Template talk:Infobox school/Archive UK school 1

message: How do you put a piped entry into the County field on the template? West Midlands needs a pipe link West Midlands to be used.
Keith D 14:51, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK I have found out how to handle this now. Keith D 16:08, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  County problem 

message: I've added a coordinates field; see example at Sidcot School. Please use  with "display=inline,title". Andy Mabbett 21:27, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coordinates 

message: The changes to the template over the last couple of days has removed the display of most of the fields when viewing the template page. All we now have is the image and address field displayed. 
Could this be changed back so that all of the fields are displayed on the template page and the optional ones marked appropriatly. It is easier to work with if you know what the fields are and how they are displayed.
Keith D 08:44, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have put these back in. Hope it does not cause a problem with the other changes made recently. Keith D 09:52, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changes to display 

message: This is US spelling - UK is enrolment. Can this be changed? -- roundhouse 16:04, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I changed it; it was easier than I thought. -- roundhouse 11:30, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Any chance we could have the choice between "enrolment" and "students", similarly to :Template:Infobox Secondary school? - Scribble Monkey 15:03, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think so - it looks quite easy on :Template:Infobox Secondary school. Try chGallen who seems to know how to effect and properly document these matters. -- roundhouse0 15:14, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I could probably manage it myself, having edited the other template before, but I wanted to know what the consensus was. - Scribble Monkey 15:29, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would tend to disagree, I'm afraid.  Wikipedia:Manual of Style (infoboxes) seems to suggest (to me, anyway) that as much as possible, the infobox should keep consistent field titles.  Better to either leave it as it is, or just change them all to students.  Seeing as though some schools call them pupils, some students, and some have different names depending on the year group, I would be in favour of keeping it as it is.  There is nothing wrong with "enrolment" as it is, it's a perfectly fine British English word and has the connotation of average school capacity rather than just the current number of students at the school - more infoboxy.  (chgallen 16:07, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The reason most often put forward for differentiating between pupils and students, is that pupils are in compulsory education (years 7-11) and students are there voluntarily (years 12-13). If the government raise the school leaving age, as is being suggested, perhaps we'll have a single term again. Personally I think students is a sufficiently generic term, and understood by all, whereas enrolment is somewhat ambiguous (see comment below). - Scribble Monkey 09:42, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Having said that, if it's just a problem with "enrolment" sounding too American, then we could always change it to "capacity" or something... (chgallen 16:09, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's the problem; is enrolment how may students the school can take, or approximately how many actually attend? In more and more schools the two figures are diverging. - Scribble Monkey 09:42, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

text: My wife teaches at an 11-16 school and they are all called students (she believes that the word 'student' applies to one who studies and there should be another term for those who merely attend - eg inmates). In my day we were either boys or pupils when at school. One could put say 'Enrolment - 1236 students/pupils in 2005' (citing the latest ofsted) which seems unambiguous. (Ofsted use the phrase "Number of pupils on roll" - see eg here.) -- roundhouse0 15:13, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I take your points Scribble Monkey.  I think that the field should represent the average number of students who actually attend rather than how many the school "can take".  But I think entering a number like "1236" should be avoided - better to have "c.1200" say.  The infobox is meant to give a general idea of the character (and in this respect, size) of the school, not a year-on-year of figures...  That's why I'd be hesitant to change to students - it gives the impression of a current, flexible statistic rather than a statement about the school size.  However, for lack of a better alternative perhaps enrolment should be changed to students.  (chgallen 20:32, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like we all agree to change it? Do you want to do the honours Chgallen? - Scribble Monkey 08:52, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Certainly :) (chgallen 17:49, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Enrollment 

message: I was wondering whether anybody would be able to add these fields to the template.  Whether or not people agree with it, there are a growing number of British faith schools so the religion bit makes sense.  Houses are less common in the state system, but they are also growing in prominence (due in part to the "Harry Potter effect").  And many other school infoboxes have a staff number field, so if that could be added I think it would help to make this template complete.  These aside, this is definitely the best general infobox for UK schools around.  Peace.  (Chgallen 12:10, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Template:Infobox School2 has options for 2 free lines (to cater for individual schools) + an option to call the Headteacher something else via head_label (eg some boys' schools will have a Head Master). I don't know how this is achieved, unfortunately. Also my wife teaches at a UK comp (11-18) and all the pupils are termed students these days (I don't know if this is true in the independent sector; in primary schools they are still pupils I think). She has remarked that there should be another word for those many 'students' who do no studying. -- roundhouse 14:17, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  That shouldn't be a problem.  I'll have a go at both.  UPDATE: Done the head_label thing.  It should default to "headteacher" if nothing is filled in.  UPDATE AGAIN: Have also added some free labels.  (Chgallen 14:53, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Cheesy Mike, I agree with you.  There are a couple of options: under "staff", we could have a bit for teaching staff and then support staff; or we could have two fields, teaching and support; finally, we could leave it but remove the "teachers" bit.  For the moment, I'll just remove the word "teachers".  (Chgallen 14:53, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religion, Houses and Staff number 

