Talk:Newcastle High School (Australia)

Fair use rationale for Image:Newcastlehighlogo.gif

Image:Newcastlehighlogo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 22:20, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Newcastle High School Logo.jpg

Image:Newcastle High School Logo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 14:58, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Students of Newcastle Boys High were not students of this school

Far too often I see "famous alumni" added to this article who never attended this school. Typically the people added are ex-Newcastle Boys High School (NBHS) students who people, apparently not understanding the concept of succession, think attended Newcastle High School (NHS) because of the statement "Newcastle High School, which began in 1976, is the successor of three schools". Prior to becoming just plain old non-selective Newcastle High, the school was called Newcastle Girls High School (NGHS) and was, as the name suggests, an all-girls (ie no boys) school. NGHS and NBHS were completely separate entities at different locations. Students of NBHS can't be considered to have been students of NHS because they didn't attend the school, or NGHS. When NBHS became Waratah High School in January 1977 it was just a name change, nothing more. Students weren't transferred en masse to NHS. Nor was any of the infrastructure transferred from NBHS to NHS. NHS is just the last of a family of schools that shared a sometimes common history. That's where the succession comes from. The common root is Hill High. NGHS split off from that in 1929 as a separate entity, although uniform colours and the motto carried on to the new school. NBHS started at Waratah in 1934 and Hill High continued on as Newcastle Junior Boys High until 1973. NBHS, using the same motto, colours and school song, survived a further 3 years until it lost its identity and became Waratah High. Meanwhile, NGHS continued on and is the only one of the three schools left to carry on with the colours and motto. The only people who can be considered to be students of Newcastle High School are females who attended Newcastle Girls High School until 1976 and anyone who attended Newcastle High School from 1977. --AussieLegend (talk) 10:11, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

There's a redirect to this page from "Newcastle Boys' High School", so there's no other place for old boys of NBHS. I've broken up the list by school attended, and I think it would be reasonable to add a section for NBHS. Giles Martin (talk) 14:19, 23 August 2010 (UTC) And I left in one person who clearly went to Boys' High. I'm not sure about Peter Cronau: I can't find his age or which school he went to. Giles Martin (talk) 14:29, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

NBHS students shouldn't be added to this article because they didn't go to this school. If there is a need to include famous NBHS alumni, then the NBHS redirect should be converted into an article. Any names that can't be verified as having attended the schools shouldn't be in either article. --AussieLegend (talk) 23:19, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

I've now created an article for Newcastle Boys' High School. Giles Martin (talk) 15:33, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Motto

I'm bringing over the discussion regarding the motto from User talk:AussieLegend, because I intend to ask for a third opinion.

I think your interpretation of the translation of Newcastle HS's motto is best placed in the article proper (otherwise we'll have people interpreting the mottos for every bloody school, it'll get ridiculous). Can you make a section for it? ...and I'm sure I've raised it before, but ,'s in these numbers aren't really all that necessary. -Danjel (talk) 11:03, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

It's not my interpretation. I went to Newcastle Boys High which, along with Newcastle Girls High (now Newcastle High) and Newcastle Junior Boys High, all shared the school song, colours, logo and motto. This is the official interpretation. There's nothing to be gained from deleting it at this time. As for commas in numbers, MOS:NUM requires them for large numbers and Australian practice is to use them so we do so for consistency. Again, there's no point deleting them. --AussieLegend (talk) 11:13, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for finding that for me. I knew it was around somewhere, but... MOS:NUM#Delimiting_.28grouping_of_digits.29:

Numbers with five or more digits to the left of the decimal point (i.e. 10,000 or more) should be delimited into groups so they can be easily parsed, such as by using a comma (,) every three digits

(emph. mine)

As for the motto... WP:No_original_research? You're basing it off your own personal interpretation, because you haven't referenced anything. Furthermore, there is no other school with the meaning in the infobox. It is inconsistent. I suggested you make a new section for it. This is a good compromise, no? -Danjel (talk) 11:31, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Oh, and thanks for catching the single sex thing... Sorry, everything I was working on kinda melded into one. Heh. -Danjel (talk) 11:34, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

No, I'm not basing it off my own interpretation. It's actually listed in the yearbooks that are in the local public libraries. A section can be made for it, but I don't have time right now so it's best left in the infobox, where it's been for some time, until somebody has a chance to do so. Otherwise, it will be lost. --AussieLegend (talk) 11:40, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

