Template talk:Infobox Aust school private

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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.

Template

This page is not an article and has, therefore, not been given a rating on the quality scale.

Schools Portal

This article has been rated as NA-Importance within Schools.

Portal	Infobox Aust school private is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
NA	This page is not an article and does not require a rating on the quality scale.
NA	This page is not an article and does not require a rating on the importance scale.
	This non-article page is supported by WikiProject Education in Australia.

1 Secondary School Infobox is better
2 Fees as part of the infobox ?
3 Another alternative infobox suggestion
4 Additions and Improvements
5 Merge?

[edit] Secondary School Infobox is better

I disagree with the proposed use of the Infobox Aust school private on Sydney Grammar School and , indeed, elsewhere. The Secondary school infobox is used standardly across the board for GPS, CAS and ISA schools as the best infobox for the respective - and indeed, all - schools. Purely because the Aust school private infobox is there does not mean that it is the best one to use for private schools: the current "Affiliations" line is better than "denomination"; "slogan" is very crass; "key people" rendered inspecific when compared to the wide options in the secondary school infobox such as "Headmaster", "Principal" and "rector"; "num_employ" is the same as "faculty" in the SSI; "revenue" is irrelevant; "products" crass and unspecific yet again (of course the products are students!); while all the rest of the lines are in the Secondary school infobox. Any other thoughts? Cheers, Jpeob 00:26, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

How is "slogan" crass? Are the specific titles used in the other infobox universal across all such schools? Why is "revenue" irrelevant? Again, why is "products" crass? The very use of the term crass could be considered highly subjective, so let's be specific about our concerns here. If this infobox needs updating, let's do so. -Harmil 14:18, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

I think they are both pretty bad. I prefer the one's in the AHIGS and GSV school article's (that apparently all need to be changed) as they look much neater and aren't so Americanised. I agree with you Jpeob, "Key People" is just a joke, "slogan" is crass and just an excuse for free advertising (I can just imagine what some school's will insert there), "products"..well I have no idea what is supposed to go there. Can't remember my other great dislikes for this template but there were multiple. Surely we can come up with something better and more suitable to an Australian private school..or are we stuck with this one forever?? Loopla 16:22, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fees as part of the infobox ?

Out of curiosity, why are school fees allowed in the infobox ? Surely this is a form of advertising - I doubt it would be allowed on articles related to commercial products.... or is it ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by CultureDrone (talk • contribs) 11:28, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Another alternative infobox suggestion

I found this attractive looking but unloved infobox just recently: Template:Infobox_High_School. I don't understand why it's not being used. Any thoughts on including the same horizontal lines into this template? I think they'd help make this template more readable. --SRHamilton 06:28, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Additions and Improvements

I've been adding this infobox to a number of Aust Private school articles and in my opinion the 'Key People' section looks a bit messy and unclear. What does everyone think about replacing 'key people' with clear headings such as 'Principal', 'Chairman', 'Founder' and/or 'Chaplain' for example. Template:Infobox UK school seems to do this well, especially with the option of 'head_label' (preventing the long 'Principal/ Headmaster' heading seen in Template:Infobox Aust school). Further, I have no clue what is supposed to go under 'Key Products' and have noticed that it is almost never used, so shouldn't this be removed? Finally, I have no idea which infobox to use for defunct Australian private schools (e.g. Cooerwull Academy) so could a 'closed' (obviously optional) parameter be included?? Just my thoughts, would appreciate opinions/suggestions on the matter. Cheers. Loopla 03:08, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Personally, i think Key people is too wide, we have people sliding in Deputy Headmasters, Heads of department and all sorts. Basically, i would like to have: Headmaster/Principal (with the option to choose one of them) and Chairman. I dont think the schools chaplain is worth a mention so prominantly in the article, if indeed they are notable it should be included in the list of staff. Twenty Years 13:24, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

The proposed head_label is good, i would support that. The school is providing a service (education), although it does also provide products in the form of uniforms etc, i must admit, im slightly bemused by why it was included, id happily see it removed. For defunct schools, an option to have defunct would be good, although where would it be placed in the infobox? id suggest just under Established, but wouldn't mind too much. Twenty Years 13:28, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