message: The microformat hcard in this template is very poor.  All I am able to export in Firefox Operator is name and fax - nothing else.  The rest of the markup seems broken.  Could somebody who's fluent in hcard try and fix it?  To be honest, I'd be in favour of removing it entirely for the moment.  Few other school templates have hcard, and the code in this instance is almost useless, and is causing more trouble that it's worth.  (Chgallen 16:22, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In fact, looking back through the history, the hcard markup has never worked properly.  I really do strongly advocate removing it - it's pretty pointless being able to export the school's "name" and "fax" only. Having said that, if it can be fixed then so much the better.  (Chgallen 16:33, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: All that is required for a valid, useful hCard is the name (class-="fn org", in this case). That said, Steinsky recently moved the coordinates outside the infobox; previously, they were included in the hCard. You should also be able to export the address, as a "label" in hCard. I've re-added the "adr" class (which was lost here - prior to that, the hCard had the address included) and some "note" properties, Please try now. Andy Mabbett 17:00, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Still no change, I'm afriad.  Using The Kings of Wessex School as my test, all I can get is the name and the fax.  I can receive the notes you added, though.  Is it just me? (Chgallen 17:11, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Right on, that's now working.  Thanks very much! (Chgallen 17:44, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Microformat problems 

message: I have updated the infobox with two new fields: Religious Head and Founder.  This is now a pretty comprehensive template - good for state schools, primary schools, ancient boarding schools, pretty much everything.
Also, I've changed the location field a fair bit.  It can now be as detailed or vague as each school requires.  Previously, if the street address was given, the whole field had to be filled in as well, including the county.  This could result in odd addresses like "High Street, Lincoln, Lincolnshire" or "Church Road, Cambridge, Cambridgeshire".  It's more usual to omit the county in those cases, and that can now be done.  The required fields are city (or town, village) and country.  I also added an option to have a postcode.  Of course, this all works with the microformat.
on the subject of the location field, I've also removed the autolinks.  The main reason for this is that the autolinks sometimes do not work, depending on the notability of the location and/or the location's article's name.  Automatic, broken links which cannot be fixed "in-article" are not a good thing.  Links can be added when filling out the blank template.
:OK, reverted this - messes with all the articles that use piped links.  (Chgallen 21:57, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed them again.  They really rendered the format inflexible, (e.g. what if a school of international renown wants to use the Flagicon template?).  Also, having gone round correcting all the schools that use pipped  links, I found a not insignificant autowikilinks pointing nowhere.  I think it's best to remove these links now, rather than wait until the number of articles using this template grows to large to be manageable.  I'm now going through all the schools which use this template, and inserting individual links for each.  (Chgallen 10:35, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Nice work - it all seems to be marked up correctly, from an hCard PoV. You might like to not that the correct form of postal address is "8 Peacock Lane Leicester Leicestershire England LE1 5PX" and not "8 Peacock Lane Leicester Leicestershire LE1 5PX England" - in other words, the postcode should be the final line. Andy Mabbett 13:42, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I was wondering about that.  I didn't really know which way round the country and postcode should go.  According to the live example on the hcard page, it goes after the state code and before the country - but that's American.  I'll switch it round now though.  (Chgallen 13:51, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks - I was referring to UK Post Office standards. I don't know those applying in the USA. Andy Mabbett 15:14, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some updates - 29th May 

