Talk:City of London School

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"The Albert Memorial" - the London Portal's current "Showcase Picture" This article is part of WikiProject London, an attempt to expand, improve and standardise the content and structure of articles related to London. If you would like to participate, you can improve the article attached to this page or sign up and contribute in a wider array of articles.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
WikiProject Schools This article is related to WikiProject Schools, an attempt to write quality articles about schools around the world. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
Schools Portal
High This article has been rated as High-Importance within Schools.

This article badly needs some references. When it has these then it would be a B. Article looks very good. Victuallers 11:56, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

old school with impressive old boys list. Could be a B with better refs. Victuallers 16:38, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

On 2 September 2005, this article was made a showcase article at the Schools Wikiportal "as it has been identified as one of the best high school (sic) articles on Wikipedia". So maybe it should go up a grade. Chelseaboy (talk) 18:46, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Current pupils and Old Citizens on Wikipedia

Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: City of London School has been created for all current pupils and Old Citizens on Wikipedia. Timrollpickering 14:58, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

To add yourself to this list, insert the following on your user page:

[[Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: City of London School|{{subst:PAGENAME}}]]

Alternatively, you can add the following template to your user page (this will automatically add you to the category): {{User CLS}}

This user is an Old Citizen.




[edit] Miscellaneous

True or false: they plan on renaming this article "City of London School for Boys" to avoid sexism. 66.245.17.89 00:51, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

False

Did Joe Strummer go here?

No he didn't; he went to the Freemen's school which was somewhere in Surrey, I think. Masud 04:28, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Staff listings

Is it really important to have a list of current staff? I don't think so, they're all fairly non-notable, but interesting trivia for old boys (like me) but I could find that out on the CLSB website anyway. If there are no serious objections, I'll remove the list of teachers. Masud 01:18, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree - best to remove this list. (another Old Citizen) Bwithh 03:17, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

NOOOOO!!!!!!!!! The list is awesome —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.203.212.209 (talk • contribs) 10:50, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

It has Mr. Martin on it and he owns all! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.189.100.65 (talk • contribs) 21:50, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Same with Mr. Ellis-Ress - He is a legend

[edit] Pictures

The article has a really good selection of pictures, but I think the formatting lets them down: they come one after the other in a long line, I think they'd look better if there was some variation in their placement. I shoved this together in a spare moment: User:Driller_thriller/Lipsum It can be done better, but this is the idea I want to put across. Driller thriller 15:10, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

I think that's a lot better. But maybe you should put it in historical order? So the Milk Street ones and then the Victoria Embankment ones. I like the way you've staggered them, and put one on the left, and another on the right. The Coat of Arms is also a good image, but maybe it doesn't belong all the way at the top of the article, where one of the main points of discussion is the various buildings the school occupied.
In any case, what you have done is an improvement on the current page. --Masud 23:57, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay, it's been a busy couple of weeks; I made the edits. Hope everyone approves. Driller thriller 16:09, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

that's better, it looks nice —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.188.159.83 (talk • contribs) 19:28, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

I've gone on to put the pictures in chronological order, and have had to slightly resize them so the page's layout isn't disrupted. I think it's important to see the pictures at their relevant points in the article. --Masud 16:08, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Does City Count as a Public School?

  • Well, does it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.247.250.128 (talk • contribs)
The City of London School, which derived from a mediæval foundation of 1442, and was reconstituted by a private Act of Parliament in 1835, was held to be a public school by the Divisional Court in the case of Blake vs. City of London in 1886. Yes, it does. Driller thriller 00:58, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Like the Corporation of London itself, the Corporation's schools are probably sui generis Bwithh 22:21, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
No. Absolutely not. Drillerthriller thinks it does because he went there and enjoys speaking of himself in the third person. --SandyDancer 21:07, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm an ex-pupil and I agree that it is definitely not a public school. I mean, look at the fees... Pneumataultramicroscopicsiliconvolcaneosis is the longest word in the English language. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pneumataultramicroscopicsiliconvolcaneosis (talk • contribs) 09:18, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
It's a public school on almost any definition. It's on an ancient foundation, it is old by school standards even taking the date of its refoundation by Act of Parliament in the reign of William IV, it has always been fee paying, it was authoritatively determined to be a public school by the Divisional Court in the case of Blake v City of London in 1886, and it is a member of the Headmasters Conference. Chelseaboy (talk) 18:59, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] POV and references tags

