Talk:City of London School for Girls

NPOV
This passage is obviously not from a neutral point of view: "The school has a growing academic reputation which is demonstrated in rising league table results, although some accuse it of anti-intellectualism in favour of exam performance. Most notably, the school achieves far higher results in the intellectually undemanding GCSE examinations than it does in the more challenging A-Level examinations. This stands the school in stark contrast to its brother school, where the trend is the exact reverse."  Who are the "some" who "accuse it" - can we have names? References? The point about GCSE/A level performance is interesting, but how can "results" in the girls' school be compared with a "trend" in the boys' school? This could be fixed by stating hard facts so that readers could make their own judgments: what years are referred to and what are the results relied upon for this point in those years? There may be a debate about causes - for example, does the girls' school lose some of its most able pupils to mixed sixth forms in other schools (such as Westminster School)? But the passage needs to alter the balance between fact and opinion first. Chelseaboy 09:41, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * I agree, I think there are many statements like excellent academic reputation, fantastic extracurricular opportunities, The pastoral role of the school is strong and it deals well that need backing up with sources; the article doesn't cite any of its sources. I have added a template highlighting that the article's neutrality may be disputed. Drum guy 23:10, 13 January 2007 (UTC)


 * however the sentence about the a level and gcse results and anti intellectualisum is quite true, but also npov is the part about the school being a hot house, however it is quite an accurate desciption. I must say this review gives quite a poor opinion of the school


 * girl 13 jan


 * I've just tried to fix the article a little now, but I still think it's got a serious point of view problem in favour of the school. It seems still to have been written like an advertisement for the school - I don't think the fact that "casual vacancies arise occasionally" really fits in an encyclopedia article.


 * I think it needs to have predictions about the future removed - I think "As its success rises" should be "As its success has risen". Everything needs to be backed up with a reliable, third-party source. I'll reference the history to the school's website, but, I think, that's probably all that the school's website can do as a source. See WP:SOURCES for more information.


 * Examples of ideas needing reference are: that the school has a 'reputation of a hot house', that it has an 'excellent academic reputation' - league table results may show it to be above average, but that's all we can say unless a trusted source has interpreted them to be excellent, or it is beyond doubt.


 * I'm probably being a bit harsh - it's just a pity that the article has both a biased point of view, and no sources. I've added a external links, which I've just found with a simple google search for City of London School for Girls. I've added a POV template, as I don't have time to do all the work that I think is needed. Thanks, Drum guy (talk) 18:15, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

I've made a spelling correction to the first paragraph of "Future Plans" and a couple or grammatical corrections to the second paragraph. But the second paragraph is so poorly written and polemical that it should probably be deleted altogether. it reads like somebody's personal gripe against the previous headmistress. (DK) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.43.97.121 (talk) 21:37, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Section removed
Removed the section: History of the City of London School for Girls, Précis of 'Daughters of the City' by Joan Carden, Jean Cardy, Rosemary Hamilton, Pat Bawden and Anne Savage. Likely not public domain. ed g2s • talk  02:13, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Seems a pity, unless you're sure it's not public domain. The editor has described it as a precis and, if it is a precis (and not cut and paste) it cannot be a copyright violation.  Copyright is in the exact words, not in the meaning or content.  Even if it is not a precis but a cut and paste job in breach of copyright, summarising what you have removed would solve copyright problems without losing information.Chelseaboy 09:53, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

London School Stub
I have removed the stub template as I believe the article is long and comprehensive enough to no longer be a stub. Drum guy 23:13, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Comment
good alumni Victuallers 19:20, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:City of London Arms.png
The image File:City of London Arms.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --14:53, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Categories for discussion: nomination of various 'Former pupils' categories
The 'former pupils' category associated with this school has nominated for renaming, along with all similar categories. Comments are invited at the categories' entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Occuli (talk) 15:22, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on City of London School for Girls. 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/20081026195100/http://www.goodschoolsguide.co.uk/school/city-of-london-school-for-girls.html to http://www.goodschoolsguide.co.uk/school/city-of-london-school-for-girls.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110713150117/http://www.kidslitquiz.com/world-final/2010 to http://www.kidslitquiz.com/world-final/2010
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070905021145/http://www.isinspect.org.uk/reports/2003/0223_03.htm to http://www.isinspect.org.uk/reports/2003/0223_03.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081026195100/http://www.goodschoolsguide.co.uk/school/city-of-london-school-for-girls.html to http://www.goodschoolsguide.co.uk/school/city-of-london-school-for-girls.html
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20130421044624/http://www.schoolsguidebook.co.uk/schools/City_of_London_School_for_Girls.html to http://www.schoolsguidebook.co.uk/schools/City_of_London_School_for_Girls.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:07, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Primary school
There is a city of London school for girls there is also a prep school which has recently moved to Grays Inn 45.141.134.10 (talk) 17:04, 20 November 2022 (UTC)