Template talk:Infobox school

message: : Parameters to be deleted completely – template code and transclusions.
*  should be merged with . They both mean "current religious leader / head person". – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:59, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:   should be deleted completely, I don't think we need CSS styling for the infobox but after checking the monthly error report, the parameter is not being used at all.  currently has 22 uses but I don't think there is any need to manually adjust the width of the infobox, the default width is perfect and also because of low-use. But if you have a look at some of the articles that are using this parameter, it looks terrible. What you think? Steven (Editor) (talk) 03:50, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have moved the uses above to alumni, this can be safely deleted. Steven (Editor) (talk) 23:15, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

text:  I have moved the uses above to head and head_label, this can be safely deleted. Steven (Editor) (talk) 22:35, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

text:  The need for the athletics parameter which can also be applied to the sports parameter was raised by another editor in 2014, who deemed it as "somewhat unnecessary". Steven (Editor) (talk) 21:17, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

text:  Schools have feeder schools and feed to other schools — some will have many. These are better kept in the body of article, it is too much clutter to mention them all in the infobox. Having checked the parameter usage report, they are either linked to schools or plain text only. Steven (Editor) (talk) 05:28, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

text:  Hi , I see what you mean, but grades is not for academic achievement but for the years the school offers. The US does not use this parameter for A–F, instead grades is used for K–12 or 9–12 for example (please see these pages). So that’s why years is redundant as you can use grades_label. Hope this clears things up, Steven (Editor) (talk) 09:04, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  I understand that's what it's for, but it's a confusing term for those of us who have a different meaning of "grades". Why not allow a synonym? Also, by allowing "years" there should be no need to specify "grades_label=Years". I think WP:ENGVAR applies here. We allow "principal", "headmaster", "headmistress", "rector" etc, although each of these could be replaced by "head" and "head_label".-gadfium 17:32, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  , I'm British and we use years here, I don't find this confusing, but then again it's different for everyone. Grades is used on 21,000+ with grades_label being used on 2,000+ which includes 664 for years. Whereas, the individual years parameter is being used on 337. Do you still think we should keep years? We do need to simplify and consolidate parameters, there are far too many head position parameters in the infobox — principal and head has to be kept, this is used on a whopping 20,000+ and 6,000+ respectively. It's the others we need to consolidate on, for example there are 4 additional principal parameters each with labels. I don't understand why we have this many, only the top position should be mentioned in the infobox such as principal/headteacher/president/director. Chairman and chairperson which both have labels is redundant to the chair and chair_label. Steven (Editor) (talk) 19:55, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Delete completely 

message: * Agree with the delete completely ones: I support deletion of ACT/SAT as the fields change every year and are, for most people, too much to maintain. Acting principal/headteacher IMO is unnecessary - just put the acting principal/headteacher in the article. I also agree with deleting the alumni name field as that's best handled in the article text. The others I see don't need to be in the infobox. WhisperToMe (talk) 20:30, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hi , I see what you mean, but grades is not for academic achievement but for the years the school offers. The US does not use this parameter for A–F, instead grades is used for K–12 or 9–12 for example (please see these pages). So that’s why years is redundant as you can use grades_label. Hope this clears things up, Steven (Editor) (talk) 09:04, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  I understand that's what it's for, but it's a confusing term for those of us who have a different meaning of "grades". Why not allow a synonym? Also, by allowing "years" there should be no need to specify "grades_label=Years". I think WP:ENGVAR applies here. We allow "principal", "headmaster", "headmistress", "rector" etc, although each of these could be replaced by "head" and "head_label".-gadfium 17:32, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  , I'm British and we use years here, I don't find this confusing, but then again it's different for everyone. Grades is used on 21,000+ with grades_label being used on 2,000+ which includes 664 for years. Whereas, the individual years parameter is being used on 337. Do you still think we should keep years? We do need to simplify and consolidate parameters, there are far too many head position parameters in the infobox — principal and head has to be kept, this is used on a whopping 20,000+ and 6,000+ respectively. It's the others we need to consolidate on, for example there are 4 additional principal parameters each with labels. I don't understand why we have this many, only the top position should be mentioned in the infobox such as principal/headteacher/president/director. Chairman and chairperson which both have labels is redundant to the chair and chair_label. Steven (Editor) (talk) 19:55, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Delete completely comments 

message: * Support all template merges — Preceding unsigned comment added by WhisperToMe (talk • contribs) 20:14, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge comments 

message: : Other ideas and issues.
* Add : "Etonian" for Eton College. -DePiep (talk) 10:32, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: My suggestion is to add this option. Yes indeed exact parameter name is open. -DePiep (talk) 20:46, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  Not formally opposing but I do object when we use an child care facility for the obscenely privileged as an example. We have two example schools- we should stick firstly to those. Then we could look at St John Fisher Catholic Voluntary Academy (taken at random) as a more representative institution. (Within the Catholic sector- yes we do have one a more needy field is diocese! ) Why is a nickname seen as infobox material? Have a look as NUAST- the infobox there is awful. That is a school- what are you going to call the alumni (apart from Survivors (POV) )?ClemRutter (talk) 18:20, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  If you're referring to the name of the school's alumni, there is an alumni parameter which would suffice and some schools are already using it for this purpose, including Eton College. There is also alumni_name but I've suggested for this to be deleted completely (see delete completely section above). Steven (Editor) (talk) 18:07, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

text:  Add  as an alias of ? See discussion above. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:06, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

text:  Not needed as there is  and . A possible UID parameter to identify the trust was mentioned but to be discussed. Steven (Editor) (talk) 04:36, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

text:  Reading Carlton le Willows Academy, which is about to go GAC, you will see that Specialism refers to Specialist schools programme. There are residual effects of this programme, but whether we need a field  is dubious. Carlton le Willows Academy is a useful article that traces recent history, and is well linked. The Judd School (FA) is non typical, being in Kent, remaining a VA school and selective, and having avoided initiatives designed to form academies, specialist schools and trusts. SSAT (The Schools Network) is useful too --ClemRutter (talk) 00:51, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

text:  Hi , are you suggesting for alumni to be interchangeable with Old boy network or for it to link to that article? The addition of an alumni_label would be the best option to do this, which will allow for any other custom names and linking. Steven (Editor) (talk) 20:03, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other 

message: I occasionally run AWB to clean up bits and bobs in school infoboxes. I often come across the r_head field being used incorrectly (i.e. for vice/deputy positions), certainly more so than for its correct use. This suggests that editors don't know what the field is for, and r_head as a label isn't self-explanatory. Is there a reason we abbreviate "religious" here, but don't for the religious_affiliation field? Would religious_head avoid ambiguity and misuse of the field? MIDI (talk) 15:38, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: That sounds like a good idea to me. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:09, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religious head