Talk:Howardian High School

Relationship with Fitzalan High School

I originally created this page as a redirect to Fitzalan High School, based on the content of that article which says:

Fitzalan High School can trace its links and origins the establishment of Cardiff's first municipal secondary school at Howard Gardens, Adamsdown in 1884. The school later became Howardian High School and a Grammar School in 1941.

User:Stevehem has recently written a separate article here with the check-in comment Howardian High School should not redirect to Fitzalan High. They are distinct schools. However, there seems to be some relationship between these schools. Both articles claim that the schools originated from a school in Howard Gardens, Adamsdown in 1884 or 1885. Please clarify the relationship between these schools and adjust both articles accordingly. Verbcatcher (talk) 02:31, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would dispute the claim that Fitzalan can trace its roots back to 1884. It seems from the unsourced history in the Fitzalan High School article, that "Fitzalan Technical High School" was created after the Howard Gardens High School pupils at the bomb damaged Howard Gardens site relocated to Penylan. One would presume that the Howardian name stems from their original Howard Gardens location. It looks to me that Fitzalan's history began in 1953 with Fitzalan Technical High School.

In any case, now we have a separate article on Howardian High School there is no longer any need to redirect to a mention in another school's article. At the very least I would say that Howardian's history has a better documented claim to continuity with the earlier school.

Personally I'd be inclined to amend the history description of Fitzalan. There's lots of things Fitzalan can be proud of, so no need to be creative with their history... Sionk (talk) 01:21, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

William Grant Murray and Howardian High School

Your addition of the Template:Unreferenced section tag to William Grant Murray and Howardian High School appear to be motivated by our dispute concerning Académie Julian and my recent proposal in Talk:Académie de la Grande Chaumière#Lists of teachers and students. These edits appear to be trying to make a point, and not an attempt to improve these articles, see Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point.

The lists you have tagged only contain blue-linked names. If I added these names then I would have tried to ensure that the facts were cited in the linked articles. If you find any name that does not qualify for inclusion then please tag or delete the name. If the references are inadequate in the linked articles then please tag them there.

You appear to have selected these articles because I created them. I suspect that you had not looked at them before. While it is acceptable to check other edits made by an editor who you think has made questionable edits, if these are the worst cases of my work then I seem to be doing very well. I am out to get you; I have been aware of the Académie de la Grande Chaumière article for several years through an interest in Otto Gutfreund. Neither I am not fixated on cleaning up lists of names. Verbcatcher (talk) 14:20, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification: I intended "I am not out to get you". Apologies, Verbcatcher (talk) 23:17, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Citations needed for alumni--DDupard (talk) 14:37, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:DDupard, what does your check-in comment "it has to work both ways" mean? Is it an admission that your edits on this page are revenge for my edits elsewhere? That would be unacceptable.

We discussed the need to cite names in lists of names in Talk:Académie Julian#Lists of notable professors and students and Talk:Académie de la Grande Chaumière#Lists of teachers and students. On those pages you defended the inclusion of unsourced and redlinked names. Now you are arguing for the opposite, for the addition of sources to blue-linked names. While the policy for all facts to be verified where they appear, this is often not achieved and it is usually acceptable for the facts to be sourced in the linked articles.

Please remove these tags, or I will proceed to Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. Verbcatcher (talk) 15:58, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide sources to conform to guidelines, sections students and alumni are without citations--DDupard (talk) 16:12, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In many of the examples, the fact the individual attended Howardian is cited on their article. It would be pedantry to remove those peaople from the list. However, others (such as Owen John Thomas) seems to have no evidence anywhere of being alumni. In those cases it may be best to remove them from the list and also tackle the uncited info on the BLP. Sionk (talk) 17:32, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I have added a good citation to Owen John Thomas, so he can stay. Verbcatcher (talk) 18:40, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In Talk:Académie de la Grande Chaumière#Lists of teachers and students, User:DDupard wrote "And my proposal there is pedagogical", which I take to mean that the addition of the Unreferenced section tag to this article was intended to teach me a lesson. This breaks WP:DISRUPTPOINT, and I will remove the tag. Verbcatcher (talk) 19:51, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]