No. It's inconsistent with every other Australian school here. It won't be lost if you commit to making a section for it? :) -Danjel (talk) 11:43, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

No, it's not inconsistent because Remis Velisque means both "With Oars and Sails" and "With all one's might". There are numerous references online.[1] --AussieLegend (talk) 11:49, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

What I mean by inconsistent is that no other Australian school (at least as far as I've seen) has that. If you'd like to suggest it for inclusion in Template:Infobox school, then maybe (but I'd oppose it on the grounds that it's more often than not interpretational - my school motto, vincit qui se vincit, has a completely different meaning depending on who you talk to *shrug*). -Danjel (talk) 11:52, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Has what? A translation of the motto? They certainly do. It's covered by "|motto_translation=" and doesn't need any more inclusion than there already is. --AussieLegend (talk) 11:54, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

No other Australian school has an interpretation (ie, telling people what the English words mean), ie, it's inconsistent. Many have a translation (which is putting the Latin words into English).

Look. I'm contesting what you're including on that page. You shouldn't include it until we've come to a satisfactory conclusion. This is becoming WP:EDITWARRING. -Danjel (talk) 12:05, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

"With all ones might is a translation and that's not inconsistent. Please don't tell me what I should and shouldn't do. I've been here long enough to know what is required. You're converting articles despite the fact that we still haven't come to a consensus yet so it's the pot calling the kettle black for you to tell me how to act. As for your removal of commas, citing MOS:NUM#Delimiting (grouping of digits) as a reason for removal is quite ridiculous. That section says, "Numbers with four digits to the left of the decimal point may or may not be delimited (e.g. 1250 or 1,250)" so using commas is quite valid. As I've pointed out above, using commas is standard Australian practice, so we use commas which is supported by MOS:NUM#Delimiting (grouping of digits). Deleting commas for no reason is disruptive at best. --AussieLegend (talk) 12:13, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Can you please show me where in "Remis Velisque" you see the word "might" (you can look it up in any number of Latin-English dictionaries all over the net, try synonyms like strength and so on too if you like), for example? It isn't there. You're adding a layer of interpretation onto the saying. That's going beyond what every other school article on this site does. I'm Australian, I don't use commas in a 4 digit number. Am I unAustralian? You're referring to a practice which just isn't there. I'm calling for consistency, you're arguing against, fine. Let's put it to everyone else (as I did so at WP:EiA), like I repeatedly suggested you do. Until then, inconsistent information shouldn't be there. You're the only person still arguing against the consensus on template:Infobox school. We're moving on. -Danjel (talk) 13:40, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I've taken this over to Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:AussieLegend_on_Newcastle_High_School, because I think some sort of administrator input is the only way that we can get a page without the controversial bits that you think should be added in while discussion continues. -Danjel (talk) 13:48, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Remis Velisque, based on my limited understanding of Latin, translated word-for-word directly into English is exactly and only "Oar and Sail". Saying that it means "with all one's might" is adding a layer of interpretation on the direct translation. This is wildly inconsistent with every other school article that I have ever visited.

Consider if we allow this. On North Sydney Boys High School, we'd have to accept an edit which would say that Latin: vincit qui se vincit means "to overcome everything, one must first overcome oneself". Or maybe we'd have to accept an edit which would say "the only important victory is over oneself". Or maybe "the person who wins has won over himself". Or any number of other possible interpretations that do not come directly from the Latin.

How about facta non verba (Deeds not words) from Riverside Girls High School? Or esto sol testis from Kambala Girls School? Esse quam Videri (To be rather than to seem to be) from Cranbrook? How about we extend it to explaining slightly confusing English mottos, like Carlingford High School's Adventure in Learning? On and on, there is no school that puts an interpretation into the infobox. It is inconsistent.

The compromise I suggested above was to put a section in the article on the motto, like there is with the motto virile agitur, just like there is with Knox Grammar School. Fort Street High School also puts further information on the school's motto into the article (although not into a separate section).

I'm asking for a Third Opinion on this issue and that this article be Temporarily Fully Protected while a third opinion is sought. -Danjel (talk) 10:28, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Huhhhhh... A point from the citation that has just been added. "i.e." means "it means". So, what you're saying is that, yes, I am categorically right, and that "with all one's might" is a meaning NOT directly translated from the Latin words. QED, quod erat demonstradum which translated is "what was to be demonstrated" (i.e., the point is proved, thanks). -Danjel (talk) 11:29, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Response to Third Opinion Request:

Disclaimers: I am responding to a third opinion request made at WP:3O. I have made no previous edits on Newcastle High School (Australia) and have no known association with the editors involved in this discussion. The third opinion process (FAQ) is informal and I have no special powers or authority apart from being a fresh pair of eyes. Third opinions are not tiebreakers and should not be "counted" in determining whether or not consensus has been reached. My personal standards for issuing third opinions can be viewed here.

