Talk:King Edward VI Five Ways School

King Edward VI Five Ways School was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
October 20, 2007	Good article nominee	Not listed

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.

West Midlands

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject West Midlands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of West Midlands 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.West MidlandsWikipedia:WikiProject West MidlandsTemplate:WikiProject West MidlandsWest Midlands articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Assess for Schools

Very good page and you are discussing the right issues below. I hope this wasn't copied off the school web page..... if it was then you need to delete that bit as it is copyright. Alumin tick. Refs are listed but its not clear where they are used. Look at the ref tag to see how it is used. Welcome. Oh we can help more ... Victuallers 13:56, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On behalf of everyone who has contributed, thanks and I'm glad you like it. I can assure you it is all original material. With regards to references, I did add them whilst reading the Wikipedia guideline on references. However I noticed there were a number of different reference styles, and I will certainly investigate the ref tag since I suppose it is more convenient/low-maintenance. LibLord 14:48, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar

Was grammar deliberately spelled wrong? I dunno about Malcom X. I think Mussolini was more of an influence on Wheelybin, y'know...the faschism and all.Hashimashadoo 10:18, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Lulz, I think you're going to get owned for saying that Gagabrain 21:19, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to LibLord for making some great stuctural re-arrangements to this article. Alex Holowczak 21:47, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Old Edwardians

Aston and KES have lists of famous, or "notable" old boys. Does anyone have a list of those, or more realistically, know of anyone that went on to become really great? Alex Holowczak 18:12, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is at least one old boy who now works for radio 4. I can't remember his name, maybe consult Mr. Sharp on this one. 41214 21:21, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou for the tip-off, I shall investigate! Alex Holowczak 20:20, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I updated this to "alumni" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.137.56.223 (talk) 18:43, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed, and I agree it's a better choice of word. Alex Holowczak (talk) 13:00, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pupils' Worries

In view of the fact that this article is supposed to generally promote the school in a good light, I for one nominate this section for deletion. --LibLord 19:27, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

What makes you think that it's a fact that this article is supposed to generally promote the school in a good light? Surely encyclopedia articles should be factual and neutral. A neutral point of view seems to be lacking throughout. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.122.50.62 (talk) 12:56, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Too many titles, too little text

That, in a nutshell, I believe to be the problem with this article at the moment. I mean, look at the sporting section. One line for cricket! It doesn't look good that we write one sentence then move on to the next topic.. we need more people to write about the things they know about within the school. LibLord 21:21, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Now have done something to solve this regarding the start of the article. Rewrote the History, Education & introduction sections, and jiggled them around a bit. Still in dire need of something substantial on some of the sports. LibLord 22:48, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

I put that in as a stub, hoping people could expand on it. I figured someone out there could fill it in.

Holy diver. You've been down too long in the midnight sea.

Complaints

This is not a place to post any dislike for Mr. Wheeldon. It will be swiftly deleted. The Pupils' Worries is a bad reflection on the school, and we cannot allow that. If you would like to do that, post it on the Five Ways myspace page instead - somewhere a little less public. I agree with User:LibLord that that should be deleted. I tried softening it up, but alas, I think it needs to go completely. Alex Holowczak 21:59, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Some more random points from me

Just here to point out a few things with the article I'd like to see change gradually, in the long term. Most of it involves tweaking the article in accordance to Wikipedia's policies on article content. This may be the school's article, and we may want to portray it in a good light, but it's still on Wikipedia:

"This may be the school's article..." Really? Wikipedia articles are private fiefdoms are they? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.122.50.62 (talk) 13:11, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is a lot of original research on here that just makes me cringe sometimes... like "The future of Five Ways looks strong"... says who? I just picked out that one because I think the "future" section should be more factual, less opinionated.. but let me just stress, I'm not ruling out ALL statements of this nature, because sometimes they are true and just can't be verified.. but if we stripped the article of everything that couldn't be verified it would be very short indeed.

It shouldn't be "more factual, less opinionated", it should be wholly factual (and verifiably so) and not in the least opinionated.

References: the more the merrier, really. Anything that can be referenced, do. Go here to see how, and that's the type of referencing I propose we adopt. If you can't do it just post your links here and I will.
Spelling errors! Seems silly but there are so many of them. I could just change them myself but that wouldn't be so sustainable. So yeah. Use a dictionary.

LibLord 23:11, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Or failing that, use the Wiktionary! Alex Holowczak 21:52, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox!

I hope you like the infobox! LibLord 19:10, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Links Too Long?

I copied and pasted a whole heap of stuff from the school website about links to other schools. Is that overdominating the page? Alex Holowczak 20:24, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

sexual incidents

I just removed a few paragraphs regarding P.E. teachers, sexual incidents, 'claims of harassment and debauchery', and 'prospective sex offenders'. Why?

