the beginning of a pattern, and therefore the issues deserve preservation. Hypothetically, if a third or fourth verifiable incident were to occur, it would be difficult to maintain your editorial stance.
The bottom line is that none of the information here is grounded on simple opinion or "somewhat scandalous" unsubstantiated rumors. This issue IS debatable and should not be subject to wholesale deletion as you have engaged in; NPOV can be maintained without a whitewashing of factual, verifiable content simply because it does not conform to your teacher-oriented viewpoint. I plan to make significant, substantive improvements to this page towards this end, including the woefully inadequate "Current" section which fails to mention the significant construction efforts undertaken at the high school campus as well as the community service undertaken by campus groups like Servant Group. Closedspace808 ( talk) 12:21, 6 March 2018 (UTC) reply

Middle School

I added a citation of the firm that designed the middle school and referenced their website Hataem10:08, 5 Aprile 2010 (UTC)

Presidents & Alma Mater

I added presidents going back to Stan Sagert and the Alma Mater. Opukahaia808 ( talk) 06:10, 22 February 2011 (UTC) reply

I updated the presidents section as Ron is now the new boss Closedspace808 ( talk) 12:27, 6 March 2018 (UTC) reply

I restored the Alma Mater that LibStar deleted. The reason given for the LibStar deletion was that the Alma Mater was "not required". This is not a valid basis for removing significant information that is commonly recognized to communicate a school's identity. It is also invalid as a basis because other things may not be required, like school mascot, school colors or motto, but are not deleted for the claimed arbitrary reason. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Opukahaia808 ( talk • contribs) 10:27, 30 June 2011 (UTC) reply

I improved the alma mater section as it is clearly derived from the KJV. Closedspace808 ( talk) 12:27, 6 March 2018 (UTC) reply

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Hawaii Baptist Academy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{ source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:01, 31 October 2017 (UTC) reply

"Scandals" section should be removed.

The section on "Scandals" should be deleted because it contains at least one factual inaccuracy. I do notice that this has been discussed on this talk page, and there is disagreement over its relevance or importance to a Wikipedia page about a private high school. The two scandals described do not have much relevance to the school's history or current profile. Their inclusion on the Wikipedia page magnifies the incidents unfairly. Furthermore, Jack Duffer was never the Christian Ministries Director; he was only a part-time Bible teacher. His criminal behavior was all done long after he left the school. The President of the school giving a quote about his shock over the matter does not make Duffer's crimes and arrest relevant to the school's history.

All private high schools have had "scandals." No other major private school in Hawaii has a Scandals section -- not because those schools don't have any past controversies -- but because there is a general understanding that many controversies that schools go through should not be highlighted or mentioned in a public page about a local, private high school. If the "scandals" mentioned are ongoing issues, then that's another thing. But both of those were isolated incidents. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HSMT2002 ( talk • contribs) 20:28, 19 June 2018 (UTC) reply

We do not delete entire sections because there is a claim of a factual inaccuracy. If you feel there is something inaccurate then change it (supplying citations to reliable sources as needed) to be accurate. Also, note that the previous discussion began in 2009. The response in March 2018 mentions that an additional incident has occurred in 2012. Leave the section in place while there is no consensus that it should be removed. Gab4gab ( talk) 21:26, 19 June 2018 (UTC) reply
Agree on holding up before deleting. My original statement offered two points: lack of relevance and non-notability. I maintain that the Duffer issue's irrelevance automatically makes it non-notable, but even if it were relevant, would it be notable? It depends on the purpose of the article, and I'm not sure a couple of sex scandals passes the notability test. There have recently (and much more publicly) been sex scandals at other schools, in Hawaii and elsewhere, whose articles don't include them. Is it because the editors of those articles just haven't gotten around to it, or has Wikipedia established a pattern of general (if possibly unspoken) agreement that these aren't notable in the framework of the article's purpose? If school articles ought to have such sections, which scandals pass the notability test and which don't? Does Wikipedia have precedent-setting discussion elsewhere? Mitchell k dwyer ( talk) 00:38, 20 June 2018 (UTC) reply
I strongly oppose deletion. The unsigned initial post in this thread by HSMT2002 opens with the entirely unsupported claim that the entire section should be deleted because there is “at least one factual inaccuracy,” specifically that Duffer “was never the Christian Ministries Director; he was only a part-time Bible teacher.” While claiming factual inaccuracy, the post is devoid of any verifiable facts or evidence to the contrary. The statement appears to be informed by personal opinion or experience, both of which are inadequate bases for deletion.
Further, Mitchell k dwyer’s current position is inconsistent with and sidesteps valid rebuttals to his 2009 post, where the user argued for a standard in which: “Unless any of the behaviors can be linked to (referenced) behaviors while the teacher was affiliated with the school, it does not belong in this article.” To reiterate, according your very own logic, the 2012 incident therefore merits inclusion because according to a published source, a bona-fide employee of the school was linked to such behaviors which occurred during an official school function. Ignoring rebuttal arguments made in good faith and suggesting that the original statement can be condensed to “lack of relevance and non-notability” is a misrepresentation that amounts to moving the goalposts, and is unconstructive. Closedspace808 ( talk) 10:57, 20 June 2018 (UTC) reply
It's not difficult to find school articles containing coverage of scandals, controversies or sexual abuse. Two recent examples are Petaluma High School and Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School. Also see the Category:School sex abuse scandals. Gab4gab ( talk) 16:39, 20 June 2018 (UTC) reply
Sorry; I didn't address the initial rebuttal because I am still processing it. I haven't looked at this issue in nine years; cut me a little slack if I need to get caught up. I do think a little bit of good-faith assumption would be nice, though: I wouldn't call it goal-post moving so much as rethinking the issue. Mitchell k dwyer ( talk) 21:59, 20 June 2018 (UTC) reply
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Talk:Hawaii_Baptist_Academy&oldid=1205702001"