Talk:Warwick School

March 2007 V2
Hello all, and thank you for contributing to this school site. I'm part of the WikiProject_Schools/Assessment team, and, as it is a very old school, then I'm reviewing this page. I'm currently giving it a grade of B on the Wikipedia 1.0 Assessment Scale and an importance of Mid on this importance scale.

My reasoning is as follows: This article is a good size and includes refs infobox pics, Mid because of the age .... Alumni good. Victuallers 21:16, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I cannot, having looked at your 'Good Article' criteria, see how this article does not satisfy your vague conditions in the very least of its possible interpretations, with 18 months further development.  Shirelord 26 Oct 2008 23:21 (GMT)

I have to say that while Warwick School is undoubtably notable enough to deserve having an article written about it, the quality of writing in this article is substandard. It is very clear that it has been written from a biased perspective, thus reducing the overall credibility of the article. The whole piece does read like promotion material for the school. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.31.193.34 (talk) 23:52, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

G N Frykman

 * G.N.Frykman is somewhat of an enigma in regards to his middle name, Nebuchadnezzar, which was discovered by a pupil on 2005-12-18, unlocking a 21 year mystery with Frykman himself claiming no boy ever to have guessed his entire name. The find will be considered a key asset to the school's Chemistry Department and to archiving. &mdash;

I've removed the above from the article. Whilst (the first sentence of) it is now sourced, and thus is verifiable, it appears to have nothing whatsoever to do with Warwick School, the subject of this article. If this belongs anywhere, it belongs in an article on G. N. Frykman. Jonathan de Boyne Pollard 02:57, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

This is a scurrilous entry from a pupil of the school, either present or past. Thanks for removing it. It did not last long. Needless to say, sourced or not, Nebuchadnezzar is not my middle name! I regret that I am not (yet) famous enough to warrant a whole article. My web-site is enough!G N Frykman 00:05, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

I am sure Mr.Frykman's name is not Nebuchadnezzar and he is a very nice teacher and has many hilarious stories. Mr Frykman's middle name was also 'discovered' to be Nebuchadnezzar back in about 1995. Or so he said it was (we were in his Chemistry class at the time). I suspect this is part of a mysterious game he plays to create a bit of intrigue. Oh, and if he reads this, 'hello again, and thank you'. --anon. 17:51, 11 September 2006 (UTC)


 * He did read this. Thank you for your appreciation. --G N Frykman 17:38, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I'd just like to add that there are far too many pictures of the school in this article, and, as much as I appreciate the artistic way in which they are presented, they are merely promotion instead of aides to factual information. I believe some should be removed - possibly down to one of the main school and one of the Bridge House Theatre. --Frostiesgreat 18:12, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I disagree, the article is fact-based. The buildings form part of the school campus, and therefore are factual representations of the school, aiding a factual image in the reader's mind. Shirelord 18:04, 29th July 2006 (BST)

Hope no one objects, but I have reorganised the 'Notable Alumni' into alphabetical order and surname first. Wikifellow 6 Oct 06

I'm not sure...I think most other alumni lists are ordered by surname with forenames first (if they are ordered at all. It's probably easier to keep it that way. Rob.rjt 17:34, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

I actually copied the formatting from the Leeds University Alumni by doing it this way (alphabetically and surname first). It seems more logical, and anyone adding a new name can just slip it into the right place more easily. Wikifellow 7 Oct 06

Age of school
The opening paragraph is inaccurate. Warwick School appears to be the ninth oldest school in England and it is not the oldest grammar school. See: List of the oldest schools in the United Kingdom. There seems to be some dispute about the date at which the school was founded. Surely there must be some sources which will provide confirmation of the foundation date? Dahliarose 00:13, 11 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia is just one source of assessing the relative ages of British schools. If all the oldest schools on this list were to be completely honest, there is no documentary evidence available for most of these claims.  All the ones which have better evidence as to their true age being greater than Warwick School have gone co-educational or out of business, hence the claim that Warwick School is the oldest surviving boys' grammar school.  G N Frykman 08:31, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

In fact, there is no evidence _whatsoever_ for Warwick's having been founded earlier than the mid-sixteenth century, as the History section almost admits. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.147.113.240 (talk) 20:53, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

If that is the case, why, then, did King Henry VIII, in granting a charter to the town of Warwick in 1545, call the school "The King's New School of Warwick"? I rest my case.G N Frykman (talk) 07:53, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Ya di ya da. Maybe there was a school in Warwick before 1545. Probably there was, in fact. What had it to do with the present institution, if it existed? Nothing whatsoever (Continuous endownment? No. Continuous occupation of buildings? No. Overlapping staff or governance? No. Etc., etc. and see cf. Bablake's risible claim to have been founded in 1390.) Might as well say Myton was founded in 914. What a pity the silly 1906 history is still deferred to: a fellowship of All Souls in 1906 wasn't then what it is now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.147.113.240 (talk) 21:29, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

