Talk:Troy High School (California)

Untitled

Haha, it's funny to see Troy in Wikipedia. The satellite image is cool. - Protokurios 02:08, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Troy

Haha, yeah. I saw schools like Stuyvesant and Andover had a nice page, and I wouldn't let us be shown up by them. Feel free to add to it!

Where did all the statistics come from (the rankings in California, etc)?

Most came from the school profile thing, which Troy actually puts out itself, it might be better to have a third party source or so, though, too. I'm not sure where the rankings came from, although Troy's site does have random statistics of Troy laying all over it. There's also this link C14 07:45, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

This article gives me the warm fuzzies

I randomly searched for Troy High School on Wikipedia and *poof*! There it is!

National Merit Finalists/Hispanic Scholars for 2006, SAT Scores, and Mr. Maruca (awwww) need to be updated. Additionally, the paragraph about AP Comp Sci should read "the best high school computer science program in the universe."

~Class of '06 rules! - Margaritasalt17 18:33, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

What happened to Mr. Maruca??? --EvilRobot69 19:33, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

He retried this year (2005-2006). Sad to see him go after all those years. Though, we still don't know who's gonna be the new principal. Probably Mr. MacIntyre. Excelblue

As long as it's not D'Amelia...although I miss the vice-principal he replaced a bunch. --146.165.82.239 17:25, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Just read up some things on the district website. New principal is going to be Mrs. Buchan, transferred from Buena Park High School. Ref: http://fjuhsd.k12.ca.us/documents/board/intouch_may_16_06.pdf. I don't think we should updated it though until the time comes. Excelblue 02:45, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Maruca retired? Whoa... that's frightening. Oh, and the class of '06 pales before the class of '05, thank you. --Jello 07:01, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Maruca, and also Fornell and Soroya (sorry if I messed up the spelling) retired.--Artega 04:45, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Fornell and Sawaya too? No wonder I can't recognize the schedules of current students, all the experienced teachers have retired! --Jello 00:27, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Troy High School, Michigan

I'm going to add another page about the Troy High School in Michigan. Michigan's THS has more National Merit Semifinalists than this school does, and has comparable standardized test scores, so it deserves an entry.

It does? "Troy High School had an incredible 22 National Merit Semifinalists, 2 Achievement Scholarship semifinalists& 9 commended students." from http://www.troycolts.org/troyhighannualreport.pdf. 39 > 22. And I believe the ACT is taken more in Michigan, so it makes sense that SAT scores are high (only motivated students take them). 129.59.32.153 08:30, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Speaking as a non-student

There's nothing wrong with putting up a wikipedia page for your high school, and maybe it does give you the "warm fuzzies", but does it really need a long list of standardized testing and national merit scores here? To me, it seems like bragging. A few examples from recent years should suffice.

In fact, the whole article reads like it was copy/pasted from the school web site. Again, there's nothing wrong with being proud of your high school, but perhaps having a nice concise wikipedia page is also something to be proud of? Sayhar 02:35, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I went through and removed a lot of unnecessary content. Let me know what you guys think. EvilRobot69 04:44, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree, but you did leave a small typo. I'll fix it216.100.88.208 (talk) 21:09, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Worst school?

There seems to be either vandalism or independent research in the introduction. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.205.34.127 (talk) 14:23, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Removed. Thanks for pointing it out. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 14:26, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

NJROTC

I'd like to post a quick query on here: should Troy's NJROTC get its own article or be made as a section of Troy High School (California)? I have seen a couple other JROTC articles created separately from the high school page, so I'm not quite sure as to what to do. Right now, I'm leaning towards making it a section based on WP:N... Any comments? Or is there a different policy for paramilitary programs that I'm unaware of? Thanks. -- Havocrazy 05:32, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Keeping it as part of Troy High School (California) would probably save a such-titled article from a speedy deletion. I'm not very sure on how far you can take "notability." Then again, many high school pages like these are just lists of achievements and programs. I'm having trouble locating such individual JROTC articles separate from their high school's pages. Can you name a few? And I doubt there is a different policy for paramilitary programs to this extent. If there is, then all pages would be individual or embedded. Then again, it could be worth a mention due to the visit to Nationals that happened in the 11-something month hiatus. MechStan (talk) 00:36, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Update