'Key Products' is probably just leftover from a company infobox that this might have been created from. I shall remove it. Wongm 00:31, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for doing that Wongm. Yeah I think 'Closed' should be placed below 'established', in my opinion most of the first few lines of Template:Infobox UK school should be replicated (Motto, Established, Closed, Type, Religious affiliation, head_label, head, chair_label, chair, Founder, founder_pl). Maybe it would also be worth while considering "r_head_label" and "r_head" option rather than chaplain as in some schools a Chaplain, rector or similar religious head is one of the most senior and 'important' members of staff (e.g. Saint Ignatius' College, Riverview). The infobox probably needs a bit of an explantion aswell (especially if the above are added), which I don't mind doing if I can work it out. Thanks for your input Twenty Years and Wongm..I was worried I was talking to myself haha. Loopla 01:44, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

What sort of information would be in the section called "type"? and instead of having Religious Affiliation, why not just leave it with Denomination, which we already have? I like the founder, and chairmans bits, the rest is good. Cheers. Twenty Years 04:49, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Template:Infobox School is fine for the job. The only reason why Template:Infobox Aust school and the others exists is because people didn't know how to use parser functions and if includes, and the only way they knew how to get the unwanted options out of the 'top level' infobox was a copy and pase, then a hackjob. Infobox School now supports hiding of unused and irreverent option, so there is no reason to use it, bar the effor to move. Wongm (talk) 02:01, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

I completely disagree. See my comments below. Template:Infobox School is not the solution, its a mess. The reason why this and Template:Infobox Aust school exist is because they work. Loopla (talk) 11:21, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

The issue is that Infobox School has the huge laundry list of params - all we need to do is work out which ones are needed for a Australian school, and provide a blank template with just them on it, one of our Wikiproject pages so users can find it. What is the difference between Aust school and Aust School private anyway? At least those two can be merged, and the #if conditionals added for relevant params. Wongm (talk) 00:21, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merge?

Would anyone object to me merging this template to Template:Infobox School? --MZMcBride 22:22, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

I object. This is a specialised infobox, which is in fine working order. Wont be trying to fix whats not broken. Twenty Years 02:52, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Below is a list of templates all accomplishing the same task (i.e., putting an infobox on a school article):

Each has (or had) its own style. What a mess. That's not a problem? Essentially the differences between each involve terminology, which is completely fixable (and has been fixed) with ParserFunctions. Is a school in Australia really so different from a school elsewhere that Template:Infobox School won't work? It will add consistency to Wikipedia. --MZMcBride 02:59, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I also object. I think schools are very different around the world and so specific country infoboxes are quite valid. A lot of stuff included in infoboxes for US schools for example just don't apply to most Australian schools (e.g. superintendent, mascot and words such as 'grades' and 'athletics'). Template:Infobox School is a disaster, it's just confusing and excessive. I say leave it be and maybe we could work towards one infobox for Australia, rather than one for the world. Loopla 04:23, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Why fiddle with something when its not broken....its just a recipe for disaster. Not to mention the various that the users will have to understand, simply put: it would make it so hard to use that only experienced editors would be able to place infoboxes on schools, when admittedly, the majority of school editors arent experienced, and havent been around here for long enough to work out this sort of stuff. Twenty Years 04:36, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

You honestly believe having 26 templates to accomplish the same task isn't a symptom of a broken system. Template:Infobox School is attempting to correct a legitimate, measurable problem; it's not trying to fix what isn't broken. The parameters that work in this template would work exactly the same way if the template was redirected. --MZMcBride 04:49, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I dont see any problem, the 26 templates seem to be doing their job adequately. The other 24 that are not concerned with Australia may not be performing their tasks (im not sure), but Australia's are working 100% fine, and i just dont want to mess with a winning formula. Twenty Years 05:05, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Template:Infobox School needs quite a bit of cleaning up as well (email, phone and fax numbers should not be included for example) so essentially we would be moving to an infobox of a lower standard. It is also not very nice looking compared to Infobox Aust school private. While Infobox Aust school private could do with some slight tweaking I think it, along with Template:Infobox UK school are the best we've got. Loopla 05:33, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

It would be interesting to note that WP Schools actually specifically says in that things like phone numbers, email addys etc should NOT be included in infoboxes, yet the schools infobox includes them! It is simply substandard. Twenty Years 06:34, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Template talk:Infobox Aust school private

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Secondary School Infobox is better

[edit] Fees as part of the infobox ?

[edit] Another alternative infobox suggestion

[edit] Additions and Improvements

[edit] Merge?

Views

Navigation

Interaction

Search