Talk:Tunbridge Wells Grammar School for Boys

Who's speaking, please?
I removed this paragraph:


 * "The school aims to equip our students for a full and constructive place in society, to help them to be adaptive, to exercise critical judgement and to be prepared for the rapidly changing requirements of the twenty-first century. Academic excellence is very important at this school and we take pride in achieving our results. As a selective school we aim for high standards and the pursuit of academic excellence, helping every student to reach their full potential through the development of skills, concepts and knowledge, within the framework of a caring community. Relationships between staff and students are based on trust, mutual respect and a determination to succeed."

The quotation marks were included with the text in the article - they are not mine. It's not clear who is speaking nor if the text is relevant. Radiopathy (talk) 21:57, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Edit: I was looking at the difs, and the quote had originally been attributed as: From the school website, an extract from the introduction given by the Headteacher, Mr. J. Harrison. It was removed, but the quote itself was left intact. Radiopathy (talk) 22:23, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Ofsted inspection
''The last Ofsted inspection, conducted in January 2008 and led by Mrs Jacqueline White, concluded: "This is a good and improving school; it is well led and provides students with good standards of education, guidance and care...Students have a positive attitude to learning, air their views and develop their leadership skills through house meetings, the school council, the prefect system and by mentoring and supporting younger students." Teaching was referred to as "good overall and sometimes outstanding".''

The excised paragraph sounds too promotional. Radiopathy (talk) 23:08, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * OK; I have rewritten the Ofsted section to provide a balanced assessment. No way does it now sound promotional! TerriersFan (talk) 00:30, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Extracurricular enrichment
This section could use a good pruning, with a reference linking to the page about the remaining clubs or activities on the school's site. I'm done here for a while! Radiopathy (talk) 22:47, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * OK; sorted. TerriersFan (talk) 00:56, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

WP is not a a repository for images
According to Not a gallery The images that have been included recently do not belong in an encyclopedia. In addition to the images a lot of the information is unsourced, poorly sourced or promotional in nature. Finally, okay not finally, but finally what I am going to include here is list of notable alumni should actual only have those individuals who already have articles written about them. Not a list. VViking Talk Edits 22:40, 7 July 2022 (UTC)


 * 1. Images: Wikipedia clearly allows for the use of images in articles (see Manual of Style - Images). The suggestion that the "images that have been included recently do not belong in an encyclopedia" is faulty. What is not permissible according to What Wikipedia Is Not are "photographs or media files with no accompanying text". In other words, Wikipedia should pages should not be photo galleries. Images may be used so long as they have "an encyclopedic context" (i.e. they are relevant to the subject matter of the article). All the images removed: (a) had accompanying text both in the body and the image description, and (b) were clearly relevant to the subject matter. Additionally, all the images were sourced from Wikimedia Commons and therefore available for use in Wikipedia articles. I will therefore be reinstating the deleted images in a future revision.
 * 2. Information: I have no observations about the editing of text as that is the whole point of Wikipedia. However, I may reinstate some text which was deleted but came from reliable, footnoted sources.
 * 3. Notable alumni: The suggested criterion for inclusion (i.e. "notable alumni should actual only have those individuals who already have articles written about them") is too narrow and does not fully comply with Stand-alone Lists and Alma mater. Whilst not having a Wikipedia article may suggest a lack of notability, membership can also be established from reliable, published sources. I will examine the list of removed alumni to see if any can be reinstated on this basis. Cherno999 (talk) 20:06, 10 July 2022 (UTC)