Talk:Astrea Academy Woodfields

message: There are so many things wrong with this article I don't know where to start:
:Despite, its name, it's a school, not a FE college (so Category wrong)
:The university infobox needs replacing with a schools infobox
:It is not 'independent', it's state-funded
:OFSTED does not 'grant' anything, it describes
Plus problems with layout etc etc. I will have a go at correcting this article, but someone else may have to take over with some details (e.g. I can't find the number of pupils). Emeraude (talk) 13:13, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Number on roll is 1251 according to Ofsted Keith D (talk) 13:37, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Or 1276, also according to the OFSTED report, though as this was published a year ago, it is likely that 1251 is more up-to-date. Article duly altered. Emeraude (talk) 19:14, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error upon error 

message: I am dismayed that this article has been tagged 'unbalanced'. It isn't 'unbalanced' and everything written in it is true and suitably sourced. If there is 'good news' about the school anywhere then I am not aware of it, maybe Martin Craig (the Head) needs to be contacted and told to input something but it would only be spin. 
Personally, I am only sorry that the public and the government are not able to be informed (at least on this forum) of the full extent of the scandal that is Balby Carr. 
Furthermore, by the looks of things someone from the school has already 'had a go' at the page (under the username BalbyCarrWiki) and their only response was to vandalise it by removing true and sourced statements - labeling aspects 'untrue and factually innacurate' that are in their OFSTED report  - such as their disgraceful staff turnover for example; or their support for a teacher involved in a relationship with a pupil; or statements about the attitudes of their own staff from a survey they commissioned; or branding information 'out of date' which clearly isn't. 
In light of this, I respectfully request that the 'unbalanced' tag be removed as it obscures and discredits an article that needs to be in the public domain.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Balbytruthbringer (talk • contribs) 06:54, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The insertion of lots of negative things about the school without any positive items to provide a good balance is definitely not what we should be doing. The article is slanted while it should be written from a [[WPNPOV|neutral] point of view and it had undue weight given to the negative aspects.  You appear to have a conflict of interest here and attempting to stack every possible negative story about the school into the article. Unless there is a balance then the negative items needs to be cut back to base essentials. We are not a site for knocking organisations but of providing balance. Keith D (talk) 15:19, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

text: I have already tagged this article and action needs to be taken before I get the scissors out much of this information is coincidental and not directly relevant to the school such as sections on red light district which need to be culled. Keith D (talk) 19:52, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Unbalanced Tag

message: There has been a request by the school to look at this article at OTRS #2010100710006121 and I can understand why. This article is an utter mess of aggregated complaints without and structure or theme. Please can this be fixed asap. Spartaz Humbug! 05:00, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clean Up Urgently Required 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Balby Carr Community Academy. 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/20110717015918/http://www.education.gov.uk/cgi-bin/performancetables/school_09.pl?No=3714056&Mode=Z&Type=SC&Phase=1&Year=09&Begin=s&Base=b&Num=371 to http://www.education.gov.uk/cgi-bin/performancetables/school_09.pl?No=3714056&Mode=Z&Type=SC&Phase=1&Year=09&Begin=s&Base=b&Num=371
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160305150928/http://dashboard.ofsted.gov.uk/dash.php?urn=106802 to http://dashboard.ofsted.gov.uk/dash.php?urn=106802
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070321034105/http://www.balbydrama.4t.com:80/shop.htm to http://www.balbydrama.4t.com/shop.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100720234313/http://www.professionalsecurity.co.uk:80/newsdetails.aspx?NewsArticleID=10716&imgID=1 to http://www.professionalsecurity.co.uk/newsdetails.aspx?NewsArticleID=10716&imgID=1
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090125000608/http://balbydrama.com:80/ to http://www.balbydrama.com
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:15, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: We have great students but you might see people that just walk into your class. S1=Warning, S2=Another warning, S3=Have a word with a teacher or sit somewhere else in the class,S4=Detention and go to another class until the end of the lesson, S5=Go to isolation (a room where you do nothing) and do an 1 hour work after school finishes.
ip user wants to add this- which breaks many of our rules. I would like that user to write a lot more about the school here on the talk page, so we can show her/him how to find references and do it all properly. That could be really useful, and shows the ip that he hasn't been ignored.ClemRutter (talk) 13:33, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: It's totlly unacceptable as is. Besides, it's just referring to a well-known disciplinaey procedure that's used by schools all over the world and has no particular significance in this school. Emeraude (talk) 11:52, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Information from ip user, a witness at the school