![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Are the names of teachers at all relevent. In fact does a school warrent so much detail. If it were a state school no one would write such irrelevencies about it. Mtaylor848 ( talk)
I removed the following edit by User_talk:84.67.189.10, because it's just copied and pasted in with no attempt at context and it seems highly POV. Richard W.M. Jones 20:25, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
The latest few edits ( [1]) by an anon, adding a lengthy quote is not very encyclopedic. In addition, whom is the Richard W.M. Jones being cited? I have left a msg on the talk page of User:Richard W.M. Jones. Anyhow, it seems like a copyvio from the school's website to my mind, and I have thus removed it. └ UkPaolo/ talk┐ 19:26, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Are we sure GSAL counts as a 'grammar school'? Sounds highly dodgy to me. Debs 17:17, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
The article is,in my opinion, constructed like an advertisment. My attempts to moderate have been speedily wiped. Because of this I have decided to tag as of 15 Oct 2007. The tag will be removed when I believe that the article has achieved a neutral position. If it continues to be operated as an advertising page for GSAL then it risks being cut down ramatically and rewritten. Please don't remove the tag withoud prior discussion with me on this page. ANHL 09:18, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Quite agree about the 'goals of the new school' section; think that this should be cut down to a section about the houses only. I think that if that section was edited then the article would actually be OK. Don;t have any problem with the management positions section personally. ANHL 07:10, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Cleaned it up a bit and separated 'goals' in to 'goals' and 'houses'. Sign if you think that it is now neutral and that the tag should be removed... ANHL 12:37, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
User:ANHL is adding what looks to me like POV and opinion, with no citations and little hope of finding sources. This would be a case in point (how do you "actively discourage letters of complaint"? From what dark recess do you adduce the factoid "it has been said that if the merger had gone to the vote then it would not have gone ahead"? This is a second example. Which parents are we talking about here? You, ANHL? And an advert tag added. I'll probably get around to removing uncited POV from the article sooner or later, including these edits. -- Tagishsimon (talk) 12:51, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
If you do have any problem with the edits then please don't just blanket wipe them; discuss them here before deletion. If you don't have the time to do that then why not just give them the chance to sink or swim depending on whether people believe that they are accurate? P.S. If every passage of Wikipedia was fully cited then it would have never got off the ground. If you have the time then I can dig out some citations. ANHL 07:28, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
Image:GSAL CREST INDENTITY3.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 17:33, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Are the names of teachers at all relevent. In fact does a school warrent so much detail. If it were a state school no one would write such irrelevencies about it. Mtaylor848 ( talk)
I removed the following edit by User_talk:84.67.189.10, because it's just copied and pasted in with no attempt at context and it seems highly POV. Richard W.M. Jones 20:25, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
The latest few edits ( [1]) by an anon, adding a lengthy quote is not very encyclopedic. In addition, whom is the Richard W.M. Jones being cited? I have left a msg on the talk page of User:Richard W.M. Jones. Anyhow, it seems like a copyvio from the school's website to my mind, and I have thus removed it. └ UkPaolo/ talk┐ 19:26, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Are we sure GSAL counts as a 'grammar school'? Sounds highly dodgy to me. Debs 17:17, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
The article is,in my opinion, constructed like an advertisment. My attempts to moderate have been speedily wiped. Because of this I have decided to tag as of 15 Oct 2007. The tag will be removed when I believe that the article has achieved a neutral position. If it continues to be operated as an advertising page for GSAL then it risks being cut down ramatically and rewritten. Please don't remove the tag withoud prior discussion with me on this page. ANHL 09:18, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Quite agree about the 'goals of the new school' section; think that this should be cut down to a section about the houses only. I think that if that section was edited then the article would actually be OK. Don;t have any problem with the management positions section personally. ANHL 07:10, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Cleaned it up a bit and separated 'goals' in to 'goals' and 'houses'. Sign if you think that it is now neutral and that the tag should be removed... ANHL 12:37, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
User:ANHL is adding what looks to me like POV and opinion, with no citations and little hope of finding sources. This would be a case in point (how do you "actively discourage letters of complaint"? From what dark recess do you adduce the factoid "it has been said that if the merger had gone to the vote then it would not have gone ahead"? This is a second example. Which parents are we talking about here? You, ANHL? And an advert tag added. I'll probably get around to removing uncited POV from the article sooner or later, including these edits. -- Tagishsimon (talk) 12:51, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
If you do have any problem with the edits then please don't just blanket wipe them; discuss them here before deletion. If you don't have the time to do that then why not just give them the chance to sink or swim depending on whether people believe that they are accurate? P.S. If every passage of Wikipedia was fully cited then it would have never got off the ground. If you have the time then I can dig out some citations. ANHL 07:28, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
Image:GSAL CREST INDENTITY3.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 17:33, 2 January 2008 (UTC)