I quote: "The truth, therefore, seems to be that the present Warwick School is the legitimate successor of a small-town grammar school which dates from before the Norman Conquest." Please identify yourself so that we can have a meaningful dialogue.G N Frykman (talk) 07:49, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

To even imply that Warwick School is the oldest surviving grammar school is farce, with justification stemming from half-winded technicalities about it descending from some previous school. An entirely different school was founded initially. Warwickians try to claim that it changed name and location. Actually that is proposterous! The present Warwick School has no affilations to aformentioned original school, and so the founding of that school should not add to the age to this unrelated present one. If one was to look at the page for oldest schools (as I'm sure you have), you'll see the numerous other candidates with far more verifiable and justified claims to the title.


 * I believe I made a balanced edit regarding the controversial topic of the school's age. Please G N Frykman - don't instantly revert on grounds of personal preference/opinion. Remeber wikipedia's oh-so-infamous NPOV... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.137.218.9 (talk) 10:48, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

If it is an independent school, how can it also be "the oldest surviving boys' grammar school in the world"? A grammar school is a selective, state-funded institution. Tsuguya (talk) 13:17, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

A grammar school, in the original meaning of the word, taught the classics - and very little else. A curriculum based on Latin and Greek was supposed to set men up for life... G N Frykman (talk) 08:14, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

But it's no longer a grammar school in that sense of the word, is it? That's like saying the Musée d'Orsay is still the oldest surviving electrified railway station in France (even though the station was decommissioned in the 1970s and is now an art gallery). Tsuguya (talk) 02:02, 23 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I feel that the school's alleged 'heritage' is being used as justification for this clearly self-promoting article (possibly trying to make up ofr the fact his has no real 'notable' people who can call it their alma mater).

Notability
I'm surprised that I'm the first person to say this but... Is this school that notable? I'm sure it is within it's local area, and maybe possibly stub-worthy - but I don't think the length of the article reflects the schools notability/fame. There seems to be few tuely notable alumni (and virtually none from the last 20-30 years), and while the age is impressive, simply becaus the school has remained single-sex as opposed to going co-educational, it doesn't seem enough to grant the school extra props in terms of age. I'd suggest an article more reflecting the one for neighbouring school, Myton. I'd keep some of the pictures though - they capture the school perfectly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.137.218.9 (talk) 17:59, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

6th oldest surviving school in the UK and 9th in the world. Pretty notable, so I'd say the length of the page is justified.

Good point. I found this on the Bablake discussion page:

DNB entries for alumni of Warwick Group schools:

King Edward's School, Birmingham: 50+ Nottingham High School: 18 King Henry VIII School, Coventry: 17 Wolverhampton Grammar School: 13 Warwick School: 7 Solihull School: 5 Bablake: 2

Per WP:NOTABLE if a subject is notable enough for an article there is no notability criterion for the length of the article. If the OP thinks the article is notable enough for a stub, it is notable enough for a full artilce. Rob.rjt (talk) 06:51, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Its age makes it notable in itself. However, it is not "the oldest public school in the world" - that is nonsense for a number of reasons if you ferret about.-MacRùsgail (talk) 15:47, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Category:Old Warwickians renaming
At present there is a discussion relating to the renaming of this category. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at this discussion page. Please note that the discussion is not a majority vote so contributions should be based on Wikipedia policies and independent sources. Cjc13 (talk) 13:59, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Academic section
Well, that academic section was full of gush... and probably written by staff as usual (representing a conflict of interest, common on private school pages).

The academic results of these schools are high for one main reason - they cherrypick intelligent children, and offer them scholarships! That, and an entrance exam to eliminate less intelligent fee paying children. It's not a level playing field, unfortunately many people are wise to it now.

Also, regarding Oxbridge, and St Andrews, these universities are notorious for privileging privately educated children. A disproportionate number of their students come from them, and this cannot be put down simply to intelligence or schooling. (Entry into Oxbridge is primarily by interview, i.e. the personal preferences of the clique who happen to run whichever college at the time.)-MacRùsgail (talk) 15:46, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

RE MacRusgail - pure hearsay, and thankfully no longer true. I can't speak for Oxford, but Cambridge's admission process is nothing of the sort. It cannot be denied that coming from a private/public school confers an advantage to the extent that you are likely to be better prepared (as the school will likely provide good advice), but there is no bias from the perspective of the interviewer. 131.111.184.7 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 12:02, 10 April 2015 (UTC)