Talk:The King's School, Grantham

Schools High‑importance

	Schools portal This article is related to WikiProject Schools, a collaborative effort 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.SchoolsWikipedia:WikiProject SchoolsTemplate:WikiProject Schoolsschool articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Lincolnshire Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lincolnshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lincolnshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LincolnshireWikipedia:WikiProject LincolnshireTemplate:WikiProject LincolnshireLincolnshire articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Daily pageviews of this article

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

March 2007[edit]

world famous alumniVictuallers 22:47, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is the mention of the "chamber of secrets" toilets necessary?

--Aparently so.

chamber of secrets toliets... another magnificent waste of money by the school

Debating society[edit]

Are David Pratt and Daniel Leahy students at the school? If so I'd suggest they're not notable enough to keep updating the presidents of the debating society with each new academic year - is this a shared opinion?

This is not a forum for discussing the structure of the hierarchy of the socity. No reason for discussion.

I believe that this has been resolved by removing the names of the students and should therefore be considered "dispute resolved" chris (talk) 14:54, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In Wikipedia encyclopaedic terms, this article is flawed.[edit]

This article relied, (and still relies somewhat,) heavily on what appears self-reference to King’s School promotion, showing blatant disregard for Wikipedia: Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:NPOV. It read largely as a brochure for the school, was padded out with superfluous phrasing, had sloppy construction, and included schoolboy trivia. I have sharpened its text and worked on its structure with a hope that it is a better and crisper read, and slightly more Wikified.

INTRO:

I have reduced the first para to an introductory sentence above the info box.

HISTORY:

The rest of that para about history is now under a ‘History’ section. However, much of what was there, and in the previous ‘Famous names’ section was not appropriate for this article; to have mini biogs of famous or notable associated persons is unnecessary when such information is found under their own Wikipedia article, and if anything new is written about them, their articles are the appropriate places to add it. The phrase “... and its reputation did not grow as that of other similar schools grew, as they outpaced it”, is typical of dubious unsupported personal statements throughout the article. I have left something of Richard Foxe in here, but this is still too much; unfortunately, if what I’ve left is removed, very little would remain. I have added a couple of historical snippets.

IMAGE:

I have removed the dead link to a Newton signature as the image no longer exists.

EARLY FAMOUS SCHOLARS:

I have added those famous old boys in this section, and trimmed the unnecessary fat against their names: Wikipedia links are sufficient.

NOTABLE SCHOLARS:

There is a new section for ‘Notable scholars’. I have changed the Jason Haynes entry to “Jason Haynes, cricketer.” There is no need to add a mini biog, just a simple label for who he is. If such a label doesn’t aggrandise him suitably, perhaps he isn’t notable enough. Similarly with others on the list, especially those with their own Wikipedia articles, there is no need to over-egg the pudding; over-egging appears desperate.

TODAY:

A total revamp here. This section was complete travesty: a mixture of promotional bumph and juvenile concerns over insubstantial events. However, I have not removed any items or events, but restructured for a more intelligent read and trimmed out the fluff and unsubstantiated claims, examples:

considered to be one of the best one hundred in his age group

which promises to benefit the students of both institutions

The school is near-enough unique in that

The section is arguably the most successful in the CCF

students hold a privileged place in the "pecking order" of school uniforms

There is blatant one-upmanship too: reaching second place in front of Royal Newcastle Grammar School

and blatant promotion: The uniform can be bought from shops in Grantham.

I have removed the sub-section ‘Cricket’ and added the edited "information" into the sub section called ‘Sport’, where it might belong. When the schoolboy travelogue trivia about what I did on my hols is removed from ‘Cricket’, there is little of interest left. What is left should be binned.

I have removed certain red links: they link to things that, by googling, don’t seem to have the weight to deserve an article, or seem to have no substantial presence internationally or even nationally, eg: The Grantham Church (VA) High School

SCHOOL LINKS:

I have changed the heading of the ‘Social and business links’ to ‘School links’ as there was nothing ‘social ‘ in there... in fact there was nothing about links with businesses either.

GENERAL:

I have updated the headmaster info in the infobox.

I have removed all links to the previous reference 1: this led straight to the School’s web site home page, giving no information about the ‘fact’ referred to. Another ref link to a School information PDF was dead. A further link to King's School - Uniform and Appearance was to the School web site page with ‘where to buy’ info.

Citation requests abound because very little is supported by proof. This article is still slight, and with little to support its assertions.

Acabashi (talk) 02:50, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brief page protection[edit]

Article has briefly been semi-protected after repeated vandalism from multiple IP's and throwaway accounts.

If you're editing without an account or from a very new one, and have a genuine edit you'd like to make, please feel free to post it here and a longer-term editor can make it on your behalf. Alternatively the protection expires in a day so you can wait till then. Euryalus (talk) 02:03, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Notable scholars Martin Pointer and others[edit]

The addtion of Martin Pointer in the Notable section of The King's School, Grantham by blocked IP User:212.121.220.212 has been copy edited. Verifiabilty needs to be provided for the inclusion of Pointer, and others added at the same time. Pointer has only one apparently notable case to recommend him; this does not make him notable enough - all web refs seem to refer to this Heather Mills case and his day job. To gauge notability it should be considered whether he deserves a Wiki article in his own right - at the moment he doesn't. Any importance needs to be fatted-out with more evidence - can anyone help? Pointer will be removed if no evidence of notability can be found. I will check others added for notability and verifiability; having a Wikipedia article doesn't automatically recommend a subject to Kings School Notables, unless that subject's article states association with cited evidence. I have added this argument to User talk:212.121.220.212's talk page. Acabashi (talk) 17:37, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Martin Pointer[edit]

I have removed Pointer from the list for the reasons stated above. Acabashi (talk) 13:27, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Notable former pupils[edit]

Is there any real point in separating out 4 early scholars from the others? Surely all should be included in a single heading? Head-it-behind (talk) 12:00, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

usage of building containing Newton's signature[edit]

"he carved his signature on the wall of what is now the school library"

This is not entirely correct, this building has not been in use as a library for approximately a decade, perhaps longer. I'm not sure how to amend this, else I would have done so myself. perhaps the line is simply best removed. ADM.Tetanus (talk) 18:36, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]