Talk:Royal High School, Edinburgh

message: Reassessed to high importance based on age. Article needs referencing to make a B and more topics. You must have an impressive alumni list? Welcome again Victuallers 14:29, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: WP Schools

message: I'm a former pupil and have never heard of a Franciscan connection to the school or to Holyrood Abbey, which predated the Franciscan order by a century. I've changed 'Franciscan monks' to 'Augustinian canons', with whom the early school was associated, and have cited Dr. Murray's official school history as a source. Lachrie 17:52, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Augustinian origin

message: I'm deleting the poet George Campbell Hay from the alumni list. He's doubtful because he's known for having been an Old Fettesian. Hay's Wikipedia entry says: 'He was educated at Fettes College (which he despised) and the University of Oxford.' He did bequeath his library to RHS, but I think that's because he was a teacher rather than a pupil. The Oxford Dictionary of National Biography says nothing about Hay's schooling, only about his teaching, which included a stint at RHS: 'In 1934 Hay won a major scholarship in classics and took a degree at Corpus Christi College, Oxford, afterwards taking a teacher's training course at Edinburgh and teaching briefly at the Royal High School there.' Some institutions adopt a loose definition of alumni which includes former teachers, so I'm not one hundred per cent sure deleting him from the list is the right thing to do here. Suggestions would be good. Lachrie 14:03, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: George Campbell Hay

message: He's not there. I think he's on a sabbatical. Someone should put that in... J8149ZZ (talk) 11:00, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: George Smuga

message: This article *needs* shortened -- it's ridiculously long for a sub-important comprehensive in Edinburgh. If nobody asks upon this, I'll start removing non-important sections in an attempt to shorten this article. 77.97.225.178 (talk) 17:28, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, it's very hard to read or navigate -- everything is just randomly placed. 77.97.225.178 (talk) 17:29, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree totally. 92.236.244.140 (talk) 18:46, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't. The Royal High School was the most important school in Scotland for several hundred years. Obviously it's going to be a long article. If necessary you can create sub-articles. Xanthoxyl (talk) 21:59, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The school is a national institution with a long history. The length of the article reflects that. The content is valuable and should be reorganised rather than removed. Lachrie (talk) 20:18, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

text: School dress is important to historians of fashion. Before removing content, we should create the sub-articles into which it can be transferred, so the information isn’t lost. Lachrie (talk) 20:18, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: They information is never lost, it's always retained in the Wikipedia history pages. School dress is not so important, perhaps only sections about current dress and small mentions of previous dress should be included. Message from XENUcomplaints? leave me a message! 20:33, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The uniform is, in fact, treated as an important part of the school culture and the information provided cannot be found online elsewhere. There is no good reason to remove the paragraph. In addition, information which is buried in a page history is effectively lost from the point of view of almost all users. The page is, in my view, unusually complete as compared with other pages, rather than "excessively long", and 60KB poses no problem to any modern browser. I ought to point out that anonymous users have recently been warned about blanking this page -- and persisted in making disruptive edits. Lachrie (talk) 20:48, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: If you read what I said, I said we should shorten it, to only include what what be relevant to the article (modern (now) uniform, small paragraph about past uniform). Any comments like "students take pride in the uniform" can't really be placed here, as for a start it's not neutral. Thanks! Message from XENUcomplaints? leave me a message! 21:17, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

text: Just tried to shorten it, any problems, feel free to place here or my talk page! Thanks! Some neutrality still is pending fix, and length of article overall could be reduced. Message from XENUcomplaints? leave me a message! 21:27, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shorten 

message: Many schools in existance during the time of the World Wars will have lost a number of their former pupils to the various conflicts.  It should be noted that not many have a list of the dead on their pages.  Articles should reflect modern schools in 2009, not act as an "In Memoriam" page.  84.71.187.76 (talk) 21:38, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, only notable figures should stay there (if any). Message from XENUcomplaints? leave me a message! 21:40, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't agree at all. While it is not a major school today (though it is often the national pilot school for the public system), it has had a central role in Scottish history (which is why its importance is rated as "High" on the template) and this is already a list of notable people. Lachrie (talk) 21:50, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Military 

message: I'd suggest moving the list of alumni to a new page, List of alumni of the Royal High School (Edinburgh). It would also contain the military honours. Xanthoxyl (talk) 00:51, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: We probably do need to hive off material to make the main page more readable. The lists are a good way to organise information, but they’re getting so complete now that the main article is becoming a little unwieldy, so creating sub-articles for some of them is probably the best solution. So long as we’re transferring content, not arbitrarily deleting it, I don’t think anyone can reasonably object to making the change. There are precedents for splits like that in articles on other institutions. If it's done right, it would be an improvement. Lachrie (talk) 01:19, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll split it now. Xanthoxyl (talk) 01:31, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggested split 

message: The club has merged with Corstorphine RFC in the last few years. As a club it is historically important in its own right (although it has declined in recent years), and probably should be at a combined CRFC article.--MacRusgail (talk) 13:19, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Royal High Rugby 

message: As far as I'm aware, this school doesn't do classics anymore. Should this be removed?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.97.224.230 (talk) 16:24, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  classical teaching 

message: The traditional translation is "The State Flourishes with the Muses" which seems perfectly acceptable. User:Zimzimbadabim replaced this with "By the Muses, the State/Republic Flourishes". I'm wondering if it was really an improvement. As English, it strikes me as less idiomatic. If we're going to use an alternative rendering, perhaps a positive case could be made here first for its superiority? Lachrie (talk) 05:11, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Musis Respublica Floret'' 

message: Dcoetzee 03:35, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggested image 

message: I am an FP. I left in 1968, the year the school moved to Barnton.
The internal subdivisions of the school for sporting and other competitive purposes were NATIONS not HOUSES.
I believe the 'house' colours you have are incorrect. from memory Angles were pale blue, slightly turquoise, Britons were the deep blue colour, Picts were red and Scots green. If there are no objections, I propose trying to edit this in about a months time. If the new school (Barnton) have chosen to change the colours, then please post back. Jobadi (talk) 13:42, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I do agree about changing the houses to the correct term Nation if it has not already been done, but another nation was added a couple of years ago and I think the colours have changed for some of the other ones.  PinkPuffyPower759 (talk) 18:26, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nation Colours 

message: The uniform rules and restrictions have changed a lot these past 2 years. If I can find the document with the new rules, I will update it or ask someone else to do it. 
(E.g. blazers are no longer required for most students, ties are no longer required for most students, much looser rules in other areas, etc.) PinkPuffyPower759 (talk) 18:28, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uniform