Talk:Ruthin School

Category:Old Ruthinians renaming

At present there is a discussion relating to the renaming of this category. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at this discussion page. Please note that the discussion is not a majority vote so contributions should be based on Wikipedia policies and independent sources. Cjc13 (talk) 13:53, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ruthin 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/20140624054251/http://ruthinschool.co.uk/about/the_principals_message.php to http://www.ruthinschool.co.uk/about/the_principals_message.php

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) 03:18, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pointless material

I see we have finally progressed to producing a cite. However, it seems to me it does not merit inclusion to note that a posh school has a prize-giving. No independent cite is given for this material, because no independent source has the slightest interest in it. It should be removed.

The paragraph beginning "The school won the 2016, 2017 and 2018 ..." is essentially uncited - the URL provided does not contain material supporting the statements. Pinkbeast (talk) 21:51, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This seems to me to be deliberately inflammatory - the material talked about is either a relevant part of the traditions section, or a genuine achievement (which admittedly required citation). (talk) 20:08, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't actually seem to include any argument to show why it merits inclusion. "Posh school has prize giving" is simply not a remarkable fact in any way. You might as well include a sentence to the effect that the headmaster has a nose. Pinkbeast (talk) 01:06, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a given that any school has a prize giving day, hence its inclusion alongside the other traditions. (talk) 15:30, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a given that the headmaster has a nose, either, but it's still unremarkable that he does. If he didn't - if a posh school did not have a prizegiving - it might merit inclusion as an unusual situation, especially if independent sources had considered the deficiency worth reporting. Pinkbeast (talk) 16:18, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this discussion is going anywhere so I have sought a third opinion. I will abide by the 3O decision and I trust you will do likewise. Pinkbeast (talk) 16:23, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

3O Response: I concur with Pinkbeast. The relevant policy here is WP:NOTEVERYTHING: Information should not be included in this encyclopedia solely because it is true or useful. A Wikipedia article should not be a complete exposition of all possible details, but a summary of accepted knowledge regarding its subject. Whether a school has a daily prize-giving event is trivial and does not get to the essence of the subject, which should be the point of a Wikipedia article. When we think about summarizing the third-party reliable independent sources to write an article about a school, we want to disclose the most important details about the school: where it is, how long it has been operating, what ages of students it takes, whether it has sustained significant news coverage for an event, etc. Having a day to distribute prizes is not particularly important or interesting, and as such I agree that it doesn't merit inclusion in the article. /wiae /tlk 16:47, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

3O Response: Beat me to the punch, and probably more fluently. Now, if an independent source has made note of the prize-giving events, that may establish a case for inclusion. DonIago (talk) 16:49, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both. Pinkbeast (talk) 03:59, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Commons files used on this page have been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page have been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:37, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]