Talk:Wellington College (New Zealand)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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
Mid This article has been rated as mid-Importance within Schools.
Flag Wellington College (New Zealand) is part of WikiProject New Zealand, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.
Assessment comments
It is requested that a photograph or photographs be included in this article to improve its quality, if possible.
Wikipedians in New Zealand may be able to help!

Archive for talk page prior to refactoring: Talk:Wellington College (New Zealand)/Archive01

[edit] Grandstanding

There seems to be a debate between 202.89.150.160 and 124.197.27.249 (although the IP addresses do seem to change) about this statement:

"More New Zealand Governors-General and Chief Justices have attended Wellington College than any other New Zealand school."

This could turn into a revert war, so I'd like to bring the discussion here.

One side of the argument (from the edit summary) is "grandstanding, even if it is true, because WP is not a trophy cabinet."

The other side of the argument is: "it's not grandstanding. its a fairly notable achievement over a long period of time."

(please note I have fixed spelling mistakes)

My personal thoughts are that the comment should be removed. I feel that it is not a fairly notable achievement. The school (as far as I can tell) was attended by only 2 NZ Governor generals in its long history. The Governor Generals should be listed, but it does not deserve a note. Same for the Chief Justices (although I think there have been more then 2 of them).

I will not change this until I hear other peoples thoughts. --Roue2 03:34, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing up the topic. I am the one who wrote the anti-grandstanding comment. My take on the issue is that if this school's achievement is truly notable, it would not need a comment of the sort in the first place. Adding a note that n GGs attended the school, just highlights a fact which is plainly obvious from inspection anyway, which is grandstanding. I am against such a note, and the verbose career descriptions after people's names (not just on this page, but other NZ school pages in general).
PS. there are three GGs :)
202.89.150.160 10:45, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
The most recent version of the GGs claim was originally the Wgtn Coll had "produced" more GGs than any other (NZ) school. It is drawing a long bow to assert that any school produced a GG, given the decades between leaving school and becoming GG. I changed "produced" to the more neutral "attended". But 3 is not really a big number, even if it is 3 times as many as have attended any other NZ school. I think that this says a lot more about the GGs than about Wgtn Coll. Never mind though, there are worse things in the NZ bits of wikipedia. Neil Leslie 18:48, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
So the comments should be removed, no? All three comments so far support removing the comment. 202.89.150.160 08:09, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

More self-congratulatory talk... For the most part, its been commented out, since text like that sounds very much like it was written by someone involved. There are lots of NZ school pages which suffer from this kind of edit, with this page being one of them. Also, repeated details, etc, were cut out. 202.89.155.94 22:22, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:WCNZCoatofArm.jpg

Image:WCNZCoatofArm.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:16, 21 January 2008 (UTC)