Talk:Trinity Grammar School (New South Wales)

message: Welcome ... This is a very well made page. Particularly impressed by the well referenced alumni page. If you could get your main page to be similarly well referenced with 3rd party sources then it would be a B. Register on the schools page for a reassessment when ready. Victuallers 08:35, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: assess

message: How can you possibly justify removing a piece of the school's history no matter how unflattering or how long ago it happened. Wikipedia is here to present truthful and accurate information to those who wish to view it. This_is_England
:A major concern is that you are copying and pasting large chunks of text, which violates copyright. Please see WP:COPYVIO. As for the substance of the section, there should be some mention of this incident, but the mention cannot be undue. See WP:UNDUE. Recurring dreams (talk) 13:15, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi there. You may sign and date your posts by simply typing ~~~~ after your entry. 
I am not trying to justify removal of the school's history. I have no connection of any type to the school or the parties involved in this matter. However, adding a lengthy recital of facts from a government hearing unduly highlights this single incident. A Wikipedia article, in addition to being truthful and accurate as you mentioned, must keep a neutral point of view.  This precludes us from adding so much positive or negative information about a single incident that the article becomes unbalanced. My fear was that your edit did that; a more measured one that cited the hearing as a source might not.
I do see that another editor objected over a possible copyright violation, but I agree with you that a transcript of a government hearing does not present a concern on that score.  Xymmax (talk) 13:23, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

text: The incident is still not notable in the scheme of the whole article about the school - a note about another former teacher was removed from the article for the same reason. If all you can come up with is one reference to a Parliamentary debate, as opposed to the multitude of media coverage which accompanied the other Boarding House incident mentioned in the controversies section, then perhaps it deserves a place. But one single reference (and by Franca Arena no less), does not merit inclusion in this article at this point. JRG (talk) 12:55, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: April 2008 Changes to Controversies section

message: I am assessing this article for WikiProject Schools as B / High on a request (apologies that it has taken four months to respond to an assessment request). Quite a good article in terms of length and organisation, and quite well referenced. This could get a good article rating with work. First, the introduction could be expanded as it is a little short for a long article - three long paragraphs will do, it should summarise the entire article. Second, the history section is a good length with pictures but the sourcing could be improved; there are some gaps and only one source is used, getting varitey as much as possible with sourcing is a good thing. Third, the school song. Has the copyright status of this been verified as ok for inclusion? Even if it has past consensus on the issue has been that the school song should be on Wikisource and linked from the article. Any sourced details about the song (history e.t.c.) are fine however. Forth, some sections such as 'House system' have no sources - even if they are primary sources, adding some is still good. Finally, The 'Curriculum' section looks incomplete and short, expansion would be nice there.
I am giving this article high importance, up from mid, due to the long history of the school, controversies, and significant alumni. Camaron | Chris (talk) 17:28, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment

message: A possibly useful PD photograph of Hilliard:  99of9 (talk) 06:07, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hilliard pic 

message: OK, deleted replicated text; will paraphrase and repost soon. Z 11:51, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed  tag. Stickee (talk) 12:33, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I propose to merge Trinity Grammar School Preparatory School into Trinity Grammar School (New South Wales). The Prep School is simply a campus of the main school and I feel that the content in the Prep School article can easily be explained in the context of the School. The main school article is of a reasonable size, subject to further editing (currently in progress), that the merging of the Prep School will not cause any problems as far as article size is concerned. Please discuss your support or opposition to the merger. Based on feedback, I propose to complete the merger by 31 May 2019. Rangasyd (talk) 14:20, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: In the absence of feedback, the content has been merged from Trinity Grammar School Preparatory School into Trinity Grammar School (New South Wales). Rangasyd (talk) 13:34, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, that's good. Sorry I didn't reply earlier - I don't think I received the ping. StAnselm (talk) 19:18, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal