Talk:Reigate St Mary's School

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the Talk page for the Wikipedia article on Reigate St Mary's School. Please use it for any discussion of the article. DAHall (talk) 03:22, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal to delete this article[edit]

Please see the article Articles for deletion/Reigate St Mary's School and give your opinion. DAHall (talk) 03:25, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination[edit]

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 19:30, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(
)
Reigate St Mary's
Reigate St Mary's

Created by Moonraker (talk). Self-nominated at 02:54, 17 June 2020 (UTC).[reply]

  • First, article is at AfD, so this needs to be held until that's decided. Second, I'd object to this anyway. A directory listing is in no way a sufficient source for a claim of uniqueness. It isn't in any sense a reliable independent source. If we are going to discuss a subject on the front page, we are certainly not going to just parrot what they've said about themselves. John from Idegon (talk) 10:34, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
John from Idegon, I agree that this should be held until the Afd is closed. There is no claim here of uniqueness. I see your point about school directories, but they have editorial integrity and are independent of the schools. Much the same information appears year after year, and any factual errors are soon pointed out and corrected. But as you have challenged that source for the hook I have added a second you may like better. Moonraker (talk) 16:19, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Afd now closed, reviewer needed. Striking the first hook, which is not very strong, but here is another suggestion. Moonraker (talk) 06:26, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • New enough, long enough, neutrally written, no close paraphrasing seen. ALT1 is interesting; hook ref verified and cited inline. Images in article are freely licensed, but do not show up well at thumbnail size. QPQ done. Good to go. Yoninah (talk) 23:40, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of all external links[edit]

At this edit, all external links were removed, and one to the school’s web site was added which is already in the Infobox. The edit summary was "rm inappropriate ELs as per WP:EL". But please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools/Article advice#Structure, which says this under Other sections:

  • External links – Give a link to the website of the school, preferably one in the English language. Include other informational links that might interest readers, but whose contents might be beyond the scope of inclusion in the article (for example, links to the school's Parent Teacher Association). For understanding of adding external links to the school article(s), see guidelines of adding external links.

The way forward is to check each of the removed external links against the above guidance and to reinstate the ones which seem to comply with this policy. Fob.schools, do you have any comment? Moonraker (talk) 21:53, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That advice is just an essay. What applies are WP:ELMAYBE and WP:ELNO which are part of the guideline WP:EL. Most of the deleted links are already used as refs anyhow, which is as it should be. Fob.schools (talk) 06:23, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fob.schools, your edit summary was "rm inappropriate ELs as per WP:EL". That can only refer to the list of Links normally to be avoided in WP:ELMAYBE, with nineteen points listed. They do not include being cited in the article, but (10) refers to Facebook, so we can agree on that. Here are the other links you removed, for each of them would you please state which point you say applies. Moonraker (talk) 13:58, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

External links
They are all already available as references as far as I can see. The YouTube is just a self promoting puffpiece which fail WP:NPOV. You're not getting paid for this are you? Fob.schools (talk) 16:10, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Fob.schools, if you will take a gentle tip from me, you will cut back on that kind of accusation. Believe me, it loses arguments. And I am indeed not getting paid. Getting back on topic, without the numbered points which apply to those links, I can see no objection to putting them back. WP:NPOV refers to content, not external links, which are not part of the article. Moonraker (talk) 22:53, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
What kind of accusation? That it’s a puff piece? Of course it is. What world are you living in? Every self produced video is a puff piece. That’s why they are self produced and not the subject of a third party produced insight into the subject. It’s not normal to link to such videos. Fob.schools (talk) 03:51, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
And BTW, there is no need to ping me every time you want attention. I have all the necessary pages on my watchlist and will see any relevant edits. So please do not ping me too. Thanks. Fob.schools (talk) 03:54, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've been through every school article in the {{Schools in Surrey}} template and not one of them links to a school YouTube video. If you can find an instance, I'd be delighted to see it. Fob.schools (talk) 09:25, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Reigate_St_Mary%27s_School&oldid=1210004803"