User:Kierant/Sandbox/Potential reply

Lots of anons editing the GWC article, so I don't know if I want to get roped in to some nonsense. Potential reply, to make if the article edit war continues.


 * This may seem trivial but I feel quite strongly about accuracy. The point made above is correct about where the school is &mdash; it's in Merchiston, as clearly seen on the map that's been linked to. The bit about the entrance to Morningside is really just confusing the issue. The school is near Morningside, not in it. If the headmaster does as you say in letters, (and I'm not casting doubt), then I imagine it is done in order to help people understand the location (Morningside is more famous) and perhaps also to promote the school, since Morningside has a good reputation, and since there will be many parents there glad to know the school is nearby. But to answer your question, "why not mention it", well, I'd be happy to see a mention of what the headmaster writes if properly proven by a reference somewhere, and not just entered on the basis of original research; in other words, we'd need to be able to verify what the headmaster writes, somehow. However, it is just not appropriate to state in the article that the school is somewhere which it simply isn't.
 * As for the photos; the point isn't how popular the commons is. The point is that it exists, and it exists for several good reasons, one of which is that Wikipedia is not a gallery of photographs. Given that the school's own website is linked from the article, the question to be asked is what unique value does the photo in question add?
 * Finally, regarding the size of the school, if that's a valid reference, somebody who cares to do so could put it in the article along with the point; the point was previously unreferenced, and that (I presume) is why it was getting deleted. – Kieran T  ( talk  15:56, 6 December 2006 (UTC)