PSST should not cannibalize the Troy High page with their history of board members. That is purely unethical. It is against Wikipedia policy to post information about an article topic of which you are affiliated. Should PSST want to post such, I suggest they start their own article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.86.33.3 (talk) 16:36, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

The whole issue with Azia Kim probably warrants a mention in the page. [3] [4] [5] Maybe in the notable alumni section? Jumping cheese ^Cont@ct 04:14, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

There was a lot of press coverage surrounding the matter at that time, but mention of the issue in mainstream media is becoming extremely rare a few months after the initial "hype". I don't think the subject demonstrates long-term notability... +A.0u 23:27, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, whatever happened to CB Barrett? Class Of '81? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.215.203.11 (talk) 22:55, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Year of Founding

I was amused to see my edit reverted with the blithe and incorrect assertion that "1967 is the correct year" rather than 1964; if you would like to see some photos of my 1989 yearbook that says "25 years and it's worth it," I can supply them. Or perhaps you might like to take a look at http://troyhigh.com/alumni.htm, which notes that the Class of 1967 is having a reunion... how exactly can a school have a CLASS OF 1967 if it didn't even OPEN until 1967? 24.68.138.157 05:56, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

More proof: http://www.fjuhsd.k12.ca.us/pages/bond/4%20-%20Bond%20Meets%20O.C.%20Taxpayers%20Assn%20Criteria.htm 24.68.138.157 06:50, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Troy Tech Magnet Program Format

Is there anyway to make the prerequisite table not stretch that far (thus adding a horizontal scrollbar to the bottom of the page)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gloomfilter (talk • contribs)

I have re-formatted the section with the correct syntax. +A.0u 23:42, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Controversy section

I've deleted the controversy section; neither the Azia Kim item (see above) nor the asbestos concerns were sourced. References to each can be Googled, but as with the rationale above, it is a dubious proposition to suggest that either item, beyond temporary news coverage, demonstrates long-term notability. JNW (talk) 04:19, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

I accept that with the notability that you are citing. But the newest article on the Controvery section about how Amy Long got shafted by that fascist VP D'Amelia has multiple sources. It is notable- the ACLU for crying out loud filed a amicus brief on her behalf against the school, and the sources speak for themselves. Roylucier (talk) 05:17, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

I have trimmed down the Long section because it happened in 2005 when the student was 18 years old, meaning she is no longer a student (I went to Troy and absolutely refuse to believe the Oracle editor-in-chief would still be a student if she was 18 in 2005). Additionally, the sources given do not support all of the claims made. I have also renamed it to remove "-gate" controversy involving the student's name, as sources do not call it by that name. KuyaBriBri^Talk 22:42, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Whatever happened to this case, anyways? Did Ann Long graduate from Troy in 2005 and the whole thing was just forgotten? The paragraph seems incomplete without this information. KuyaBriBri^Talk 13:45, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

It was a pretty big deal and was even mentioned in the news back in 2005. I can't find anything on how it turned out, hopefully it turned out for the best either way. Whippletheduck (talk) 01:40, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

"to make an example out of her"

The only source that claims Long would be fired as editor "to make an example out of her" is this one, which states:

Long said D'Amelia called her to his office on Jan. 24 where she was admonished for not seeking the parents' permission. "He told me I either had to resign and make an example of myself for failing to do my job, or I would be removed," Long said.

Nowhere does it say D'Amelia wanted to make an example out of her; this is Long's summary of what D'Amelia allegedly told her—literally a "she said he said" scenario. Additionally, none of the sources given, as well as these: [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], explicitly says that D'Amelia initiated the disciplinary action; again, these were Long's claims. Per WP:BLP,which applies to any Wikipedia article, not just biographical ones,

Remove any contentious material about living persons that is unsourced; that is a conjectural interpretation of a source (see Wikipedia:No original research); or that relies upon self-published sources (unless written by the subject of the BLP; see below) or sources that otherwise fail to meet standards specified in Wikipedia:Verifiability.

