Talk:The King's Academy, Middlesbrough

Merge
This page ought to be merged with the Emmanuel Schools Foundation page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.9.126.89 (talk • contribs)

References, facts, citations
I recently added some "" tags (which appear on the page as superscript "[citation needed]") next to statements that are making certain claims such as about exam results. This is requesting that editors who add such information demonstrate the statements' claims with evidence from sources.

For instance "increased its GCSE pass rate from... to..." is simply a set of words. How do I, the outside reader, know that the claim is actually true? (It might be, it might not be: the important thing is that the words alone don't either make it true or allow me to assess its veracity.) But supplementing it with a footnote to the actual report from an authoritative source (not the school's own website, by the way), turns it from mere words to a reliable statement: you will have pointed me the actual facts and figures, from a source that we can all trust.

For Wikipedia, references to online versions of authoritative sources (OFSTED's own pages, BBC news, etc.) would be good. If you are unsure about how to format them in the article, then copy the URLs ( "http://..." ) somewhere below here and I or someone else can format them up for you. Thanks.

Feline Hymnic (talk) 10:42, 1 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Further to the comments below, all requested references have been added - from authoritative sources, of course! I would be grateful if you would "format them up for me" as I don't yet know how. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.242.35.75 (talk • contribs)

I've done a few of them, to get the process started. Feline Hymnic (talk) 21:17, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Fact not fiction?
I added a short para here from the article on Emmanuel Schools Foundation as it relates to this particular school, including the Guardian's 2006 visit. It has been removed by anon editors (all apparently connected using Opal Telecom), the last time with the edit summary "This article should be based on fact not fiction - hence the deletion". That makes no sense to me, as the paragraph is well sourced. What's the perceived problem with it? - Fayenatic (talk) 20:34, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

One of the anon editors removed the para again with the edit summary "Article added is symapathetic to an urban myth". What urban myth? It says the school is not selective, not a faith school, does not teach creationism and does not push fundamentalist Christianity. Which of these denials does the anon editor believe to be false?

This Guardian article was a marked change of view from a long innuendo published in 2005 that is referenced in the article on the Foundation. That 2005 article might be described as "sympathetic to an urban myth". I have not added that one here, but the corrective article published in the following year.

The allegation gained national press coverage and was repeated in the House of Commons, so it is worth mentioning here. It is also appropriate to rebut it since there are WP:reliable sources to do so. - Fayenatic (talk) 17:16, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

The anon editor continues to claim that no allegations of creationist teaching have been made, despite the citations already provided from the local press (2004) and the Guardian (2006). Richard Dawkins created protests with his allegations of "educational debauchery" when the school was opened in 2003; this was reported by the BBC, Ekklesia (think tank) , Observer as well as the Guardian. The allegations were not true, as the Guardian eventually made clear in 2006, but it was notably alleged and reported in WP:RS, and is therefore valid encyclopedic content. - Fayenatic (talk) 19:21, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Fayenatic london - I admire your attempts to ensure the article on The King's Academy is full and complete, but you have to appreciate that all stories that appear in the press are not necessarily accurate. Do you believe everything that you read in every newspaper - of course not. It follows that simply because an article in appears in a local or a national press publication, the essence of the article is not necessarily accurate.

What is true is that Emmanuel College in Gateshead found itself embroiled in false accusations that creationism was being taught in science classrooms. That is a well documented fact. Other schools within the Emmanuel Schools Foundation however, including The King's Academy in Middlesbrough and Trinity Academy in Doncaster have never had such allegations made against them. This is also fact. For the sake of accuracy, therefore, let us dwell on what is fact and what is fiction. The entries that you have been endeavouring to add to the article are nothing more than fiction and should, therefore, be deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.145.132.167 (talk) 20:20, 22 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't understand why you are either not reading the articles that I have cited here and in the article, or are mis-stating them. I believe that the allegations are false. However, it is true that notable allegations have been made in reliable sources, and are still being peddled in unreliable ones -- so it is valid to mention and rebut them here.


 * You are clearly protective about the article as you had written it, but please familiarise yourself with Wikipedia's policies WP:OWNER and WP:COI. - Fayenatic (talk) 07:07, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

I was simply attempting to write an article that was accurate and that was based on fact rather than fiction. The creationist argument is certainly "media fiction" and has nothing at all to do with the reality of The King's Academy. My attempts to exclude references to the story of creationism were to avoid such nonsense gaining any credence by appearing in the article. Do you understand my position? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.145.129.41 (talk) 20:12, 26 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes. However, anyone who does a web search on the school will find those allegations. Better to deal with them clearly than to exclude any mention of them. This is a general purpose encyclopedia, not a promotional site, and should cover whatever is notable about the subject, from a neutral point of view. My purpose here is to improve the encyclopedia, although I hope I am doing the school no disservice either. - Fayenatic (talk) 09:23, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

False
"Students are involved in a wide range of music and drama activities throughout the year. Students are encouraged to practice a musical instrument and to take graded exams, and to participate in showcase events such as the Performing Arts Festival"

I attended this school for five years, and can strongly say that this is not the case. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.22.36.54 (talk) 15:30, 5 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Those claims are not mentioned in the school website or Prospectus either, so I have removed them. - Fayenatic (talk) 20:50, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

NPOV?
There's a strong smell of promotion to this article. I note that a former student has made reference to false claims (now removed). However while the Ofsted reports are consistent, there's a strong element from the USA with Christian Evangelists apparently being invited to attend from time to time. There's no question that when it was opened, the idea of Creationism being taught was a foregone conclusion and it was only the backlash from parents and others in the secular community that made sure that would never happen. Even while Nigel McQuoid was there and he was very pro-Creationism. I know this from speaking to the guy and I was worse than upset that an apparently intelligent and charming man could hold such ideas in a modern world.

One of my children attended this school for the full five years and while the quality of teaching has been broadly good, there are other areas which fall well below an acceptable standard. I am in fact, currently writing a letter of complaint (and not the first) about something that's happened recently which is how I landed on this page. So it really needs a re-work from someone who is neutral and not involved. I certainly am NOT neutral so I won't do it. 81.97.100.208 (talk) 11:21, 28 August 2020 (UTC)