That's simply censoring the truth and as it is relevant to the school, should stay. Despite the fact that it may put the school in a bad light, we should make a point of being honest. If you were doing a Nathan Gale article, you wouldn't miss out that he shot Dimebag, in the same way we should not hide the truth, unless I'm mistaken and it is fictitious. Gagabrain 21:25, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Five Ways Today" section

This little addition just read as a disgruntled student's add-on to an introduction to the school as it currently stands. i.e. it didn't flow properly, it didn't make sense where it was, and it didn't sound good. in terms of article structure that is, never mind content.

"Current Issues and The Future" section

This addition doesn't belong in the section the editor placed it in. It belongs in the "pupil's worries" section. But we deleted that section several weeks ago on the grounds that is was inappropriate and just made the school look like a bad place... sure, there are things about Five Ways that people are going to dislike - hell, even hate. But it's the same for every school. Other schools don't write about it on their wikipedia pages, so why should we? Writing about a sex offender in the school, no matter how much truth there is in it, just makes the place look like a dump. Anyway, that's my opinion, but please let's discuss. If enough people think it's a good idea to talk about the school as a "humanities specialist sex-offender institute", I guess maybe that makes me wrong.

LibLord 12:15, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

POV and bias

I think the editors of this page need to be careful about only wanting to show the positive side of the school, if someone comes along with verifiable information that is negative, you'll have to let them add it if it's notable enough. Other schools have had to let it happen on Wikipedia.Terri G 19:25, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Point taken, but none of the stuff I deleted was verifiable. LibLord 22:34, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

deleted "see also"

I deleted the "see also" of Babati, because:

I don't think there's any need to have it as a see also... it's already linked to within the main article.
We don't have any other "see alsos" and so it looked silly on its own.

Any comments?

LibLord 16:37, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Alex Holowczak 19:44, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps some users find it easier to see a list of relevant wiki pages, rather than have to hunt through the article for it...... 86.130.252.131 22:32, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Changes

We found a list of Old Edwardians, thanks to a prospectus supplied from none other than Mr Wheeldon himself! He also pointed out he was not an ex-pupil of the school. All corrected now. Alex Holowczak 22:21, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fake Sheikh?

Rumour has it that Mazher Mahmood also came here? Anyone know anything about that? Alex Holowczak 22:22, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed from as good a source as any - Mr Sharp! Alex Holowczak 15:30, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Sharp is a great place to check for old Edwardians by the looks of things! Callum (talk) 15:47, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Continuity of names

in some places, staff names are quoted in full, e.g. David Wheeldon, in other places, formally, i.e. Mr Wilson. would some continuty in staff naming be sensible?

ukeivo 21:30, 09 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose so - we just don't know all the teachers names! Hence the anonymosity. Alex Holowczak 21:36, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think you mean anonymity. LibLord 18:50, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think I mean that too. :) Alex Holowczak 20:33, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Simon Pegg

Really? He was born in Gloucester, it seems a bit of a commute. I know it says he came here on his page, but there's no guarantee that he came here. The others came from The Chronicle, produced by the school, which is a verifyable source, but not on the Internet sadly. Yet Pegg's name was not mentioned in The Chronicle, yet I feel it is worthy enough of a mention for it to be there. Thoughts? Alex Holowczak 17:14, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, he wasn't as confirmed by Mr Marston. Alex Holowczak 13:14, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sandie Shaw

I am removing her from the list of famous Old Edwardians for a few reasons:

She was born in Dagenham, which is nowhere near here.
She is a "she"... And in the 1950s/60s the school was a boys only school. Even the Sixth Form.

So, find evidence, but for now, she goes.

Failed "good article" nomination

Upon its review on October 20, 2007, this good article nomination was quick-failed because it:

had a virtual or complete lack of reliable sources

thus making it ineligible for good article consideration. According to WP:Verifiability, "Material that is challenged or likely to be challenged, and all quotations, must be attributed to a reliable, published source."

This article did not receive a thorough review, and may not meet other parts of the good article criteria. The article needs a lot of work. There are a handful of sections with zero references or wikilinks. Before anything the article needs to be brought up to standard with the manual of style. Headers and section structure need to be changed to better comply with the manual. Look at the good article criteria and make sure you comply with all points before submitting again. Best of luck! I encourage you to remedy this problem (and any others) and resubmit it for consideration. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to a Good article reassessment. Thank you for your work so far.—Noetic Sage 23:09, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

N-POV? Advertisement?

