Talk:Monmouth School/Archive 1

NPOV Please!
Goodness this page is declining into POV-ness! "It is the only boarding house with a garden" well so what! As well as this being a little liberal on the truth front, the addition of a specific Chapel House section (the point of which is debatable in its own right) without any other houses is ever so slightly biased. I have had to correct this sort of thing on here before, when only boarding houses were mentioned in the house list for example. Could we please keep the rivalry inside the school bounds? Dan 21:45, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree, why on earth does Chapel House have its own section? Either this should be removed or incorporated into a section which covers each of the houses in more depth. SillyWilly
 * The School has far more interesting buildings than Chapel House. It's pretty POV to keep it in on its own. Perhaps a section on the different buildings in the school - in particular the original part of the school, the Chapel and Library Anthropax 20:01, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I've removed the quote about Chapel having the only garden since its not true. School house has a garden and I think that you could count that little bit near Wierhead as a garden too. Charles Baynham 23:19, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Sorry but can you lot stop changing the section about boarding?! New House is not the holder of the cup, School House is, so stop changing it to New House!

The Grange
Do other users think The Grange needs a small section here, as a feeder school to MS? Anthropax 20:01, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

What a certain magister who will remain nameless would think of that I don't know... I agree that it would be the best place and that it is necessary. Whether I shall ever get around to doing it, I don't know.Dan 20:02, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Should The Grange not have its own page? There's a list of prep schools here. Probably there isn't enough information available for it to be anything more than a stub. SillyWilly 22:09, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Prince Edward
I hate to be typically pretensious, but the fuller correct form for adressing to the aforementioned person is: His Royal Highness (or HRH) The Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex. It may sound odd, but it's correct. Unless you'd rather, which is acceptable, just HRH the Earl of Wessex? Dan 20:08, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * My apologies, it doesn't sound grammatically correct to me, but I cannot claim to know the protocol for addressing royalty! I accept your revision. SillyWilly 22:03, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Alumni
In what sense was Tom Little "the youngest person to die in world war II"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.85.217.239 (talk) 12:07, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't mean to steal anyone's thunder, but how famous does someone have to be to warrant inclusion under the Alumni heading? Would a sensible rule of thumb be that they should have their own Wikipedia entry? SillyWilly 18:10, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Agreed - I'm removing the two rowers (Ben Curtis and Rob Hollis), as neither have their own page. Have either won anything? I guess if they have, but don't have a page then they could still be included. Anthropax 14:41, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

After some background checking I've just deleted Liam somebody and Dan Goodson, neither of whom deserve to be on here at the moment, although good luck to them both for the future. Will also link the Wayne Barnes guy to his own (fairly lengthy) Wikipedia page, but blimey, from the looks of things he's not really considered to be any good, is he? Never mind. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Quickpint (talk • contribs) 14:08, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

I've just added Daniel Llewellyn Williams to the list but I just realised that he doesn't have a wikipedia page. He has been in Torchwood and numerous West End Plays though... Cymrog (talk) 12:51, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

In Welsh
In the Welsh language this is Ysgol Trefynwy, right? Paul Silverman 13:21, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but it's never called that. For a start it would be pretty ironic if it were, as the school doesn't offer Welsh as a subject. The local comprehensive can however be: "Ysgol Gyfun Trefynwy"- Monmouth Comprehensive School. The sites at the link you give, I think, refer to that school. Dan 21:19, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually Dan it does offer Welsh if you ask nicely and you are taught by the teacher from the Comprhensive school. I studied Welsh to both GCSE and AS-Level. Cymrog (talk) 22:22, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Houses
I think that the section about Chapel house should be demoted to a sub-section in a section "Houses", or even put into a table. That way all the other Houses could be mentioned or left space to be mentioned whenever someone with the knowledge gets around to it. Charles Baynham 23:22, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Famous Old Pupils
Would it be possable to add a list of famous old pupils? 80.41.236.212 15:24, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Yes, this is what is trying to be achieved under the Alumni section. Charles Baynham 23:24, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

School Motto
Does the school have a motto? User:Brenont 21:25, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes - It is "Serve and Obey"

KJP1 (talk) 21:01, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

BIAS
Hello charles baynam and daniel wilkes. I know you are surely both massive fans of the school and writers for the lion newspaper so obviously are assigned to "guard" the wikipedia page, however the criticisms of the school must be left on the page even if you do not like them. Even wikipedia criticises itself on its page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spindoctor69 (talk • contribs) 00:07, 23 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi, no one is assigned to guard this Wikipedia article, however, unsubstantiated and uncited criticism of the school could be considered original research and may be libellous and should be removed. Journalists for The Lion will be very familiar with providing balanced coverage of a subject, judging by your edits, you could learn a great deal from them SillyWilly (talk) 11:59, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Notability and Sources
After loking at the recent tag, I read the article and it is true. There is nothing to say that this organistation is notable or even worthy of an article on Wikipedia. There are no sources and the external links are all to the school's own websites. This article needs either a thorough re-write or a quick deletion. 190.246.82.69 (talk) 02:08, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

NPOV Dispute
It seemed a little ridiculous that such an uncontroversial topic should be tagged in this way. The tagging appears to result from the animus of an individual contributor. I have therefore sought to edit out those comments which might be more suitable for a prospectus for the school, or indeed for a particular house, and, having done so, have removed the NPOV tag. Perhaps any contributors wishing to re-instate the tag could first indicate those sections of the text to which they object. This would enable further improvement. It's certainly true that the article needs more facts, in particular more on the history of the school and, perhaps, on its architecture, although there isn't much that's particularly meritorious. I've added a list of headmasters and a few references as a start and will do more as time allows.