Opinion: One particularly wise Third Opinion Wikipedian, RegentsPark, once succinctly put the purpose of Third Opinions like this, "It's sort of like if you're having an argument on the street in front of City Hall and turn to a passer-by to ask 'hey, is it true that the Brooklyn Bridge is for sale?'." The following is an opinion of that sort. Mottoes are much like logos and trademarks, they're a symbolic representation of the adopting organization and they mean what the organization wants them to mean. If a French-speaking institution in France adopts the motto (in English) "So's your sister!" and says (in French) that it means "Greater honor and glory!", that's their right and the motto means for purposes of symbolizing them what they say it means. Since Wikipedia is an encyclopedia for reporting notable, established facts, an organization's trademarks, logos, and mottoes are non-notable and unimportant except for the (barely-notable and barely-important) fact that the institution has adopted them as its symbols. Therefore, the proper thing to do, from Wikipedia's point of view, is to report both the foreign-language term and the institution's adopted native-language meaning for it without comment that it actually translates to some other meaning. The fact that it actually translates to a different native-language meaning is not a fact of sufficient importance to be reported here at Wikipedia unless there has been a reliably-sourceable controversy or other public comment or debate about the divergence between the adopted and actual meanings. If that exists, then what gets put in the article still isn't just the alternate (actual) meaning, but a section on the controversy, which will by its nature include the actual meaning. (And there still has to be consideration given to whether putting the discussion about the controversy in the article gives it undue weight, of course.) Until that public discourse exists and can be reliably sourced, Wikipedia is not the place to "out" the discrepancy or initiate the debate because Wikipedia is not a soapbox. The foregoing presumes, however, that AussieLegend's assertion that "With all one's might" is the official meaning of the motto is is, in fact, correct. That assertion should, however, be given good faith, for a reasonable period of time — measured in weeks, not hours or days — until he can provide a specific reliable source for it (it may be {{fact}}-tagged while waiting, of course), but if he fails to provide a reliable source then the proper action is to remove the English meaning, not to substitute the actual translation.

What's next: Once you've considered this opinion click here to see what happens next.—TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 15:21, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your response, TransporterMan. You're right to call the issue on it's notability. But I think that because this is an infobox, it's OK to have a lower standard for notability. For example, we mention executive teachers and the colours of the school, when they're not especially notable facts - they just might prove to be useful in understanding the school)

The general practice for schools is to include the school's motto. Where schools have a Latin (or French, or whatever else) language motto, the word for word translation is also given, but no interpretation, i.e., no "i.e."'s. The examples of Australian schools that I give above of Knox Grammar School and Fort Street High School are schools where there is some notable issue with their motto, so a further comment is put into the main article. The other examples, North Sydney Boys High School, Riverside Girls High School, Kambala Girls School, Cranbrook and Carlingford High School all do not provide an interpretation of their motto.

It is here that the controversy lies.

I accept your point that the official meaning of the motto (ie, according to the school) should be given more weight, but I am not willing to accept AussieLegend's say so as a reliable source that the actual translation is given WITH the interpretation, as with the text that he advocates. -Danjel (talk) 15:45, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Moved from User_talk:TransporterMan#Thanks_for_your_considered_reply:

G'day TransporterMan,

Thanks for your reply, and your work on trying to sift through mounds of text for meaningful information.

I fear that you've missed the point. I'm not attacking the notability of the additional text that AussieLegend wants, I'm attacking the consistency of providing it against other similar Australian school pages. I've replied to your post at Talk:Newcastle_High_School_(Australia)#Motto. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danjel (talk • contribs) 15:54, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

End of this section of moved text.