I don't know why all the negative tags have been attached to this article. Perhaps one section, "King Edwards Public School" needs some clean-up or cites added. But the rest of the article looks just fine. Just compare it to any university entry in Wikipedia. Is the MIT [[1]] article an advertisement? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.151.21.99 (talk) 00:59, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry too much. I asked the user to put tags here, for where I should include sources to improve the article. He has only done as I have requested. Although I admit, it does look awful now! But it will look better once I have things to replace the tags. Alex Holowczak 20:17, 6 November 2007 (UTC) P.S. Compared to a lot of other school articles, I don't think this is bad at all.[reply]

This is about tag cleanup. As all of the tags are more than a year old, there is no current discussion relating to them, and there is a great deal of editing done since the tags were placed, they will be removed. This is not a judgement of content. If there is cause to re-tag, then that of course may be done, with the necessary posting of a discussion as to why, and what improvements could be made. This is only an effort to clean out old tags, and permit them to be updated with current issues if warranted.Jjdon (talk) 19:10, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Nish"

Please do not add "Nish" to the Old Edwardians section. "Old Edwardians" are old boys of the school. I.e. they don't go to Five Ways anymore. Hence, "Nish", who still goes to our school, is not an Old Edwardian, so therefore should not be included. Any further attempts to add him will be removed swiftly, in accordance with this message. Alex Holowczak (talk) 15:46, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oscar Deutsch

Please find a source. It again strikes me as one of those things the school would put in the prospectus. Alex Holowczak (talk) 13:51, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

EDGE partnership -- what's that?

I was trying to disambiguate the EDGE wikilink but failed to find any more specific information. The disambiguation page also doesn't contain anything related. Does that partnership programme(?) have a web page or something? --saimhe (talk) 17:25, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, here it is. Alex Holowczak (talk) 20:21, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! At last the disambig page has became a bit better. I can only dream about a separate article. --saimhe (talk) 21:40, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pointless Additions

Particular highlights:

"Most people catch the 22 bus." So what if they do? That has no relevance on the article in question. It is only necessary to state the presence of the public and private services, any further detail could be placed on a separate article. Also bordering on POV.
"Eleven Plus. aka 11+." It doesn't matter whether the alias was Konstantinov, the point has nothing to do with KEFW. So put it on the Eleven Plus article if you think it warrants inclusion.

So please think before you edit. :-) Alex Holowczak (talk) 09:52, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Language

There ought to be a law requiring people who claim that X is traditional to say just what tradition X adheres to.

"We" in the section King Edward Public School ("We also welcome another party from India...") is inappropriate.

The article is littered with management-speak: "a school improvement strategy", "roadmap for further development", "Links are being forged at the moment", "The next stage is to embed this link". Perhaps this is the way headteachers address their staff and pupils, but it is inappropriate for a Wikipedia article. 81.131.31.196 (talk) 15:24, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on King Edward VI Five Ways School. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150513004728/http://www.ssf.uk.com/profile/profile_region/west%20midlands?from=20 to http://www.ssf.uk.com/profile/profile_region/west%20midlands?from=20

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:39, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on King Edward VI Five Ways School. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071013111651/http://www.brumjuniorchess.co.uk/ to http://www.brumjuniorchess.co.uk
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060312193244/http://www.kingedwardthesixth.org:80/ to http://www.kingedwardthesixth.org
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071013111651/http://www.brumjuniorchess.co.uk/ to http://www.brumjuniorchess.co.uk
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061205042113/http://fivewaysmedia.co.uk:80/ to http://www.fivewaysmedia.co.uk
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070221100336/http://www.fivewayschess.co.uk:80/ to http://www.fivewayschess.co.uk
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071210061646/http://kefw.info:80/ to http://kefw.info

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:58, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on King Edward VI Five Ways School. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070227205418/http://www.kingedwardsfoundation.co.uk/ to http://www.kingedwardsfoundation.co.uk/
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080321114438/http://www.ke5ways.bham.sch.uk/sections/5/international_links_china.htm to http://www.ke5ways.bham.sch.uk/sections/5/international_links_china.htm
Corrected formatting/usage for https://web.archive.org/web/20060312193244/http%3A//www.kingedwardthesixth.org%3A80/
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070928171441/http://www.babatilink.org.uk/ to http://www.babatilink.org.uk/
Corrected formatting/usage for https://web.archive.org/web/20061205042113/http%3A//fivewaysmedia.co.uk%3A80/
Corrected formatting/usage for https://web.archive.org/web/20070221100336/http%3A//www.fivewayschess.co.uk%3A80/
Corrected formatting/usage for https://web.archive.org/web/20071210061646/http%3A//kefw.info%3A80/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:49, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 29 external links on King Edward VI Five Ways School. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:47, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]