Talk:The King's (The Cathedral) School

Main content

Have reinstated the earlier edits (28.09.07) because they were more accurate and in line with encyclopaedic style. The claim about the school being rated the '6th highest achieving school in the UK is unsubstantiated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.42.206.175 (talk) 22:48, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

The main information on this page is copied directly from the school's website. Dunno if this is really a problem, as it doesn't seem too biased... Odd bloke 17:05, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

This article seems to be more an advertisement for the school than a factual record. I'm not sure that some of the content is appropriate in an encylopedic entry. Comments? graydj 7 October 2006 (UTC)

I've just added a load of stuff about house music. If there are any spelling mistakes (whcih there probaly are) or facts that are wrong could someone please correct them. thanks.

RE Alice in Wonderland, don't remove it, it's true, I found it Mpateman 13:43, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately you don't count as a reliable source in Wikipedia terms, was it reported in the local paper at the time, or is therean online catalogue etc which shows that school holds the copy? David Underdown 14:47, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Public School ?

Is this school an independent school or a state comp ? The article is confusing, and their website unclear.--jrleighton 16:33, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

It's a state comp, with an independant attitude. It does have a selection policy however.

How can a school claim to be a comprehensive with a selection policy? Also how can the school claim to be cristian with its elightest attitude the bible promotes helping the poor and group responsibility your school however apears to promote the midle classes and elightism?

I don't believe that the above person has the article's interests at heart - I believe he or she is aiming simply to deride and generally put the school down. I could find no evidence to suggest that the school promote's "middle class" learning - there is a wide range of pupils at the school, from children with rich parents to children who qualify for the full Education Maintenance Allowance. I have included a reference to the perception of snobbery in King's students, however, and I have removed the badly written paragraph on paedophiles temporarily, which I will replace with a better written example. John Coxon 11:08, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

The perception of snobbery is just that - a perception. Unless there is some verification, the statement shouldn't be there at all. Likewise, the alleged paedophilia should not make an appearance in the article without a reference. See Wikipedia:Verifiability. ... discospinster 15:00, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

I go to the school, so I know that there is snobbery within it. I can't think of any more worthwhile reference, if I'm totally honest. Both of the paedophiles admitted to their crimes - "Link broken" and this article on the guy who had sex with his son's girlfriend. Will those do for references? John Coxon 14:16, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Links for article relating to T Coldwell changed to one that works.

it's not a state comprehensive, its a 'Voluntary Aided Church of England comprehensive secondary school', this is stated on the schools website, but i didn't know if this was 'proof' enough to alter the article http://www.kings.peterborough.sch.uk/page_viewer.asp?section=The+School%27s+History&sid=7 Delriogw (talk) 22:53, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup

I'm just going to go ahead and do a cleanup on this whole article. I don't really know anything about it, so others are going to have to fill in the gaps. — ßottesiηi ^(talk) 21:09, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Well there's not really enough information for an infobox, so I'll just do some wikification. — ßottesiηi ^(talk) 21:14, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Removal of information?

I am unsure as to why the information detailing the scandals concerning Coldwell and Lister was removed - there was no mention made on this page, and no reason given in the edit itself, so I have reinstated the information. It is been cited and is factual, so I see no reason why it should be removed - if anybody editing this article should wish to remove it, please comment here so that it can be discussed instead of just deleting it. Thanks! John Coxon 17:24, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Does the school wish to have a continual reminder of its 'scandals' John? Probably not. The information on Coldwell and Lister is readily available on other news sites. This page should be about the Kings School and its successes.

That is not the point of an encyclopedia - an encyclopedia entry should be as unbiased as possible and include any factual information that can be found about the school. This includes the section on the 'scandals', as you (whoever you are) so put it. This is not a site for advertisements, and this part of the entry should not be removed for the purpose of painting King's in a better light, as this makes a mockery of the goal of Wikipedia - providing good and unbiased information.

The information has, again, been removed with no reasoning or explanation by the user, and as such, I have reinstated it, as it's referenced and true. John Coxon 17:23, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree with John, of course why wouldnt i? i am Bon after all :) The information regarding the 'scandals' does not break wikipedia rules and so should be allowed to remain.