message: Five fields which could be added are president, chairman, school colours, and test performance:
The president and chairman fields could act like the head field, i.e. allow the user to change its label (e.g. chairman, chairwoman, chairperson, chairman of governers, etc.).
School colours could be added easily enough, but I'm not sure whether they're really needed for UK schools.
In terms of the tests, we could have three fields: SATS, GCSEs and A-Levels then the percentage attaining key stage 3 level five, 5 GCSEs at C or over, and average number of UCAS points respectively.  Or we could just have three custom fields with space for "test name" and "average test result"  and leave it for individual editors to fill them out for each school.  
A secondary point, but is there any need for the yellow bar at the top of the infobox?  Personally, I think that the infobox would look better all white like the American school template.
To be honest, there are far far too many possible infobox templates for UK schools and colleges.  This one is probably the best, so it makes sense to make it comprehensive enough for all schools.  Any thoughts? (Chgallen 17:09, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I personally think that the infobox should be for relatively permanent things, not annual exam results. There will be a link to the school site and perhaps to the OFsted report - let these give such details, or the national press (I think the BBC site gives exam results). Chair of governors might be OK - I don't know how easy it is to discover who this is for a given school. -- roundhouse 17:51, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I very much agree with you.  I was just looking through competing infoboxes to see what this one was lacking, but I really don't think the place for exam results is in the infobox. (Chgallen 10:37, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Future Suggestions 

message: To me, the map in the infobox seems out of place.  No other educational infoboxes have one, and when it is added it pushes the infobox text too far down.  The point of the infobox is to summarise what's in the text.  It summarises the location of the school in the... location field.  Schools aren't tourist hotspots or geographical landmarks - the main information a browser wants to see when he/she glances at an infobox is information about the school body, not a great big map pointing out exactly where the school is.  If you look at any of the "good article" or above grade schools you can see that they focus on what defines the school (i.e. it's students and history) not it's geographical significance.
I'm not saying that school articles shouldn't have a map - far from it.  I suggest either removing it from the template and placing the map (if required) in the article; or else moving the map from the top of the infobox (where it is above more important information such as the school moto, date of foundation and number of students) to the bottom. (Chgallen 16:37, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it doesn't 'need' a map, but then the map is optional and the user can move it around. There have been objections to a map in addition to coords (as the coords take one to a choice of much better maps). The Ofsted page has a map too. Putting it lower by default seems a good idea. Occuli 18:38, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you: if readers are interested in the school's location they will follow the links in either the location or coordinates field.  If the school's location is actually notable, there should be a section within the article concerning it and a map can be placed here.  The map is optional, but if it is available then some editors will use it.  If it is used, it dominates the infobox and overshadows the school logo and other information.  It also makes infoboxes which use it over-large and it makes the template page itself look over complicated.  The map caption is also very small and difficult to read.  Here is an example of it in use, before I removed the article's coordinates field because it was conflicting with the code produced by the map: Heaton Manor School.  Unless there is some compelling argument for a map's inclusion within the infobox that I have missed (other than "it can be"), I do think that it would be better it were removed.  (Chgallen 18:14, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I certainly agree about Heaton Manor School - a map of the whole of GB is inappropriate for a school (the map would possibly be appropriate for Heaton). I would not myself put any map in a school info box. I suppose you could remove it and see whether there are any complaints. -- roundhouse 19:08, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Will do. (chgallen 19:57, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Done, and with a pleasant side effect: removing the map has removed the gap created by the infobox at the start of some articles.  (chgallen 20:21, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does this infobox ''need'' a map? 

message: I've been looking around to see if there are any other fields this infobox is lacking, and I had a few ideas.  What do people think about adding:
* A "closed" field to compliment "established": for schools which are no longer going.
* "Feeder schools" and "Feeder school for":  Good info, but not sure if it's place is in the infobox.
* "Funding" (i.e. state or independent): At the moment, the infobox has "type" only.  Some schools use this for primary, secondary, sixth form; some use this for funding; relatively few use it for both.  If there were a separate funding parameter, it would be more likely that all the info would be put in the box.  Having said that, people can see from the age range whether it's primary or secondary so maybe the "type" field should just be specified in the documentation to refer to funding more than age range.
Your thoughts? (chgallen 17:24, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "closed" is a must. Andy Mabbett 20:43, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done.  And the others?  Also been thinking about moving "gender" right up to just underneath "type". (chgallen 17:53, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Final tweaking 

message: I don't think we should be encouraging the inclusion of telephone and fax numbers in infoboxes. Numbers and dialling codes have a habit of changing frequently and unless there is an interested editor looking after the school article the information could potentially be incorrect within a very short space of time. Up-to-date contact details are in any case invariably found on the school's own website. WikiProject:Schools also specifically recommends that telephone numbers should not be included. I suggest that both these fields are deleted from the template. Dahliarose 10:23, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I too am uneasy about the inclusion of telephone and fax numbers in infoboxes. See What not to include. Occuli 10:38, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree. --Cheesy Mike 11:17, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Strongly agree, I'll get rid of them.  (chgallen 15:39, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Telephone and fax numbers 