You say on my talk page that I've missed the point and I'm therefore going to violate one of my self-adopted standards to comment on the consistency issue. Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Internal_consistency says, "An overriding principle is that style and formatting choices should be consistent within a Wikipedia article, though not necessarily throughout Wikipedia as a whole. Consistency within an article promotes clarity and cohesion." (Emphasis added.) As is discussed at Wikipedia:Other stuff exists, each article at Wikipedia generally stands alone. The bottom line is that unless a policy or guideline requires consistency between articles, no editor can insist on it without building consensus (and thus creating a policy or guideline) that consistency should exist. Thus, unless you can point to some policy or guideline which requires the consistency that you're seeking here, then this isn't the place to try to achieve it because by insisting on it you are, in effect, creating your own policies and demanding that others abide by them. That violates the principle of consensus that is one of the elements of the Five Pillars of Wikipedia. The place to build that consensus is not at one or more specific articles, such as this, since it would affect a number of individual articles but at a policy, guideline, or (less binding) project page, or at the policy section of the Village Pump. If consensus is obtained to support the consistency policy, then you can then come back and insist that changes be made to individual articles. Regards, TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 16:23, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Also moved from User_talk:TransporterMan#Thanks_for_your_considered_reply:

On a slightly different note, I'm a bit confused about your comments about needing to provide a citation since one was in fact provided. Danjel has removed it multiple times.[2][3][4] Another citation has now been provided by another editor.[5] The motto had been in the article since 7 May 2007,[6] until Danjel first removed it.[7] It's not something that I've added. --AussieLegend (talk) 16:21, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Just to be clear, I removed citations that gave the translation with "i.e"'s.

And, without putting words into his mouth...

It seems to me that, being that he was talking about whether it was the official understanding of the phrase or not and that this needs a citation. Because, as I have frequently told you, Remis means Oar, Velis means Sail.

I'm taking this understanding from:

If a French-speaking institution in France adopts the motto (in English) "So's your sister!" and says (in French) that it means "Greater honor and glory!", that's their right and the motto means for purposes of symbolizing them what they say it means.

-Danjel (talk) 16:26, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Let's move this discussion to the article talk page, so it can be recorded there. Give me a minute to do so before replying here, or there, again, please. Regards, TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 16:27, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

End of this section of moved text

Fair enough and well explained. I'll leave this for now, and explore the possibility of requiring a degree of consistency in this respect. Thanks again for your help. -Danjel (talk) 16:28, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Aussie, my comments about needing a citation are to your assertion that the "might" meaning is the official meaning, not to the assertion that the "sails" meaning is the correct one. Regards, TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 16:43, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Well, the citation says that the translation is "With oars and sails; with all one's might" which seems to cover it. Danjel's assertion was that "with all one's might" was an interpretation, not a translation. That brings me to Danjel's claim "Just to be clear, I removed citations that gave the translation with "i.e"'s." This is most definitely not the case. The citation does not include "i.e." at all. --AussieLegend (talk) 16:50, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Nope, you're still not getting my point. You said, above:

No, I'm not basing it off my own interpretation. It's actually listed in the yearbooks that are in the local public libraries.

A reliable source needs to be given which proves one of these points:

• It is the official position of Newcastle High School that its motto, "Remis Velisque," means "With all one's might." or
• It is the official position of Newcastle High School that its motto, "Remis Velisque," means "With Oars and Sails; with all one's might." or
• It is the official position of Newcastle High School that its motto, "Remis Velisque," means "With Oars and Sails."

If no such source can be eventually provided, then the English meaning of "Remis Velisque" should be removed from the article as being unsourced. As a symbol for the school, the motto means what the institution wants the motto to mean and if it does not provide an official meaning or interpretation into English, then it obviously means that the institution either wants a reader to only be concerned with the motto as a foreign phrase without interpretation or wants each reader to interpret it for him or herself. If the institution had necessarily wanted the motto to have a particular meaning in their native language they could have stated it in their native language instead of in a foreign language or could have provided an official interpretation or meaning; it is thus an unwarranted presumption and original research to presume that a institution wants readers to interpret a foreign-language motto into a particular phrase or meaning. If the institution does provide an official meaning or interpretation, then that's the meaning that ought to be given here, even if the motto does not translate to that meaning or interpretation, unless the discrepancy between the official meaning and the actual meaning has become a notable controversy.

While you did not initially introduce the English meaning into the article, you restored the "might" part after Danjel removed it. WP:BURDEN says, "The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material." (Emphasis added.) It is, thus, your obligation to provide a reliable source for at least the first of the three bullet points, above.

