Talk:Staff at King Edward VI Five Ways

Nobody delete this, I'm currently in the process of compiling it. When it's done I think it'll be too long to go in the main school page.

--LibLord 21:29, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

The list of staff is unencyclopedic. It changes too fast, and people are not interested in it anyway. The rest of the stuff is unsupported ('cured the rat infestation') or opinion ('anti-Wheedon camp'). If there is really anything useful add it to the main article. DJ Clayworth 17:58, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Liblord. Sorry you found that rude. Sometimes I deal with a lot of edits. Let me explan the problems with this article in detail:

Once those things are removed the article becomes much too short to be worth separating from the main article. Why not add any inforation you really think is relevant to the main article, and once it's been there for a while you can create a separate one if it gets too long. Finally, please sign anything you write on a talk page with four tildes like this ~. It will be expanded to your username and the time and date. DJ Clayworth 18:14, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) Most of the information about the headmaster was unsourced. It needs citations to show that what is written is actually true. Even then the information is probably better off in an article about the headmaster, or about the school.
 * 2) The stuff about school politics is irrelevant. Every headmaster is popular with some people and unpopular with others.
 * 3) The list of staff will change too fast to be kept up to date, and frankly the names of the staff are uninteresting to everyone except people associated with the school. That will be true however complete you make the list.