Talk:Trinity Catholic School

message: Around stub-start. Needs additional references and footnotes. Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools/Article guidelines may give ideas on expansion. Also see :Category:GA-Class school articles and :Category:FA-Class school articles for examples of well-cited school articles --Jh12 (talk) 04:18, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  2008 assessment 

message: In the Alumni section it suggests that Johnny Depp attended this school. Is this true? His page suggests that he was brought up in America. Can I get a confrimation please?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fitzsimons (talk • contribs) 14:51, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It's possibly  unlikely, and most  probably  a student  prank. I  have removed it  until it can  be genuinely  sourced.--Kudpung (talk) 20:42, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Johnny Depp? 

message: The following  unsourced tittle-tattle/POV has been removed:In 1986 there was a mass protest by parents and students when the whole of the board of governors was sacked over the Christmas holidays; the obvious reason being the imminent retirement of the school's maverick 'creator' and head, Peter Hastings. Peter had somehow created a school with a great atmosphere of discipline through responsibility - the manifestation of which involved no uniform, and the addressing of teachers by their first name. This ethos did not suit the ideas of the Catholic diocese in 1986, and they saw a way to appoint the successor of their choice by appointing their own hand-picked governors. The signing of a petition by virtually all parents by January and the strong opinions of teachers, pupils and parents eventually created a truce of sorts, and an agreed successor was appointed, although many missed the slightly idiosyncratic, but inspirational leadership of Peter Hastings.--Kudpung (talk) 20:36, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unsourced content removed 

message: While a band or a football team  may  itself be notable  enough for a Wikipedia entry, it  does not automatically follow that their individual members are. Individuals should either already  either have their own Wikipedia pages, that conform  to  WP:CITE, or the famous residents entry  must carry  such  a citation.
This school article is not  a repository  for links to the websites of any such bands, unless all the members attended the school, or the band supports the school in  some special,  notable way.--Kudpung (talk) 04:22, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alumni, band members, & Spam 

message: This article still  appears to  be a target  for for undue weight  to  some of its aspects, and trivia. The section  on  the business about  the uniform  accounts for half the article content, where a couple of sentences would suffice. School articles typically  focus on   location, enrollment, brief history, and brief, non promotional  academic achievement. See  WP:WPSCH/AG for further details. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:25, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The uniform event was significant in the history of the school, and unprecedented.  It divided the school community for several years, it involved not only the governors, but the MP and an Archbishop.  It provoked students to boycott lessons and it got into national media and onto television.  It isn't trivia.  Its percentage will diminish as the article develops and people add more about location, enrollment, history, achievements, etc.  Do you have material to add along those lines? Twopenneth (talk) 08:39, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like you  just  said it  all  in  three sentences ;) But no , I  have no  idea where to  get  more information  on  this school. Most school articles are relatively  short and don't  need padding  out. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:36, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like overemphasis of size in the article to me too. Widefox (talk) 11:10, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I  have tightened up  the tone of the article for encyclopedic style, but  it  has been reverted. I've issued what  I  feel  to  be a fair warning. I've asked for uninvolved opinion, and will  not  be taking  part in  further discussions on  these issues. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:37, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Kudpung, your "tightening up" edit (this one?) is currently the most recent edit - no-one has reverted it, although it has introduced a few style errors itself.  What are you referring to? Twopenneth (talk) 12:02, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I  was mistaken about  the revert. I was confusing  it  with  another contentious issue in  an article on which  the same editors and myself  are contributors. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:51, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Kudpung, thanks for clearing that up. Twopenneth (talk) 14:18, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

text: Please give a reliable source to confirm your claims. Camyoung54 talk 01:57, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Content