Content deleted Content added
added "back to UWC"---it has no time stamp, so has not been archived |
MiszaBot I (talk | contribs) m Archiving 1 thread(s) from Talk:IB Diploma Programme. (ARCHIVE FULL) |
||
Line 1,232:
To insert the information about the [[UWC]] and Hahn in the early development section requires a major re-working of the section. I think it is important, but I am unable to find the spirit to do it knowing it will only be attacked and disputed, despite the fact that it is verified, legitimate information. [[User:ObserverNY|ObserverNY]] ([[User talk:ObserverNY|talk]])ObserverNY
(adding to archive)[[User:La mome|La mome]] ([[User talk:La mome|talk]]) 11:44, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
== early development re-wording ==
With all due respect Truthkeeper, the following paragraph reads very poorly, is full of run-on sentences and what seems to be non-notable information re: the $2500 UNESCO grant. ''In 1948, Marie-Thérèse Maurette created the framework for what would eventually become the IB Diploma Programme when she wrote Is There a Way of Teaching for Peace?, a handbook for UNESCO, and in that year also The Conference of Internationally Minded Schools "passed a resolution" for International School of Geneva (Ecolint) to begin the work of creating an international schools program.[8][9] In 1961, Desmond Cole-Baker of Ecolint initiated the work of developing the idea, and his colleague Robert Leach organised a conference in Geneva in 1962, at which the term "International Baccalaureate" was first mentioned.[8][10] Leach received a grant for $2500 from UNESCO for the conference; and they were interested enough in the idea to promise additional grants.[8]''
Who hosted the "Conference of Internationally Minded Schools"? Was it UNESCO? I didn't edit your work. I just thought I'd bring attention to this paragraph here.[[User:ObserverNY|ObserverNY]] ([[User talk:ObserverNY|talk]]) 17:39, 4 September 2009 (UTC)ObserverNY
:The Conference of Internationally Minded Schools is the name of an organization to which Maurette belonged and because of which she wrote her booklet/essay. Which sentence is a run-on? [[User:Truthkeeper88|Truthkeeper88]] ([[User talk:Truthkeeper88|talk]]) 18:31, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
::Thank you for your reply. It seems to me that all of this information refers to UNESCO, and can be rewritten in a clearer manner. Here is my suggestion:
::''In 1948, Marie-Thérèse Maurette created the framework for what would eventually become the IB Diploma Programme when she wrote Is There a Way of Teaching for Peace?, a handbook for UNESCO. Also in 1948, <s>UNESCO hosted</s> The Conference of Internationally Minded Schools <s>and </s>"passed a resolution" for the International School of Geneva (Ecolint) to develop an international schools program.[8][9] In 1961, Desmond Cole-Baker of Ecolint revitalized the international school concept. His colleague Robert Leach, organised a UNESCO funded conference in Geneva in 1962, at which the term "International Baccalaureate" was first mentioned.[8][10] As a result of the work achieved at the conference, additional funding was secured from UNESCO.[8]''
::You also might want to address what happened between 1948 and 1961. You will find the Kurt Hahn was influential during that period. Regards, [[User:ObserverNY|ObserverNY]] ([[User talk:ObserverNY|talk]]) 22:41, 4 September 2009 (UTC)ObserverNY
The Conference of Internationally-minded Schools was not a conference nor was it funded by UNESCO; rather it was an organization for international schools. So, the piece stating that UNESCO hosted the international-minded schools conference is neither correct nor verifiable. The resolution that was passed was simply the result of a meeting based on questionaires sent to schools. As for stating "as a result of the work achieved...funding was..." if you'd like it to be that way, that's fine, but it is a passive construction unlike the current sentence. The rest is fine. If you make these changes I would ask that you be careful of ref placement, which brings me to an issue I'd like to have all the editors here comment on so we can have consensus: I reworked the section today to eliminate the choppiness in the writing, and I also moved the references to the ends of the sentences for better readability. But, I think we should have consensus about where to place references -- after each clause or place many references at the ends of sentences. Also, I've reformatted the Peterson and Fox sources to cite chapter titles, but don't know whether we want to do it so, or to use [[WP:CITESHORT]] with page numbers. Thanks. [[User:Truthkeeper88|Truthkeeper88]] ([[User talk:Truthkeeper88|talk]]) 23:39, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
:::Thank you for the clarification. Please see my strikes above and see if the re-wording meets with your approval. None of the references would be changed. Regards, [[User:ObserverNY|ObserverNY]] ([[User talk:ObserverNY|talk]]) 01:23, 5 September 2009 (UTC)ObserverNY
::::Should be the Conference of International-minded.... not The Conference.... Also, still not crazy about replacing an active sentence w/ a passive one. Otherwise I don't mind the changes. [[User:Truthkeeper88|Truthkeeper88]] ([[User talk:Truthkeeper88|talk]]) 01:49, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
:::::With all due respect, UNESCO is an '''it''' not a '''they'''. Not quite sure what you mean by passive/active. [[User:ObserverNY|ObserverNY]] ([[User talk:ObserverNY|talk]]) 10:00, 5 September 2009 (UTC)ObserverNY
::::::The source used "they" as in the people (they) at Unesco liked what they saw; can't find the rule for passive/active here, tho know it's in one of the style articles. Essentially the verb should be active (i.e Unesco gave funding. Ask yourself who gave the funding, and make that act on the verb, if possible.) If you're interested I'm sure the rule is somewhere on the net. [[User:Truthkeeper88|Truthkeeper88]] ([[User talk:Truthkeeper88|talk]]) 14:31, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
:::::::Having worked in journalism, I was taught that organizations are never referred to with personal pronouns. So unless your source is specifically referring to the diplomats at UNESCO and not the organization itself, the authors of your source inappropriately applied the pronoun "they." I'm still confused as to what you are looking for with regards to the phrasing. Would you care to suggest an alternative? Thanks, [[User:ObserverNY|ObserverNY]] ([[User talk:ObserverNY|talk]]) 17:12, 5 September 2009 (UTC)ObserverNY
::::::::The phrasing in the article now is an active sentence. If you want to replace with passive that's fine, but somebody at some point will come along and change it. The issue with it/they is due to [[WP:ENGVAR]] and see [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_and_British_English_differences#Formal_and_notional_agreement this] explanation. Either is correct. [[User:Truthkeeper88|Truthkeeper88]] ([[User talk:Truthkeeper88|talk]]) 18:51, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::You know, I'm really trying to work with you here, Truthkeeper. Can't you just offer up a sentence that you would be happier with? I don't CARE about 50 different rules. I want to know what would make YOU happy without specifically referring to the $2,500. I guess I'm just too stupid to understand what you are getting at and I'm tiring of playing your games. Please just re-write the sentence in a way you deem fit and let me see it. [[User:ObserverNY|ObserverNY]] ([[User talk:ObserverNY|talk]]) 19:07, 5 September 2009 (UTC)ObserverNY
::::::::::I'm sorry, I didn't realise the $2500 was at issue here. Why don't you want that in? I rewrote the sentence yesterday and am fine with it as is. [[User:Truthkeeper88|Truthkeeper88]] ([[User talk:Truthkeeper88|talk]]) 19:14, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
--[[User:Candorwien|Candy]] ([[User talk:Candorwien|talk]]) 18:43, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
| |||