Talk:Raffles Junior College
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. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance rating within Schools. Please rate the article. | |
 |
 An attempt to better coordinate and organise articles related to Singapore. To participate, simply edit this page or visit our noticeboard for more info. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. |
Contents |
[edit] Redundant info
Following is info which i deem redundant for the Wikipedia purpose, and which i have therefore removed:
[edit] Under Facilities section
Block A
Lecture Theatre 3 (200 Seats)
39 Tutorial Rooms
AV Projection Room
MEP Room
Music Library
Theatre Study Room
Block B
Lecture Theatre 4 (200 Seats)
Lecture Theatre 5 (200 Seats)
14 Tutorial Rooms
Block C
Lecture Theatre 1 (850 Seats)
Lecture Theatre 2 (350 Seats)
6 Tutorial Rooms
Amphitheatre
Block D
10 Seminar Rooms
8 Computer Laboratories
14 "Chat Rooms"
Block E
6 Physics Laboratories
6 Chemistry Laboratories
4 Biology Laboratories
Life Science Laboratory
Research Laboratory
Project Workroom
Students' Council Room
Bookshop
Block F
Parade Square
Canteen
Block G
Tennis Courts
Basketball Courts
Indoor Rifle Range
Block H
General Office
Deans/HODs Office
Staff Room
Media Resource Library
Block J
Performance Arts Centre (396 Seats)
Lecture Theatre 6 (200 Seats)
4 Seminar Rooms
Block K
Indoor Sports Hall
Dance Studio
Chamber Ensemble Room
Block L
Multi Purpose Hall
Health Fitness Studio
Chinese Orchestra Room
CCA Rooms
Spectators Gallery
Track and Field
[edit] Under Students' Council section
The 25th Students' Council was officially invested into office on 18 May 2005 with fifty-two elected individuals taking over the roles held by the 24th Students' Council. The councillors were elected into office by their peers after a vigorous week-long campaigning process involving speeches, posters, bio-data boards and display boards in the amphitheatre.
Executive Committee of 25th Students' Council
President: Zhang Junli
Vice-president: Amanda Zain
Secretary: Daryl Poon
Treasurer: He Kangya
Communications Department Head: Senthilkumaran S/o Sabapathy
Welfare Head: Junghans Tasani
CCA Department Head: Mohd Ilman
--Plastictv 04:01, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Wee Shu Min
See archived page at /Wee Shu Min Inclusion Debate.
There does not seem to be a consensus that we are heading towards, I have archived the discussion as it was taking up a whole lot of space on the main talk page. If you must, post new points below this post. - fiveless 16:13, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
- A consensus has been reached to include, under "Notable Alumni" - fiveless 09:27, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
Till now, ryand's silence on my point (1) and (3) which I reproduced below is deafening :
1) Your offer to work together being civil, which everybody know is the case, and it is what every body is doing here (or else probably you will see all sorts of foul languages being used). However, you still did not address the issue of why it should be your version that remains until a consensus is reached? By always insisting that your version should be the standing version until a consensus is reached, I am not sure if it is the "consensus" way. So why not delete AC from RGS page until a consensus is reached?
2)Thanks for pointing out that "notable" can be used in a negative way, I learned something new today. Do you care to give me the name of the linguist?
3) Back to my point above, since there is no consensus on AC case, then why not delete AC from RGS page until a consensus is reached? icecold1 03:49, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
- Why are you still on about this? Anyway, take the issue up on the RGS talk page if you're that bored. It doesn't belong on this page. -ryand 09:37, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
That is because your silence on this is deafening.......icecold1 01:36, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Whoever deleted the WSM inclusion, please stop doing that.This only contribute to the impression that RJC is trying to whitewash the whole episode.