message: How about adding the schools DfES number? It could then be a clickable link through to the school's performance tables, similarly to the Ofsted link. That's if it hasn't become a DCSF (Department for Children, Schools and Families) number already. In which case, how about adding the school's DCSF number? ~ Scribble Monkey 14:21, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, that would seem like a good idea.  Might be best to wait a while to see if the DCSF changes the url of it's website from DfES, or just reorganises its website before adding. (chgallen 16:04, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As you suggest, it might be prudent to wait a while. ~ Scribble Monkey 13:01, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

text: We have www.edubase.gov.uk which gives good infobox-type info for Leicester Grammar School inc the LEA/dfes number (856/6006). http://www.dfes.gov.uk/cgi-bin/performancetables/school_06.pl?Mode=Z&No=8566006&Type=LA&Num=856&Phase=1&Year=06&Base=b gives a 2006 dfes page (ie the latest) for Leicester Grammar School which I see includes 8566006. So it looks both feasible and useful, assuming the terminology is consistent from school to school. (It needs the LEA number as well as the Dfes number.) -- roundhouse0 17:29, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You would need the LEA number and school number, as you point out. Most of the Secondary schools in Buckinghamshire have a link to their tables, and need to be individually updated each year as the url changes. It would be much easier for this template to get updated when the results for a year are uploaded, and for each school to automatically pick up the latest tables. ~ Scribble Monkey 13:01, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  DfES number 

message: Does anyone have a problem with changing the text Specialist status to Specialism, and possibly adding plural functionality similar to that used for mottoes? ~ Scribble Monkey 09:57, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I personally think Specialist Status sounds better than Specialism. The plural thing's a good idea, though - would be useful. TheIslander 11:07, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would also prefer to change the wording to specialism. Specialist status seems odd and suggests a response 'yes' or 'no' rather than a description of the specialism.Dahliarose 20:53, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I took the liberty of making the changes. I hope nobody minds. ~ Scribble Monkey 09:54, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Specialist status 

message: I should like to suggest that this template be renamed Infobox UK school, replacing the present deprecated one. Does anyone object to that?
GB is the island of Great Britain. The template summary says "This template is designed for all state and independent Primary Schools, Secondary Schools, and Sixth Form colleges in the UK." Also, the template replaces  and , as well as , all now deprecated. Xn4 12:05, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep, definitely.  If you know how to do it so that no articles are affected then go for it.  chgallen 12:35, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My hesitation is that if I were to move this template to Infobox UK school now, I guess it would still be deprecated, so we should need to get it undeprecated! May be better to let the delete go ahead before moving. Xn4 14:26, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's right.  Hopefully, once Template:Infobox UK School is deleted the namespace will just become empty -- then we can move in.  chgallen 14:27, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

text: It makes sense, but presumably every article using the template would have to be changed to use the new name, unless you're suggesting relying on a redirect? This could provide some interesting edit history, which could look like a revert to an older template. I suppose that as long as the edit summary is sufficiently detailed, it would be ok. ~ Scribble Monkey 14:34, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems like a bot would be quite useful in that case.  chgallen 14:54, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would have thought that an automated solution would be best, but I don't know enough about the Wikipedia tools to know what is possible. ~ Scribble Monkey 16:00, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

text: I'm trying to sort it out.  I've moved the template documentation, I'll see what can be done about the discussion.  We should then request a bot on the wikiproject page, I think. chgallen 09:38, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok. Robertvan1 and I have changed all the schools to use the new name, so it looks like we just need an admin to move this page, as per your request. ~ Scribble Monkey 15:52, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've put in a request for speedy deletion on the other talk page, so hopefully this one will move across sometime soon. Once it has moved, should this page and the main page it's attached to be deleted? The redirect would be pretty pointless. CR7 (message me) 13:40, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name of template 

message: I thought I could put these links here to help people to obtain data for the templates:
*Department for Children, Schools and Families (formerly Department for Education and Skills)
*Office for Standards in Education, Children's Services and Skills (OFSTED)
*Directgov
Using the above links can fill in the most important and majority of the template. I hope they're of some help, CR7 (message me) 19:20, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Obtaining data 