— excerpt from Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (emphasis mine)

I am therefore removing all claims that D'Amelia initiated the discipline against Long, and that the action against her was intended "to make an example out of her." This is synthesis/OR derived from hearsay and does not belong, especially when dealing with living persons who are not well-known public figures. KuyaBriBri^Talk 14:16, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

The article also say's however that D'amelia wussed out and refused to answer any questions regarding the issue, directing them instead to the district office. As long as Ms Long's statement of making an example out of her are quoted from Ms Long's point (ie, and according to ms long, "to make an example out of her") AND immediately referenced, then it should be OK. Whippletheduck (talk) 01:36, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm 99.9% sure that it was D'Amelia who initiated the disciplinary action against Long, but once again the sources given only establish a "she said, he said" scenario. Inclusion of his name over "Troy administration" does not enhance the article context, as the principal and FJUHSD supported the disciplinary action. KuyaBriBri^Talk 14:58, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

You left out this part from WIKIPEDIA'S verification standards, the VERY first thing they say.

The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—that is, whether readers are able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether we think it is true. Editors should provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is challenged or likely to be challenged, or the material may be removed.

Therefore, all three listed sources all cite D'Amelia as the one initiating the action against Ms Long, as well as most of the additional ones. I remember when they showed this on KCAL channel 9 news and the cameraman and producer tried to question D'Amelia and he chickened otu of answering their questions, refering it to the District office. What a surprise.

In regards to your part about BIOGRAPHY OF LIVING PEOPLE, it similarly makes emphasis on NPOV, VERIFICATION, and NO ORIGINAL RESEARCH. The edit in question conforms to all three standards, therefore, effective immediately, the reference to VP D'amelia goes back into the article. User 74.206.0.172 should refrain from making the remark against D'amelia as well. Roylucier (talk) 02:24, 2 May 2009 (UTC) — Roylucier (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

This has been discussed briefly at WP:BLP/N and above. BLP explicitly requires things to be well sourced. This is not well sourced, as most sources say it is the administration as a body, not this one person who were at fault. Note that, one source specifically uses the term 'allegedly' which means they are not sufficiently confident that the claim is true. A second source does not mention D'Amelia at all. The third source mentions both D'Amelia and Cerrutti. Importantly none of these sources, nor even Long's claim really establish that D'Amelia was the primary person behind this, even if it is true he/she delivered the ultimatum that doesn't mean he/she was the person leading action perhaps simply the person given the responsibility to give the ultimatum. Ergo this is not acceptably sourced. The only thing we that is perhaps verifiable is that Long made the claim that D'Amelia delivered the ultimatum, but this doesn't seem particularly relevant to the controversy and is not what you're adding to the article. This is a very serious matter so please do not add it back until until a consensus is reached. Nil Einne (talk) 15:01, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Which right now, it is 4 editors have all found the sources supports that it was that facist D'amelia (I don't deny I hate the guy adn love the idea of using WIKI to make a strike against the SOB), and only two editors whom see it your way. So far, consensus is that the Sources do support. Again, the WIKI part I cited says it does not matter if it was TRUE, what matters is if it can be soruced and the ACLU, SPLC and the other thing are all excellent sources to be used. I'll wait till at least two others chime in, but once we have 3 votes, the reference to D'amelia should go back in. Assuming you are not D'amelia himself. BTW, too bad I could not get the KCAL channel 9 clip to use.....the Reporter confronted D'amelia with what he did and D'amelia looked like a deer in the headlights, you could see he could not stand up to an adult and only does well lording over students!!! Turnabout is far play, Mr D'amelia!!!! Roylucier (talk) 01:00, 4 May 2009 (UTC) — Roylucier (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

The Sources do confer that it was the VP in question. All Wikipedia standards ONLY require VERIFICATION, NEUTRAL POINT OF VIEW, and NO ORIGINAL RESEARCH. The sources confered seem sufficient to sustain that it was D'amelia that did this, although yes, I doubt he did it on his own. I don't see a problem with saying it was him. Whippletheduck (talk) 05:56, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

The two articles from the ACLU doesn't mention her name, and according to the sources this was an administrative action so her name is not relevant. I removed her name per WP:BLP policy: "The possibility of harm to living subjects is one of the important factors to be considered when exercising editorial judgment." --J^mundo 06:40, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Would you kindly read what I said earlier? The sources only establish that Long made the allegation that D'amelia gave the final ultimatum. That is quite a different thing from the allegation presented in the version I reverted that he/she 'lead' the adminsitration in that matter. And has already been explained by 4 people including me, all sources concur that it was the administration that was at fault, not D'amelia in particular. The only person who appears to single out D'amelia is Long. But this in itself is not sufficient to warrant inclusion because Long's claims are not inherently notable. What is notable is the wider controversy as evidenced by the sources, all of which as I and others have said several times blame the administration not D'Amelia in particular. BTW, Roylucier, if you went to Troy High School, your apparent inability to count doesn't say much for their mathematics teaching. Only you and Whippletheduck have supported the inclusion of this information here. 1+1=2 not 4. It appears an anon may have been involved in including the information in the article but they have made no attempts to discuss this and given the anon is also responsible for this [11] completely unsourced potentially libellious claim (please though, no irrelevant discussion of the sexuality of the vice principal), I think we can safely ignore this anon. And even if you do count this anon, that's only 3, still not 4. Incidentally, see WP:NOVOTE Nil Einne (talk) 11:42, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

I have tagged Roylucier's signature on this discussion with the SPA tag, as he/she has made no contributions to Wikipedia outside of this subject. Roylucier, if you have a grudge against D'Amelia, I suggest you take advantage of the many free blog sites available on the internet. Wikipedia is not a soapbox. I have already disclosed at WP:BLPN that I went to Troy High School, but graduated before D'Amelia became assistant principal, and before Ann Long became a student. KuyaBriBri^Talk 14:20, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

In the interest of transparency, Roylucier has been indef blocked for defamation per my report at WP:ANI. I am not trying to suppress any opinions that disagree with my own; however, Wikipedia is not a battleground and it is abundantly clear that Roylucier's account existed on Wikipedia solely to voice his grudge against D'Amelia. KuyaBriBri^Talk 16:57, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Not being part of the discussion, I tried to reword it after reading the general commentary about it and coming in cold turkey with few preconceived notions. I kept the first two controversies and eliminated subtitles. What happened in the student editor case? Or has it been resolved yet? Maybe needs ONE more sentence. The slurs were mere "activities", unsupported by anyone (not really supposed to be taping people. Funny that didn't come up! ) Anyway, like kids getting detention or something. Pretty low level. Different if there were multiple sides and contentions, etc. Student7 (talk) 20:00, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

WP:BLP applies to this page also

Anything here that is possibly defamatory and is not well sourced should be removed. Dougweller (talk) 16:07, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Removed one comment as defamatory. All other defamatory content is intertwined with on-topic discussion, and I don't want to walk the line of appropriately versus inappropriately editing other people's talk page comments. KuyaBriBri^Talk 16:33, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Alma mater

Resolved

Alma maters are inherently copyrighted and are not allowed on Wikipedia unless express permission is given by the copyright holder. I would ask that the Alma mater section be removed from this article. ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 00:18, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Not done for now: Gain consensus before adding the {{editprotected}} template to the page. If there are no objections after a short period of time, feel free to re-add it. - Rjd0060 (talk) 03:36, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

I do not object to Wadester16's proposal. The protection is due to BLP concerns on a different section (see above). KuyaBriBri^Talk 03:53, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Last time I checked, copy vios sit much higher on the totem pole than wiki consensus. An alma mater is a written work, and like all written works, is copyrighted by default unless the rights are given up by the author or the work is in the public domain. I see no evidence of either here. Therefore, delete until said license is found. ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 04:04, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Please see the article history. It is protected due to BLP concerns. Wadester16 wishes to remove content that is, in his opinion, a blatant copyright violation—a completely separate issue on a completely separate section of the article. To reiterate, please delete the entire "Alma Mater" section. KuyaBriBri^Talk 04:14, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

• I've gone ahead and deleted the Alma Mater. The copyvio issue is correct. It is also inconsistent with the Wikipedia practice of not including source material (which belongs on Wikisource if free). Alma maters are no longer in the schools project outline either. For those reasons, I think it was appropriate to make the edit without waiting for a talk-page consensus.   Will Beback  talk  07:13, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
  • Thank you. ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 14:38, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

BLP and the need to mention names

The names of individuals, minor or adult, don't need to be mentioned for a single event; see BLP: Presumption in favor of privacy. We wouldn't mention the name of the coach who led a basketball team to state championships. By the same token, listing faculty involved in a decision isn't terribly important.

