This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greater Manchester, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greater Manchester 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.Greater ManchesterWikipedia:WikiProject Greater ManchesterTemplate:WikiProject Greater ManchesterGreater Manchester articles
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
Hi Simon, the GM is not a diploma mill but a University Technical College - this is a new type of secondary school in the UK. It has no claimed or actual links to the University of Manchester. Crookesmoor (talk) 14:43, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The one-size-fits-all name looks like it does (and I went to a Comprehensive School that did not call itself a "University Engineering Technical College"), which it says formally but perhaps means formerly, it does not link University Technical College, it has no references, the website is moribund, it has no pupils, it is not "next to" Bolton College. It looks like a diploma mill. I never said it was one, but the article we have makes it look like one. No coverage in Manchester Evening News or Bolton Advertiser via google news that I could find (or indeed any other paper or reliable news source). Not "next to" Bolton College as the artile claims, as any maps search will tell you: they are on different roads (and not on a corner).
As it stands it is a non-RS non-notable secondary school with a .co.uk (as opposed to .ac.uk or .org.uk) address. That is why I have WP:PRODded it and I suggest we continue the conversation there. Si Trew (talk) 14:59, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I am not suggesting in any way that User:Crookesmoor has any relation to this school (though the username unfortunately has a kinda Dickensian sound of More crooks to it, that would be the last username a crook would choose!) but I see that Crookesmoor edits a lot of these "new types of secondary school" articles and I believe did so on this one wither without fact-checking or adding any references beyond any plausibility. For example the 9 million quid new building should easily be sourced somewhere but isn't. Even if they have a nine million quid new building they are still not notable per WP:SCHOOL whether it calls itself a university technical college or not. Most Cambridgeshire secondary schools are called Village College such as Bottisham Village College (Cambridgeshire really pioneered the secondary school system) but that does not without references such as the one I gave make them of themselves notable. Sorry for turning into Mr. Gradgrind but we should be taught the facks and nothing but the facts, this article has no reliable facts.
They are all proposed to become Academies anyway, which in my view as an electronics and computer engineer and product of the comprehensive and vocational system of education seems a throwback, at least in the word, to suggest we should all come from the high groves of academe (or perhaps Highgroves :) ) rather than doing something useful, I learned my literature, my Latin and a bit of Greek and other languages, later, I was busy with a spirit level and a bit of phenolphthalene. But that is just my political axe to grind on what I think of the polits trying to ruin a perfectly good education for some of us, and has nothing to do with what I think of this article, I mention them here openly only so that it they are not falsely inferred and taken as some kind of political remark on my part rather than comments on the article. (Now I am turning rather into Mr. Bounderby.) Thanks to Crookesmoor for replying so promptly. Si Trew (talk) 15:08, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I am all for adding RS to the articles, I am just saying at the moment it looks like a fraudulent diploma mill. As such it should go. We don't keep schools without reliable references: the nine million quid is in the headline but not in the article and doesn't say where they get it from. I can do some homework but the article is not my baby. As it stands it can be deleted, because as it stands it gives a load of very dubious-looking information such as a non-functioning website that makes it look like the school has no pupils (it is just a front page with no information and is a .co.uk). I am sure with some copy-editing between me and User:Crookesmoor we can maybe turn it into a stub article of just passable merit. I insist it should neither be nor look like an advert for a diploma mill. Why they had to put up with the Thatcherite Education secretary Kenneth Baker, Baron Baker of Dorking to open it tells you something, but I am not sure what. Si Trew (talk) 15:28, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