message: Websites should be displayed as plain URLs, for the benefit of people viewing printed pages. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 22:37, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I can see your point, but it could equally apply to references where the url is often obscured by the page's title. ~ Scribble Monkey 16:09, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Websites 

message: Would it be possible to have a white background cell colour for the school logo image, rather than the current grey? Most images will have a white background themselves, so would tend to look better with a white surround within the template. I think this is done in Template:Infobox Secondary school. ~ Scribble Monkey 14:00, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Does anyone have an opinion on this one? ~ Scribble Monkey 10:20, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure about this. I think an all white background might be better than a separate background colour for the logo section. I've no idea about the coding for these templates but is there perhaps some way that a box rule can be added to the logos if required? I would actually prefer a different colour to grey. I did at one point have one rather nice infobox with a very fetching pale yellow. Could we perhaps have an option to choose our background colours or is the idea to have a consistent grey colour scheme for all UK schools? Dahliarose 10:46, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is interesting that someone has requested that the background is made transparent on Template:Infobox Secondary school, which was the example I quoted above. The ideal situation is that the logos themselves all have a transparent background, but if they are obtained from a school website, that may not always be the case. I'm sure we could add the infobox background colour as a parameter, but I suspect that most people would prefer a uniform approach. ~ Scribble Monkey 10:56, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  School logo 

message: Would it be possible to change the position of the postcode so that it goes after the county and before the country? This is the normal position in postal addresses. It looks a bit odd having the postcode in its current position. Dahliarose 12:33, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Seemed like an obvious oversight - I've swapped postcode and country round. Halsteadk 17:17, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Position of postcode 

message: I'm trying to add co-ordinates to some school infoboxes and can't seem to get the DMS function to work so that the degrees and minutes are displayed. See Reading School and St Crispin's School for examples. I was hoping that the co-ordinates would be displayed in the same way as those for Eton College. However, Eton haven't entered their co-ordinates in the infobox. Is there a work-round for this template or should I follow the same coding as Eton and leave the co-ordinates out of the infobox altogether? Also the decimal equivalents don't seem to take you to the correct location on Google Earth. For example 51 26 54 N, 00 57 18 W takes me to Reading School but 51.2654, 00.5718 takes me to a field near Bearsted, Kent. Is there some sort of formula for converting degrees, minutes and seconds into a decimal-equivalent format? Dahliarose 09:50, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This site: http://www.nearby.org.uk/coord.cgi can do this conversion (and a whole lot more). It can convert directly from a UK postcode, so you may want to just enter the school's postcode on to that site, then use the decimal latitude and longitude (rather than dms). You might need to tweak the position to centre it on the building, but only by about 0.0005 if at all. In answer to the problem, you can calculate decimal from dms but have to take into account there are only 60 minutes in a degree and 60 seconds in a minute - your conversion has assumed there are 100. So 51deg 26' 54" = 51+(26/60)+(54/3600) = 51.4483. Also longitude W is negative. Halsteadk 13:09, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See :Template:Infobox UK school - add the dms row and put some text in it to display by default in dms; see eg Leicester Grammar School. (In fact :Template:Infobox UK school uses :Template:Coord and you can override the default settings by following the instructions for coord via a monobook edit - see display.) -- roundhouse0 14:06, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

text: I have in fact now changed all the articles in question so that the co-ordinates are no longer in the infobox so that I can achieved the desired DMS display. I was brought up with pounds, ounces, minutes and seconds and in my ignorance hadn't realised that there was a decimal equivalent of DMS! I just thought it was a different way of entering the same numbers. Now I know! I don't understand the Leicester Grammar School example as the display is in a decimal format. As far as I can establish it's not possible to put the co-ordinates in the infobox and have them displayed in the DMS format or have I missed something. Dahliarose 14:51, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that the Leicester Grammar School default display seems to be decimal (using Opera). I'll ask CHGallen (who last edited the coords bit) to look at it again. I don't myself see any problem in having the coords outside the infobox. -- roundhouse0 15:14, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have no idea how that bug crept in - it worked last time I checked.  Anyhow, I think it's fixed now (at least with my computer running firefox it is).  It works like this: you must always enter coords as decimals, but if you enter anything into "dms" it will convert them into and display them as degrees minutes and seconds.  chgallen 21:38, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:   Oh, and the reason that the coords are in the infobox is that it adds them to the infobox microformat - i.e. it makes them machine readable with a nice title.  Though outside and inside work well enough. chgallen 21:39, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