KJP1 (talk) 19:10, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I added tags to specific sections where no sources are given whatsoever. Other sections, such as the section on facilities only include references from the school website itself - this does not meet Wikipedia's guidelines on sourcing. Assuming that people from the school were involved in the writing of this page, it makes me question the quality of studies at the institution.--86.147.223.141 (talk) 13:04, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

The criticism regarding the lack of references is well-made, although the motivation still seems rather questionable. I've sought to address this, including the issue of the school's religious affiliation. However, the section entitled "The School Today" is problematic. In effect, it's the school's prospectus. I'm not sure there's any solution but to delete large parts of it. In the interim, I've tried to remove the POV aspects.

KJP1 (talk) 07:51, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

In the main, it's now better sourced. However, the section on Houses is a problem. Is it really necessary? It seems, in essence, just to be a list, with a little extra information. Could it be removed? Or can anyone reference it properly? KJP1 (talk) 09:33, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Have "solved" the problem of lack of sources re. the Houses section by amalgamating the details into the "The School Today" section. Well aware this may not please everyone, so apologies in advance, but it may help to prevent further unwarranted and ill-motivated attempts to suggest that the article is biased. KJP1 (talk) 12:16, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Query for User:Matthew_Pryce-Barnett
Hi, can you give a reference for the Stock Gatehouse being Grade I listed, as I don't think this is right? Also, ever thought of registering? KJP1 (talk) 22:56, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Have taken out the Grade I listing ref. as I really don't think it is. Newman doesn't say it and, more persuasively, I can't find it in Coflein or Listed Buildings Online.  I should have said why I think it would be helpful to register - if you do, you'd have a Talk Page and I could have raised these points with you there.  I see the School is the one topic you've edited - have you a particular interest?  I was there, but quite a long time ago now.  All the best.  KJP1 (talk) 04:58, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
 * As previously discussed, we can't have the article claiming Newman lists it as a Grade I listed building when he doesn't. If you can find a source, great, but I'd be surprised as I really don't think it's Grade I quality.  KJP1 (talk) 09:52, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
 * It's Grade II, as you can see here KJP1 (talk) 09:59, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Alumni revisited
In the discussion above, it was suggested a minimum criteria for inclusion as an alumni would be that the subject has their own Wikipedia entry. I actually wonder whether this is sufficient. Looking at a number of the Sporting and Arts and Entertainment alumni, their Wikipedia articles are of very poor quality. They are often short, poorly referenced - if referenced at all, and a number have all the hallmarks of autobiographical entries, created either by their subjects, or by collaborators. That said, I fully appreciate the very great difficulties of deciding on alternative criteria. Hence, I'd appreciate others' thoughts. KJP1 (talk) 18:20, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Further to the above, I have tried to provide citations for all of the listed alumni, as well as the Headmasters. To this end, I have deleted the following:


 * Paul Groves (poet) - of the three citations on his article, two are dead links and the third says nothing about his education;
 * Mark Porter (general practitioner) - of the citations on his article, one's to his website, one's dead and the others say nothing about Monmouth School.

If these are to be re-instated, can they be reliably sourced. KJP1 (talk) 10:15, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Name Change
Now the school has changed its name, so Monmouth Schools is the name of the family of schools, and the Boys and Girls schools are named appropriately, plus the prep schools and pre-prep, would it would make sense to change the name of this page to the Monmouth School for Boys, to change the Girls' page too, and create an overarching page for the entire school? Or to roll everything together onto one page? I'm happy to do the latter, but not sure how to do the former... --Croesyceiliog (talk) 14:45, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
 * - I see the point. I just wish they hadn't changed the name - it worked for 400 years. I see some problems with the suggestions. Rolling this and HMSfG into one will likely affect the status of this page. It's a GA, which the other definitely isn't. And I'm not sure what content an overarching page would contain? What would it say that isn't said on the individual pages. You could move the article to MSfB, but I strongly suspect the majority of readers would look for MS. A Google hits search would confirm this. All in all, I wonder if the amendment you've made to the lead would meet the need? KJP1 (talk) 16:48, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
 * p.s. I've tweaked the lead a little, as I think we lost some useful information there, and added a para. at the end of the History section. I've also moved this to the bottom of the Talkpage, as new conversations always go at the bottom of pages. KJP1 (talk) 17:06, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
 * - It's definitely a bit of a head scratcher. Thanks for the feedback and improvement, I'm new to this. So, yes, let's stick with it as is. I will look at the girls' school pages and see if any similar tweaks are needed, check on the terminology used throughout and generally tidy up if need be. Thanks for your help -- nice to have such a cordial first encounter as an editor :)
 * - Not at all, I hope you enjoy yourself here, it can be an amazingly productive place. KJP1 (talk) 17:23, 12 September 2019 (UTC)