Woah hang on, who just removed all the information about house music? why? Theres nothing untrue about that. All the information doesn't 'violate' wikipedia rules?!

It wasn't me that removed it, but I did feel that there was a problem with the "tone" of some of it. For it to be included we need to be abel to find external references to support all the information - ideally from sources other than just the school (eg press reports). David Underdown 12:53, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I didn't think there was anything wrong with it. It was an accurate description of the event. So, who did remove it?! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gumbertron (talk • contribs) 15:17, 3 April 2007 (UTC).

I have replaced the 'House Music' section but have reworded and reorganised it. Let it not be removed again. Items are for editing not total removal, remember that whoever it was! (Warriorofrovac 16:10, 3 April 2007 (UTC))

Are there any independent reliable sources? Without them it will be removed again. -- zzuuzz^(talk) 16:17, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Why? to make sure we are not making 'House Music' up?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Warriorofrovac (talk • contribs).

Yes. -- zzuuzz^(talk) 16:32, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Fine, i have added citations. (Warriorofrovac 16:40, 3 April 2007 (UTC))

Heh. this iz all liez. lolz.

Lol, and why is house music a lie? Oh yes, because we made it up. The kings school isn't even real. Its all a big lie.

h4h4h4h4h l0lz3r y0uz a11 5uc|< a7 7h15 5|-|17!1

Someone has removed the scandals section again without reason. It is a valid part of the school's history and I will reinstate it if no reason for its removal is given. Earthbee24 (talk) 21:32, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Boarding

Doesn't the former boarding house deserve some mention? It's pretty unusual for a UK state-funded school to have had provision for boarders. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by David Underdown (talk • contribs) 14:56, 21 March 2007 (UTC).

It does, i probably would when i find information on it. Though i have a vague idea but i need clarification. Warriorofrovac 18:05, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

The School stopped providing boarding facilities in 1991, it is rare for a state school to offer boarding facilities withint the UK Mpateman 20:07, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

it may have stopped taking in new boarders in this year - tho if memory serves they actually introduced female boarders when i was much further into the school than year 8 (in 1991 that is) - it's CERTAINLY the case that the boarding house remained open until 1995 when i was in year 11, as several members of my year still actually lived there. unless of course they conned us all and were in fact squatters.Delriogw (talk) 22:38, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I was a boarder at Kings 1962-65. I have added two paragraphs about boarders under "Houses"; as well as adding Neil Hubbard to the list of alumni. Arrivisto

POV

very POV, reads like a positive review rather than an encyclopaedia article, I'll try to sort it later --The internet is serious business 10:43, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

it now seems to have gone completely in the opposite direction, and is fairly obviously written by someone with quite a large dislike for the school. as an ex pupil i have edited the section on the intake (i joined the school as very much a working class youngster, as were some of my friends. and it most certainly was not true that there were no lower ability students from the working class community). there is also a claim that students feel incredibly pressured to achieve.. i'm fairly certain that this will not be limited to this institution alone. Delriogw (talk) 22:39, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

History

The History section isnt exactly the history of the school more a general overview so that needs changing. Most of the information could either be accomodated in existed sections or new ones. Warriorofrovac 21:00, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Sixth Form

Is it worth a mention that the sixth form recently recieved a poor ofsted report, just to mention that it isnot considered up to the high standards of the rest of the school or something? cos i think this is an imoirtant aspect, and at the moment this just reads like a fan page (can schools have fan pages? never mind) cos theres just no bad points mentioned at all. not sure how to ref an ofsted report, though Jackc5755 (talk) 21:25, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Just add this link [1]. Note that it says the sixth form is "good", and is generally positive, so you might have to include at least some praise to remain neutral. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 21:54, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia article or School Brochure?

The page seems more like a brochure rather than an objective Wikipedia article. I have effected a number of edits and prunings, but the page still includes superfluous detail that ought to be edited or excised. Arrivisto (talk) 20:35, 15 August 2012 (UTC)