Jump to content

Talk:Waverley College

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sourcing, and some small cuts

[edit]

Hi ... I removed a couple of short bits which seemed a bit POV, like they came straight from a school brochure. One of the lines was "It looks with hope to the future." which seems very POV and offers nothing really to enhance the article. (See [[1]])

Also, removed this bit:

The school's reaction - punishing all 191 members It would appear that in retrospect the school acted over-zealously in response to the students involved. Instead of singling out the individual students who had been involved in the activities, which numbered 15 at the most, the school chose to punish all 191 members of the class of 2002. As many as 50 of that class had been nowhere near the incident, yet had to bare the brunt of the schools heavy handed response.

It can go back in, but I think it needs to clarify several things: (1) what precisely was the punishment meted out to the entire form of 191 students, and (2) can that be sourced or credited from an existing websource. If not, it's difficult to leave in given Wikipedia's guidelines on original research. (See [[2]])

I also tidied up the punctuation, some dashes where commas ought to be etc.

One thing: can someone put the school arms and details box back on the right?

(203.26.177.2 08:20, 24 April 2006 (UTC))[reply]

One more ... I cut the line "Despit the fact that they knew many were under age."

It needs to be sourced, otherwise it is defamatory to suggest that a licensed premises knowingly served liquor to underaged patrons. Unless a websource can be found to corroborate the line, it's can't really go back in.

(203.26.177.2 08:26, 24 April 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Citations needed

[edit]

This paragraph was reinstated after it was removed, so before returning it, can you please correctly cite the source of its assertions.

It would appear that in retrospect the school acted over-zealously in response to the students involved. Instead of singling out the individual students who had been involved in the activities, which numbered 15 at the most, the school chose to punish all 191 members of the class of 2002. As many as 50 of that class had been nowhere near the incident, yet had to bare the brunt of the schools heavy handed response.

The whole paragraph is very POV (see entry above for details, and links to Wikipedia's policy on POV and original research) and unless this paragraph can correctly cite a source for its assertions, it really doesn't belong.

What was the punishment? Why was the school's response heavy handed? And what web sources can be used as sources for the claim? (Remembering, of course, that original research has place on Wikipedia.)

(203.26.177.2 08:08, 28 April 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Apologies, in the frenzy I missed a word .. original research has no place on Wikipedia. (203.26.177.2 08:36, 28 April 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Third go at this ...

[edit]

Okay, so our esteemed Wikipedia colleague is keen to keep this paragraph in the article - despite a lack of sources, or even common mathematics.

It would appear that in retrospect the school acted over-zealously in response to the students involved. Instead of singling out the individual students who had been involved in the activities, which numbered 15 at the most, the school chose to punish all 191 members of the class of 2002. As many as 50 of that class had been nowhere near the incident, yet had to bare the brunt of the schools heavy handed response.

1. How can 15 involved and 50 uninvolved add up to the whole form of 191? "...which numbered 15 at the most, the school chose to punish all 191 members of the class of 2002. As many as 50 of that class had been nowhere near the incident..." makes perfect sense... As many as 50 were nowhere near the incident...15 were involved in the rampaging and the remaining were near and possibly associated but still uninvolved.

2. What was the punishment that the school meted out?

3. Who felt it was heavy handed? (And you, or I, is not an adequate response ...)

I'm going to replace the paragraph with this, until something better can be found, with the CORRECT SOURCING.

The school punished the entire form of 191 students, instead of the small group involved directly in the incident.

(60.225.92.131 11:17, 30 April 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Removal of ad for performing arts centre

[edit]

I have removed the parts of the performing arts section which read like a brochure for the school. Wikipedia is NOT a brochure, nor a promotional platform.

I have also removed this line:

The venue is avalible for hire. For more info, please visit http://www.waverley.nsw.edu.au/pac/welcome.asp

Seriously. It is obvious that someone from the school, or associated with it, is editing the article. A number of recent edits have involved either trimming controversial material or adding promotional material. Promotional material has no place in Wikipedia, nor does a link to rent the premises.

Please refer to these: Citing sources | Neutral point of view | No original research | What Wikipedia is not

Thanks (60.225.93.217 15:47, 12 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Removal of Hatfield trial, student rampage elements

[edit]

Please understand that Wikipedia is not a press release, or a promotional brochure. It is clear that someone with an association with the school is editing and deleting negative material. (203.26.177.2 01:54, 23 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]

William Matheson

[edit]

Whoever is removing the reference to William Matheson please stop it. He is as notable an alumni as the school is likely to get. Please note that "notable alumni" does not exclude "notorious alumni". And stop peddling the lie that the information is unverifiable, because the information is pulled straight from the supreme court judgement. Refer to paragraph 22 of the judgment: "William Matheson did his secondary schooling at the Waverley College."

Agreed. Matheson should stay. You didn't leave an electronic signature, which you should when you post notes into forums such as these. I've also moved your note from the top down to here with a proper sub-heading in case someone else has something to add. (150.101.112.232 12:55, 17 June 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Again, this has been removed, so again I have added it. The argument remains the same as that discussed above. I will continue to monitor this so that the reference to William Matheson remains.