By the way, ryand has still not reply to my point above either over here or in RGS page. icecold1 03:49, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
- That might have been because I've been away in Taiwan for the past week or so, if you'd bothered to check my user page. At any rate, I didn't reply to your points because I thought the incident had already been settled. Wee Shu Min's in the article, under the notable alumni section. I'll address your point on Annabel Chong on the RGS talk page, but I'm not expecting the discussion to go anywhere. -ryand 19:19, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- Whatever Wee Shu Min did, it has absolutely no relation to the article. Why then do we not include her in the article Singapore, just because she is a Singaporean? Or should we not include her in girl, because she is a girl? Why do we not include her in the article elitism, because it is an elitist statement? Is it not the same as including it in this article just because she is a student of this school? Disclamer: Please do not edit the articles to include this. --165.21.155.91 (talk) 15:30, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Time to clean up the article
It is rather difficult to read the article on RJC. The article is not comprehensive enough unlike that of Raffles Institution and it is not coherent enough. I think that we should start to re-organise the materials in there and add in more facts to make it more detailed. It is rather embarrassing that the standard of this article cannot match up with that of RI! --Russianroulette2004 14:23, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
- While I agree with the coherence (the article needs to be tidied up a bit), it most certainly does not need to be cluttered with useless information like the RI article. Any expansion of the article should focus on verifiable things like the history of the college, and all information added need to be sourced. -ryand 15:47, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
- Haha maybe not the standard of the article on RI as of now. It was pretty good if memory serves me but currently they have added too much stuff on facilities. Who in the world really bothers on the nitty-gritty of the Hall or Boarding Complex! I think we need slightly more description on facilities and tiding up on the culture of RJC. --Russianroulette2004 11:47, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Inappropriate tone and style
when reading the article i get the impression that parts of it are written by disgruntled college students or non-college students. There is a personal tone to the article which is most unencyclopediac. Statements such as "At present, Moor-Tarbet has the most number of points but the competition is fierce" would better be replaced by "___ were the first ever house champions in 2005". The "notable alumni" section also appears to be written by a politically ignorant person. 121.6.201.152 11:44, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
- Please sign up as a user and identify yourself on the talk page so as to avoid vandalism. Anyway you mention a good point and that the tone in most sections of this article is inappropriate. I made a little amendments to the Student Council section, and I hope to make the other parts of the article as objective as possible. --Russianroulette2004 14:38, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
This article seems to be fine and good in terms of providing the bare facts of the school and its operating system - but one wonders if the tone of the article is slightly biased in favour of the RJC school administration. Changes to reflect the operational difficulties of the air-conditioning system has been constantly deleted - even though effort has been made such that each successive edit has become more watered-down in tone and neutral. While the article needs to remain objective, one wonders if this comes at the expense of reflecting commonly held school opinions - would it be permissible to list certain criticisms of the student council for instance?
- Yes, if we had citations. Aha. Ariedartin JECJY Talk 16:28, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 10:31, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Removal of content
Content under the "Recent News" section on the page Raffles Junior College is un-encyclopaedic. Wikipedia is not a directory. The actions of certain individuals of the school should not be included as they were not sanctioned by the school, nor did they take place during the course of school events, nor did they occur within the school premises.
In fact, the only link is between the events in the "Recent News" section and the school is that they happen to be students of the school in question at the time that event occured. --121.7.32.204 (talk) 15:59, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] dead link / inappropriate citation
'A' Level Results In the 2007 Revised GCE A Level Examination, Raffles Junior College's first cohort of Raffles Programme students did exceedingly well with about three in four students scoring distinctions in at least 3 content subjects while about one in two scored distinctions in at least 4 content subjects. In addition, RJC produced 6 top students scoring the maximum of 9 distinctions in the examination. [4].
and
The first batch of Raffles Programme students received their A Level results on 7 Mar 2008. They have done exceedingly well. [9]
This information is lifted directly from the RJC website itself. The citations are linked to pages on RJC's own website: http://www.rjc.edu.sg/newrjc/admin/document/TopStoryForWebsite2.pdf http://www.rjc.edu.sg/newrjc/admin/document/TopStoryForWebsite5.pdf (both dead links)
I believe that an organization is not its own impartial judge. Using RJC's own website as a citation for proof of RJC performing "exceedingly well" (a phrasing which in itself carries certain implications) is akin to stating that Apple Inc is doing well and using a website on Apple's own homepage to confirm that. The judge of whether RJC has performed well or not cannot be RJC itself, Wikipedia is not a soapbox. See WP:Conflict_of_interest#Examples for more details.
Furthermore, the citations lead to dead links.
I believe that inclusion of these paragraphs is in violation of existing Wikipedia policies and have hence taken steps to remove it. The batch of 2006 achieved about two in three students scoring distinctions in at least 4 content subjects - the batch of 2007 clearly pales in comparism. I do not have a citation for this, but I need not have one.
It is true that three in four students scored distinctions in at least 3 content subjects while about one in two scored distinctions in at least 4 content subjects and that RJC produced 6 top students scoring the maximum of 9 distinctions in the examination. However, this does not conclusively prove that RJC did exceedingly well (compared to who? against which benchmark? even the phrase is loaded with ambiguity akin to an advert.) The point i am trying to prove is that a clear citation from an unbiased source (e.g. MOE, Singapore or a Singaporean newspaper / research agency) is needed to confirm the fact that Raffles Junior College did "exceedingly well". Unless one can provide me that citation (which, for obvious reasons, should NOT come from the Raffles website), such wording is akin to advertisement, and is in violation of wikipedia policies.