A lot of claims are made about certain teachers being notable on this article - this needs referencing or should be taken out altogether as unsouced POV Bwithh 22:21, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Where 1 is 'a lot'? If the word notable were removed from the heading that would seem to resolve this particular problem, as some seem attached to the list (see comments above). Also I don't see why the article is tagged 'unreferenced' at the top, as there are 2 refs given. roundhouse 20:36, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, perhaps I should have been more specific - the entire section regarding notable teaching staff are red linked, implying that they are notable enough for their own articles. This section is also unreferenced. If the teachers really are encyclopedically notable, references should be introduced. Otherwise they should be removed Bwithh 21:37, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
OK - remove the red links then. I'd have thought that some staff notable at the school but not more widely could be listed without any great controversy. (Google reveals quite a lot about the head Bryan Bass if anyone cares to pull it together, on a Hymers Hull site.) roundhouse 01:40, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Levin as head

I recall that when Dancey left in 1998 (when I finished at CLS), there was going to be another head who had to pull out late in the day because of illness and I don't think Levin arrived until 1999. Is anyone able to verify this or not? Timrollpickering 20:11, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Yeah that's true: Grossel was temporary head; I seem to remember that the proper replacement head was ill or something, and in the end never turned up. --Masud 22:58, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Academics

Why is there an American-style heading in an article about an English school? Surely in British English academics is the plural of academic (ie, a scholarly person) and is therefore very misleading as a title as this section is not about the academic staff but about the subjects taught at the school. Perhaps curriculum might be a more appropriate heading. Dahliarose 00:21, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Yep, I'm up for that. I'll go ahead and do it. --Masud 00:31, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Radcliffe an old boy?

Isn't Daniel Radcliffe an old boy now? It's the difference between him being in the current notable pupils and the notable old citizens section. --Masud 10:55, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Age wise he should be in his last year. Timrollpickering 22:14, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
OK, I've removed his name from the old citizens section, and ensured he remains on the current pupils section. --Masud 06:29, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
No, he'll leave in September.
He has left —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.141.53.202 (talk) 22:43, 8 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Toby Smyth

Is notable as being goalkeeper for ISFA U16 team Discuss... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.141.53.202 (talk) 17:16, 13 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] The list of old boys

Even though all these old citizens are notable (e.g. they have their own article), this list is becoming far too large. Either we narrow the list down, and link to a page that has them all, or simply remove the whole lot, and just have the link. What do people think? --Masud 20:47, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

keep them there. so what if the list is long? does it really take that much more effort to scroll down past it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.201.175.25 (talk • contribs) 21:54, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
I just think that the humongous section of non-prose "bolted on", as it were, to the end of the article detracts from the quality of the article itself. Whereas a page that is purely a list only is fine, as that is what people will expect when they go to the page. Furthermore, this article is about the school itself, not those who have been to it. Masud 00:49, 27 April 2007 (UTC)


[edit] First school in england to teach science

The school website does not claim to have been the first school to teach science, it in fact only claims to have been the first to teach paractical chemistry. Is there any further back up for the actual science claim? Ramw2 22:39, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

The printed school histories referenced at the end of the article make and substantiate this claim. The most detailed account is in The City of London School, A. E. Douglas-Smith (1st edition 1937, 2nd edition 1965). Other schools taught classical authors like Aristotle, which could be construed as science, but the current (March 2008) text is more specific than this, and accurate: "It was the first school in England to include science on the curriculum and to include scientific experiments as part of its teaching." Chelseaboy (talk) 18:53, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Notable pupils and alumni

I'm going to make some changes to the list of "Notable current pupils" and "Notable former pupils". First, someone has deemed Alex Watson notable because of who his sister is. I disagree, so am going to remove his name. Second, Daniel Radcliffe is the only name in a list which could, in theory, include a British Prime Minister (Herbert Henry Asquith) and a two well-regarded English authors (Julian Barnes and Kingsley Amis). I agree that Radcliffe is notable, but the list deserves a few more names. --Popeyedoyle 22:05, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:City of London Arms.png

The image Image:City of London Arms.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --23:50, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Football

I think that I'm right in saying that City of London switched from Rugby Football to Association Football in the 1990's. Such a change is quite unusual and surely deserves a mention? Millbanks (talk) 22:38, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

It was certainly exclusively football for the lower years when I started (early 1994) with no rugby at all (the higher years had a more varied choice - I did sailing) which suggests it hadn't been for quite some time - it would be strange for a school to change overnight. I'm not sure how unusual this is though - a lot of private schools don't do rugby for some or all of their pupils (my prep school only taught it to a few for instance). Timrollpickering (talk) 23:54, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I think that the changeover was gradual, over a few years. Millbanks (talk) 18:46, 6 June 2008 (UTC)