Best regards, TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 18:13, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Well said. I hadn't thought of WP:BURDEN as I was going on trust with AussieLegend's assertion that it's a commonly known fact that that is the interpretation is pushed by the school. I had thought that he would use his knowledge to accept the compromise that I offered from the very beginning to create a section, as with Knox and Fort Street. I still think that's a reasonable compromise, that maintains consistency with other articles. Further, the only argument against it thus far is that of time (to pull out a yearbook and write maybe 3 sentences against continuing to swap talk posts without any other compromise forthcoming) and a preference to keep his preferred, and in my opinion flawed version. I'm not giving up just because one user stonewalls any changes to an article he WP:OWNs, but I'm going to think about it and come back later. I think that it's reasonable for you, AussieLegend to do the same (or even write a couple of sentences). -Danjel (talk) 23:04, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

The source is saying the literal translation is "With Oars and Sails" which can be interpreted as "with all one's might". A reasonable person would be interested to know what oars and sails means and the citation clearly does that. Wikipedia:Readers first. The school's official position on the interpretation isn't really the issue here and that same reasonable person would understand that to be the case. –Moondyne 00:20, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

I agree, absolutely. Hence my suggestion to create a short paragraph or section on it. Just as Knox and Fort Street do with their mottos. That way, we maintain consistency with every other article and we provide more information than that which can be given in an infobox. -Danjel (talk) 03:23, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

First, with all respect to the — I say with no intent of irony or flattery — august and industrious Moondyne, there are many things in which general readers would be interested if included in a Wikipedia article, and which would be absolutely true, but which would also be prohibited as being original research or wholly unverifiable. The Wikipedia:Readers first essay does not say or suggest that it is acceptable to include OR or unsourced material in an article or infobox merely because it would interest a general reader. I also strongly disagree that the school's position is irrelevant, for the reasons I've set out ad nauseam above. Second, can I suggest that part of the problem here comes from the ambiguity of the documentation for the "motto_translation" line of the {{Infobox school}} template? That documentation reads, "English translation of the school motto, if needed" without explanation of what "if needed" means. Let me suggest that one way to settle this would be to propose at Template_talk:Infobox_school that the documentation be changed to read either "Translation of the school motto, if not in English" or "English translation of the school motto, if provided by school", and then tagging that page with {{rfctag|style}} and perhaps posting a notice of the discussion at the Village Pump. Best regards, TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 16:10, 16 December 2010 (UTC) PS: With all three of y'all being from Down Under, shouldn't this debate be taking place at http://au.wikipedia.org, the Australian-language version of Wikipedia? Oh, well, I guess that would mean that I'd have to make most of my edits at http://tx.wikipedia.org, the Texan-language version... :-) — TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 16:52, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't think I said that we should introduce OR or unverified material. As for the the school's position, its just that that is not really the issue here. I'm trying to see this from the readers' POV and imagine him wanting to know what "oars and sails" means. A for tx. and au. languages, strewth, I agree. If Jimbo wants global coverage we need this done properly. –Moondyne 23:48, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Mikey Robbins

Get with it people! You are missing the most awesomest ex-JJJ celebrity in the ENTIRE UNIVERSE!

Please put Mikey Robbins on there. It is disrespectful not to! After all, Silverchair came and went (and Silverhair are still going strong!!!) but Mikey was ALWAYS THERE.

And still is on the funniest show in THE ENTIRE UNIVERSE... Good News Week.

There is a facebook group. https://www.facebook.com/home.php?sk=group_140228679358880&ap=1.

ROFLMAO - Seriously, CAPTCHA verification downunder? It happened people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.233.85.116 (talk) 12:54, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Newcastle High School (Australia). 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/20110216044318/http://www.southernstars.org.au/wcapclar.htm to http://www.southernstars.org.au/wcapclar.htm

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) 21:03, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Change request for Newcastle High School page - 'Controversies'

• What I think should be changed (include citations):

The following sentences be removed:

Some students and parents have expressed their dislike of the new rules, which they consider give students too little time to get to class. They also believe the stricter new uniform rules are “over the top”. Some staff, students and guardians have reportedly expressed the view that Rosser's excessive implementation of these rules is a PR stunt aimed at making the school look good while reportedly ignoring requests for repairs by her fellow staff members and certain alumni. It has also been said that some students falling behind have found it hard coping with the new systems, and are reportedly being ignored by Rosser when they ask for a return to the status quo ante (i.e. the previous rules).

• Why it should be changed:

The sentences are conjecture and not cited or reliably sourced.

• References supporting the possible change (format using the "cite" button):

2001:8003:342E:BE00:DC3:DA8A:ABCD:4B54 (talk) 21:50, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

References

Reply 5-OCT-2023

  Item removed    Spintendo  22:20, 5 October 2023 (UTC)