Alumni, sport

[edit]

I took these three out of sports alumni, until the nature of their achievement can be clarified.

  • Damien Koureas, Beat Max Guitronich in the 2006 tae kwon do championships.

What title does he hold? Simply beating someone isn't enough to warrant inclusion on the list of notable sports identities. This needs to identify his actual winning title, assuming he won anything.

This needs to explain what Jersey Flegg actually is. My understanding is that it is an under-20s local competition. Does that warrant inclusion on notable sports alumni? Surely there are hundreds of young kids participating in the under 20s league comp?

(203.26.177.2 05:15, 17 November 2006 (UTC))[reply]

RE: Jersey Flegg Jersey Flegg is an an under 21's competition that is run by the 1st grade clubs, its basically an under 21's representitive comp, and most 1st grade players have played in flegg or for a Country clubb. The Selectors use the Jersey Flegg comp to choose upcoming players and they should be allowed to have their name placed on the site.

((<Guest> 22:58, 21 November 2006))

Hi there. Actually, I disagree. The point of a "sport alumni" section is to note those who have gone into a field and achieved a high level of distinction, not to simple list anyone who has pursued a given field. Thus, it does not list every ex-student who went into the army, just those who achieved a high rank or station. I think first grade competitive sport is worthy of inclusion, as is natinonal representation. I think there are too many junior comps to extend the mantle that far. (124.189.85.32 22:16, 24 November 2006 (UTC))[reply]
Just an update: I have done some tidying on the sports alumni. This really needs to be clear: the alumni listing is for school graduates who have achieved some kind of "noteworthy" achievement in their field, not simple anyone who works in the sporting area. (124.189.85.32 12:11, 19 November 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Update 2: I have removed these two names from sports alumni, as neither can be verified on Google. Until they have valid web references, it's difficult not to view them with a bit of suspicion.

(124.189.85.32 12:18, 19 November 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Justin Paul Fleming

[edit]

I removed these two lines:

From alumni: * Justin Paul Fleming, Pioneering Surgeon. From references: * The Crest of the Wave, A history of Waverley College, Justin Fleming (Allen & Unwin 2003)

The Justin Fleming who wrote the book Crest of the Wave is listed in Wikipedia as a playwright and former lawyer. There is no reference to him being a "pioneering surgeon". Also, Fleming's Wikipedia entry says he was a student of St Ignatius, Riverview, not of Waverley College. Can someone find a proper reference for this?

I removed the book from the list of references because it is not actually a reference source for the article. Most of the article's contents have been online for ages; the book listing is new. Perhaps the fact that a book was published on the history of the College can be referenced somewhere in the text?

(124.189.85.32 13:00, 24 November 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Waverlians

[edit]

I restored a line which was removed, which noted that former students of the College are known as Waverlians. I think that's noteworthy, and I can think of no practical reason why it was removed from the article. Colleges of this kind often have such names for former students. There's no reason not to include it.

(124.189.85.32 13:04, 24 November 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Martin J. Camilleri

[edit]

This appears to be a spoof entry, no record of Martin J. Camilleri as a darts player appears to exist anywhere. Suggest removing him from here as it has now been created twice (and deleted) as a darts article. At least some sources/references required. Seedybob2 08:33, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of Guy Russo

[edit]

As far as my research is concerned Guy Russo never attended Waverly but rather St Pat's at Strathfield. as a resullt I have removed him from the old boys list. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Imalegend (talk • contribs) 13:38, 11 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Regular removal of hatfield/rampage elements

[edit]

These two elements, with some regularity, are removed from the article, presumably either by someone from the school, or someone attempting to sterilize the article into a PR entry for the school. Both incidents are encyclopedic, have numerous internet references are are appropriate for the entry. Rather than simply vandalize the article, PLEASE use the talk page to engage in debate over why you think they should not be in the article. (124.189.85.32 14:19, 7 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Notable alumni

[edit]

I've removed everyone who did not have a wikiledia article here. Some of them may actually be notable but normally their notability has to be shown with an article. To include alumni without articles there have to be sufficient sources to show that articles would be justified (and that they attended). Meters (talk) 17:59, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Waverley College. 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, 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) 02:06, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:06, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Conflicts of Editing + Conflicts of Interest

[edit]

Recently it has come to my attention that there have been multiple conflicting edits on this page that are reminiscent of an editing war. Research indicates that there are many different accounts have been editing the page in the last 24 hours and conflicts have sprung up as a result.

To make the situation more complicated, this page is on a private corporation and it seems that multiple editors might have conflicts of interests with Waverley College.

I have been recently trying to remove parts of this page that are uncited and that speak more like an advertisement than an encyclopedic wiki page. I suggest that any changes from here on out either are cited, or have a general approval before publishing. Additionally, I suggest that any information that is cited on this page should be protected under information freedom laws and Wikipedia goodwill conduct. I also think that semiprotection might need to be implemented if this editing war continues.

Thanks,

Tom — Preceding unsigned comment added by TomD55555 (talk • contribs) 00:15, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Waverley_College&oldid=1202298506"