text:  Ignore that. chgallen 22:07, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Degrees and minutes for co-ordinates 

message: How should we handle the situation where the location and the postal address are different? The layout of "location" makes it look like a postal address, but there may be differences. We've just been discussing this at Sutton High School (London).   Should there be a separate field for "Postal address if different"?  Any thoughts? PamD 11:12, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is still being discussed at Talk:Sutton High School (London). The Royal Mail no longer includes county in (any? most?) official postal addresses.  The county which used to be included in some addresses, and may still be the preferred style of the school itself, may not be the local government area it is currently in (since 1965 in this case).  I'd like to be able to show the school's preferred version of its postal address, as well as the fact of which borough it is in.  The template doesn't help much.  In an ideal world the infobox would display "postal address" and allow for a "town not in postal address" and "county not in postal address" for information.  I don't know how or whether we could get to there from here.  Perhaps introduce two new fields for "county-nonpostal" and "city-nonpostal", to be used where useful, and gradually move towards emptying the "county" field where it is not part of the postal address? Could "Location" then be changed to "Postal address" to reflect reality?  PamD (talk) 16:05, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

text: There are other areas where the county used in postal addresses by the school is not that of the location of the school - see http://www.ingleton-pri.n-yorks.sch.uk/prospect/details.htm where a school in North Yorkshire uses the Lancashire address of its post town.  The official version of the address seems to be CARNFORTH and postcode - but the location of the school is North Yorkshire, and it is a long way from Carnforth. PamD (talk) 16:37, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  postal address vs location 

message: Would anyone object to me merging this into Template:Infobox School? --MZMcBride 02:28, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Trying it out on Sutton High School (London) at User:PamD/SHS - the small image of the logo gets expanded beyond its resolution, and the address being run on together manages to split the postcode onto two lines which looks pretty dreadful. I suggest the template needs a bit more work before UK school gets merged into it. PamD 08:56, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Strong objection. The template tries to be all things to everyone and therefore ends up overly complex. The UK template has just enough parameters to suit UK schools. --Cheesy Mike 09:22, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Strong objection. This template has been adopted by virtually all UK schools to meet specific UK requirements. Infobox School does not meet the requirements of UK schools and seems to be much better suited to American schools. Dahliarose 10:34, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Also strong object (see my comments on Template talk:Infobox Aust school private). This is one of the best school infoboxes we have and Template:Infobox School is inferior. This template works well for UK schools, so leave it be. Its way too difficult and rediculous to try and cater to the world in one infobox. Loopla 05:36, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge? 

message: ISI have modified their website and it may now be possible to include the ISA report as a number in the infobox for UK independent schools, in a similar way to the ofsted report for state schools.  Snowman (talk) 00:14, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Independent Schools Inspectorate 

message: For Ivybridge Community College they do not work. I don't know if I’m doing something wrong or there's an actual error with the template. The coordinates currently on the article are not correct, so if you are going to fix it for me can you please find the correct coordinates (just type Ivybridge Community College on Google maps or Google earth). Bsrboy (talk) 16:46, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Suggest just taking the direction letters from the co-ordinate data as it is not expecting the N & W. Keith D (talk) 17:28, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coordinates do not work! Can someone please fix this? 

message: I much prefer degrees/minutes/second formatting when presenting coordinates and that is a more common use on maps in Britain. Would anyone object if I go ahead and at "format=dms" where the coord template is used? 
:You can set your preferences so you always see dms with  - see its documentation at Template:Coord#Display for details. Occuli (talk) 17:33, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I know that, I just think for the non monobook.js savvy Wikpedia reader (which is about 99% of them) it would be better to use an easier to understand / more common display format. --TimTay (talk) 18:02, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as I can see you can set any individual school to display dms (see documentation for this infobox). However recent edits by user Docu suggest there may be some problem with this (see hist). I am not in favour of forcing this template to show dms for all UK schools ... I have no reason to think that dms is better understood in the UK than is dec. (I am personally attached to OSGB36.) Occuli (talk) 19:28, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The DMS option is definitely broken as the code has been removed. I'm not comfortable enough with IF statements in Wikipedia's rather twisted logic to be able to fix it. --TimTay (talk) 19:30, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You are right - see eg :Leicester Grammar School. I am fairly sure it was working a few months back, but share your concerns about tinkering with impenetrable template text. It does work in coord. Occuli (talk) 19:36, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  DMS coordinates 