Since BLP is such an important issue, objections to this would be best handled at the BLP noticeboard. tedder (talk) 01:45, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Racial slurs by school admins issue.

Just posting this here so it can't be said an attempt was made to deal with the edit warring by Radr4life. Basically, Radr, you need to provide source about this lawsuit, and even then I don't think it is notable enough to warrant inclusion. Danparker89 (talk) 05:24, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 5 April 2013

Hello, my name is Geno Rose, and I was directly involved in the "Racial Slurs" investigation at Troy High School in Fullerton CA back in 2010. On the Troy High School Wiki page, there are some inaccuracies in the "controversy" section, which have come to my attention of late. I have found that these inaccuracies may be hindering my chances at employment in some cases. If you would like to know exactly what happened, and the result of the investigation, I would be happy to discuss this with you and give you documentation if needed. Please email me back at genorose@yahoo.com so we can get this issue straightened out sooner rather than later. Thank you so much for your time.

Geno Rose Physical Education/Health Instructor Orange Lutheran High School Orange, CA.

Genorose (talk) 02:49, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello. I will preface my comments by saying that although I have no reason to doubt that you are Geno Rose, I must treat you as I would any other editor because of how easy it is to impersonate someone on the Internet. And in the interest of full disclosure, I am an alumnus of Troy High School, but as far as I can tell I graduated before any of the individuals mentioned in this case were employed there.

According to Wikipedia's policies on biographies of living people, it is preferred that individuals who are not relatively well-known should not have their names mentioned on Wikipedia articles as long as it is possible to omit their names without losing context. As you can see above, I invoked this policy on a previous "controversy" on this article. I have no problem with removing the names of the three (presumed to be) living persons mentioned in this section.

To take this a step further, since this article is about Troy High School, we must consider this "controversy" in terms of its lasting impact on the school, not on any individual people involved. As it stands the "controversy" is sourced to one local newspaper article, which only mentions the results of a school board meeting, and includes some sketchy details as to why the discussion at that board meeting was occurring in the first place. Any "controversy" mentioned on this article needs to have reliable sources that establish that it received widespread media attention or had a lasting impact on the school. One article in small community-based newspaper that publishes in a large mass media market does not establish this.

I have therefore removed all mention of this "controversy". If an editor in good standing can find additional sources that establish that this "controversy" received widespread media attention or had a lasting impact on the school, I will not object to re-adding it in line with those sources and without mentioning the names of living persons. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 14:51, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Response to Edit request on 5 April 2013

It seems that I have been fighting the wrong battle. My bad.Csamantello (talk) 21:46, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Troy High School (California). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070525023330/http://fjuhsd.k12.ca.us:80/pages/bond/4%20-%20Bond%20Meets%20O.C.%20Taxpayers%20Assn%20Criteria.htm to http://www.fjuhsd.k12.ca.us/pages/bond/4%20-%20Bond%20Meets%20O.C.%20Taxpayers%20Assn%20Criteria.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 12:01, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Troy High School (California). 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070212164646/http://fjuhsd.k12.ca.us/pages/sarc/SARCTRHS0203.htm to http://fjuhsd.k12.ca.us/pages/sarc/SARCTRHS0203.htm

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) 01:56, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Removal of controversy section

Hi everyone. I am considering removing the controversy section. The list is getting too big and can be considered defamatory. If you are in support of or oppose this idea, please reply here and state why. CrispyCream27 (talk) 21:07, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Replacement of controversy section

Those of us who lived through these controversies recognize the import of bequeathing these stories to future Troy students. Many of us came to Troy expecting to encounter infallible faculty--for how could Troy have amassed its reputation without them? What we found was that our teachers, administrators, and, at times, our superintendents placed the interests of themselves and the school's reputation above the needs of students. To hide these stories from future, current, and past students would be to actively ignore the rich history of Troy High, a history that includes our lowest points as well as our highest. This is not defamation; Troy's staff is largely superb. It is education: we deserve to have access to Troy's successes and failures alike, for we learn from our mistakes and can hold ourselves to higher Warrior standards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:6C50:7680:1200:5D05:E1C7:357:E910 (talk) 06:19, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• En-troyhighschool.ogg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:37, 18 September 2020 (UTC)