Talk:Wellington College, Wellington/Archive 1

message: Again, why the disambiguation? RickK 02:29 20 Jul 2003 (UTC)
... there's a prestigious school in the UK called by just the same name in Berkshire, which is regarded by most as a leading independent school. To just have one "Wellington College" page might seem a bit odd, when some old Wellingtonians (of the Berkshire type) might be told that the only WC is in the South Pacific!
-----
Lord Freyberg and Lord Grey were rewritten to show only their title (Lord of X). The ommission of Sir NN would make sense since the full name can be seen by moving the mouse over the link, where it could show the person's full real name. 203.97.2.243 04:43, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled section

message: 202.180.71.156 removed a reference to Wgtn College being affiliated to the Univ of NZ, stating "This is true though it had no major effect on the school. Also it was misleading becuase the charter ambiguously worded the name. Therefore, removed."
This is not quite correct. In Victoria University of Wellington 1899 ~ 1999 A History (Victoria University Press, Wellington)  Rachel Barrowman, writing about the early years of Victoria University of Wellington, states:
(in 1874) "The nascent University of New Zealand was re-established as an exclusively examining university, consisting of a Senate and a chancellor, and a Court of Convocation. To it the University of Otago, Canterbury College and several secondary schools affiliated – among the latter the Wellington college and grammar school (which was thereby renamed Wellington College) in order to become eligible for a 63-acre endowment from the provincial government.
In 1878 a royal commission was appointed to review what was by now widely agreed to be an unsatisfactory state of affairs (the affiliation of secondary schools was of particular concern)."
Cheers,
Neil Leslie 09:05, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the input. While I didn't know of that source IMO that statement, on its own and unqualified is not appropriate, since it lends undue importance to the school (which I should have included in the edit summary). The school's charter, which I;ve read, indeed calls it a "college and grammar school" as Barrowman repeats. However, without the proper context I felt it was highly inappropriate even if the subject matter is 100% spot-on. My motivation behind my edits is that I strongly suspect that the article was written by a ex/student who wanted to "jazz things up", and hence I felt the need to prune (evident by my edits). Trying to remove weasel terms, the passive voice etc etc has been quite a mission, but I realise now Ive got the rest of the WP school articles to do now as well :D Generally now this particular article is truthful and hopefully free of bias. 202.180.71.156 07:37, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wgtn Coll & Univ of NZ 

message: Irrespective of what Zavos states have a look at the Wikipedia page  history of Rugby Union, particularly the section on 'The forming of the International Rugby Football Board'. This certainly contradicts the assertion that advantage was invented in Wellington in the 1890's (which seems hugely unlikely in any case - had no-one thought of cheating before the 1890's?) I don't have access to the original documents, but I suspect that the details of the dispute between England and Scotland are well documented. Whether Zavos is more relaible that Wikipedia is a moot point, of course.
Also you might think about registering -- it make contributing easier
Happy New Year Neil Leslie 08:23, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Zavos's views seem to be uncorroborated with the rubgy sources I have tried to find in the public library (the only one I have access to...). Since its a minority viewpoint I will remove it, and in the process side-step the issue of invention of stories until other sources agree with Zavos. Text is in History if anyone wants to find it. 202.180.71.156 09:11, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Zavos, advantage etc