message: The 6-digit numbers called Ofsted numbers here are called Unique Reference Numbers (URNs) by DCSF.  Each state and independent school in England and Wales has such a number, which is also the index for their EduBase record, e.g.
http://www.edubase.gov.uk/establishment/summary.xhtml?urn=110158
though only state and a few independent schools in England have Ofsted pages.  Each of these schools also has a 7-digit number assigned by the DCSF, consisting of a 3-digit LEA code and a 4-digit establishment number.  For state and independent schools in England, this number is used as a key by the Directgov schoolsfinder pages, e.g.
http://schoolsfinder.direct.gov.uk/8686016/overview/
though these will not include profiles or Ofsted reports for independent schools.
So we could add an EduBase link for free, and perhaps we should add a field for the DCSF number to link to the Schoolsfinder page. Kanguole 17:41, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference numbers 

message: There are local authorities responsible for education, but these are under the directorate of children's services: there are no longer Local Education Authorities in any sense that merits capitalisation.  I would suggest that LEA should be replaced with Local Authority.  Kevin McE (talk) 23:43, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree. --TimTay (talk) 08:23, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

text: Local Authority would appear to be the correct term, but a bit long for the infobox. Would abbreviating it to LA be acceptable? Currently Local Authority (United Kingdom) redirects to the LEA page, so it would need to be decided where to link the caption to. ~ Scribble Monkey (talk) 09:50, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  LEA: anachronistic? 

message: *motto_pl
*founder_pl
*specialist_pl 
These three appear in the blank syntax, but are not in the code of the template. Using these on an infobox produces nothing.
Suggest removing them from here if they have no effect on an article TTGL (talk) 16:12, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: They are in the code for the template and pluralise the entry when given. Keith D (talk) 18:07, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redundant Entities in the Blank Syntax 

message: Help please?  I've just attempted to add an image to the above infobox, but however I input it, I'm still left with bits of coding showing in the saved infobox.  It also needs an image caption "Music room and dance studio" but the infobox has no slot for that. Thanks. --Storye book (talk) 19:09, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed.  The infobox has no provision for an image caption.  Kanguole
* Ah so that's how to do it! Thank you.--Storye book (talk) 20:04, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox at [[Blackheath High School]] 

message: Would it be worth adding a 'caption' field to the infobox? I know of a few articles in which such would be quite useful. Thanks, DotComCairney 11:31, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Caption 

message: Please!  "c." is not the proper abbreviation for "approximately" (as in number of students); it stands for "circa", meaning "in approximately", as in a date range (c. 44 BC).  "Approx." is the correct abbreviation. Radiopathy •talk•   06:13, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  approx. 

message: Could somebody please add a field for patron saint? I don't know how to. Many thanks. Rock drum (talk·contribs·guestbook) 14:07, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  patron saint 

message: Would it be prudent to add a UKPRN field?
ModWilson (talk)
:What is it? Keith D (talk) 14:23, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  A "UK Provider Reference Number" on the UK Register of Learning Providers; see http://www.ukrlp.co.uk/ Seems like a reasonable thing to add. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 13:11, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  However unlike the URN (aka Ofsted number) and DCSF number, it doesn't seem to index any useful info.  Kanguole 13:16, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  UKPRN 

message: Motto is Include Inspire Empower not Listen Respect Yourself
Established 1933 not 1972
Number of teacher 110
DFE number is 3014023
OFSTED number is wrong
please contact me at headteacher@eastbrook.bardaglea.org.uk for more information - I am the headteacher of the school and can provide you with correct information
Clayton1962 (talk) 21:28, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: I assume you are referring to the Eastbrook Comprehensive School page? Simply edit that page, editing the template here will not change it. Thanks, Stickee (talk) 22:42, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from Clayton1962, 22 September 2010 

message: Headmaster name now MR M Long
193.164.103.41 (talk) 09:32, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: What page were you referring to? Simply edit the article of the school instead of the template, which will not be semiprotected. Thanks, Stickee (talk) 10:44, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from 193.164.103.41, 27 September 2010 

message: Bryn Hafren Comprehensive School opened in September 1973 not 1971
86.148.128.28 (talk) 11:06, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from 86.148.128.28, 28 September 2010 

