Talk:St Andrew's Church of England High School

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Schools

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

London Low‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London 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.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Closure

I added a section about the proposed closure/merger. Yesterday an IP editor changed the enrollment number, although that was unsourced. I reverted the change, but I believe that the current school enrollment is well below the published enrollment as lower years are not being filled. I have provided a reference to this. recent updates would be welcome - but please remember to add citations when describing the latest situation (if you are unfamiliar with wikipedia mark up, put the reference in as a pasted URL and I, or another editor, will tidy up). Sirfurboy (talk) 10:27, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comprehensive in 1978

Probably there should be something about changing status of the school in history. It became a Comprehensive in 1978 although remained selective. Does anyone have a source for that? -- Sirfurboy (talk) 10:28, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

History

An IP editor has added a large amount of very interesting history (thanks for this). However the <ref> does not allow anyone to find the source so it fails WP:V rules on verifiability. I won't delete as I think it is probably correct but it will need better sources.

My other concern is that the length of the material, its structure, and the high quality of the initial editing make me suspect it could be a copyvio. A google search does not confirm this though, and it is just as possible that the IP editor has simply written an excellent piece. However, if this is copied directly from another source then it will need to be deleted or rewritten in your own words. If the IP @80.195.7.123: can confirm this is their own work I will leave it alone. If there is no such assurance, I will proceed on the assumption that it could be a copyright violation and completely rewrite the section in my own words. -- Sirfurboy (talk) 08:33, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have now made contact outside of Wikipedia with the author of the posted history and confirmed this is her own work. I will thus stop rewriting this as it is clear there is no copy-vio. The author has done a good deal of original research to produce that history, and it is her own work. I am in discussion as to how to source the claims to comply with Wikipedia policies. -- Sirfurboy (talk) 14:47, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]