message: The revised template displayed view/discuss/edit links (for the template) at the bottom of each occurrence of the infobox.  People who wanted to change the data in the infobox on some school's page were clicking on the edit link in the infobox, getting the semi-protected message on the template, and then clicking on the discuss link to leave a request here.  I've deleted the name parameter, which will turn off those links.  Kanguole 11:39, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit requests 

message: Principal is Trish Stringer.  William Downey is an ex-student.
Visit http://www.brookeweston.org to verify
Thanks
86.157.191.240 (talk) 21:06, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a template that is used on lots of school articles not a specific school. You need to add this to the talk page of the school article that you need changing. Keith D (talk) 23:03, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from 86.157.191.240, 8 October 2010 

message: When the | lower_age parameter is not entered the ages field shows as "+" like this:
Could someone fix this please? Or alternatively does the doc need to be updated to state that this field is mandatory? Mhiji (talk) 22:05, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: . Good spot, thanks! - Jarry1250 [Who? Discuss.] 22:33, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ages 

message: Would anyone object to removing the  parameter and instead using  in the website field per WP:UF? Mhiji (talk) 16:52, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Another possibility would be to use  and pass the website_name as the second parameter if supplied. Kanguole 17:51, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I personally feel that the  parameter is a bit pointless and just unnecessarily complicates things. Most similar infoboxes (e.g. ) just use one parameter for the website. Just using  without a second parameter also means that all of these infoboxes will have consistent formatting. If for any reason the standard formatting provided by  is not adequate (e.g. if the URL is excessively long), the second parameter could be used. Also nearly all of the values entered in the  are just simplified forms of the URL (without the http:// or www.) anyway (per the doc). Mhiji (talk) 18:56, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: There's a difference in that  expects users to call , whereas this template would call  itself (as it does ).  Thus in the (admittedly rare) case where a second parameter is needed, it would have to come from another field of the template.  Kanguole 19:38, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry if I didn't make it clear but I wasn't proposing to use  within the template. I meant to do this in the same way as at  by changing the doc to just say "Use " and deleting the  parameter altogether. Mhiji (talk) 20:14, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I would support that approach. I find the website_name parameter clumsy. --Simple Bob (talk) 21:03, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

text: Mhiji, I realize that was what you were proposing, but I think the current approach of the user just supplying data and the template generating the link is cleaner and friendlier than the  approach.  (But if the template generated the link using , the website_name would hardly ever be needed.)  Kanguole 21:11, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah I agree doing it that way would be cleaner and friendlier. The only issue with that is that I feel users would not realise that the  parameter is not necessary in most cases and fill it in anyway which will stop the infoboxes being consistent. Therefore perhaps it could be removed from the blank syntax box in the doc and instead a note put somewhere on the doc saying if its necessary to change the name add  to the list of parameters (similar to how there is a note at  about adding a parameter to stop the article title being italicized)? Mhiji (talk) 21:30, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Though would probably be better in the Usage table rather than at the top of the article. Mhiji (talk) 21:50, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

text: Using the template  retains the functionality you want; in fact, it does it for you. Note also that the doc page states explicitly in the Microformat section, "If it has a URL, use .", so this is currently inconsistent. Specifying the use of the template  and dumping the parameter  would resolve this. HairyWombat 03:28, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

text: I support this approach.  is a much neater solution and gives consistency with other infoboxes. --Simple Bob (talk) 10:12, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

text: Sorry, the penny has just dropped. The option of the user using website and optionally website name and the template then using  seems preferable, as it is "cleaner and friendlier" and would only need changing in one place rather than everywhere where this template is used. - Scribble Monkey (talk) 11:47, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

text: It's seldom needed now, but it still has occasional uses, as the 2nd parameter of  does.  For example the URL might be so long that it messes up the infobox.  Kanguole 01:15, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It is used to explanation when the web-site is not directly that of the organisation with a note tagged on. Keith D (talk) 01:49, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry I didn't really understand that. What do you mean? Mhiji (talk) 02:16, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

text: What's you point? Mhiji (talk) 02:13, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I was responding to your deletion.  The underlying template recommends using the full URL.  Kanguole 09:25, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  But the phrase you quote is part of a sentence which begins, "If you specify a query string ... or an anchor ... in the first parameter, then ...". As User Mhiji was doing neither of these things, the phrase you quote does not apply and the deletion was sound. HairyWombat 17:56, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Website