Talk:Royal Grammar School, High Wycombe

message: Roy Page? The Maths teacher? He was teaching back in 75 when I first went to the Grammar School and though he never taught me I remember him from supervising the lunches. I assume it is the same person as he was a young man then. Indeed I hope that is the case, as RP Brown, headmaster durung my time, came to the school as headmaster and was far too remote. Doubtless the site page will confirm or deny my suspicions, SqueakBox 15:16, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Page

message: The new section on Dr. Wolfe is slightly misleading, in that the Government eventually backed down and said that a short assessment would be all that is required to obtain Qualified Teacher Status in his circumstances. (See bottom two sections of this BBC News Article)--Chrisd87 10:30, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have rewritten this section to be better - thanks for wikifying and correcting it btw Chris. I've also emailed David asking him to check the facts, as he'd be one to know :) ZoFreX 11:59, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Wolfe

message: I can't find this Daily Mail article and the Mail online appears ignorant of it. Please source and we can replace it, until then I have removed it as a possible spoof, SqueakBox 14:39, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Far be it for me to accuse the Daily Mail of tabloid journalism, but do we have any other more reliable sources for this information?  The Bucks Free Press article you cite only mentions the investigation into the allegations made by the Daily Mail, not the substance of the allegations themselves, and what we don't want to do as an encyclopedia is to repeat an untruth and get into trouble for it.  Find another reliable source for the allegations, and then we can talk about the paragraph being reinserted. -- Francs2000  19:06, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I know what the Daily Mail is like, but thus far the article only says that "allegations have been made", which is true whether they are founded or not. 137.222.10.57 19:17, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes I just made sure that everything is alleged only, and that nothing has, in reality, been revealed. -- Francs2000  19:28, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My apologies, the use of "revealed" was careless of me. /Sable X. Veins 88.106.228.157 23:48, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Mr Dingle

message: I have reverted the edit of 16:14, 12 May 2006 by 84.92.84.138 in which this person added Dr. James Bunyard - Famous surgeon to the list of notable alumni. James Bunyard was in fact an alias used by Mr Dingle. See, for example, the article in The Bucks Free Press which includes:
The allegations were made by 35-year-old Nicky Barr, who claimed Mr Dingle had snorted cocaine at parties and wooed her by pretending to be a top London surgeon called James Bunyard.
I like your sense of humour, 84.92.84.138, but unfortunately the truth must prevail...
Euchiasmus 20:11, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Notable alumni - James Bunyard

message: I've removed the link to the boarding house picture as it went to a 403 error. Does anyone have or know of a valid link or picture? --Chrisd87 21:14, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Boarding house picture 

message: This article could really be better. Pictures? Structure? Anyway, I'm an old boy.. 2005. 'Twas fun. The best of schools. That dingle story had me in hysterics. -- Alfakim --  talk  02:17, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  shame... 

message: Please do the  calls by using params "url" and "title". Also "accessdate" should be specified (is a required param). --Ligulem 17:32, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Calls to cite web 

message: Question: why was Mark Oldknow removed from the section on notable alumni? There seems to be no reason given for this
Because he doesn't have an article, hence not notable enough, SqueakBox 14:06, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: alumni

message: Needs sourcing as Dim Tingle is obviously a piss take of Tim Dingle, and a fairly crude one, and hence without proper sourcing it must be removed. If it were a real mascot it would predate the extremely recent Dingle episode and this character clearly is not worthy to be the RGS mascot, SqueakBox 14:07, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Mascot

message: Removing the headmaster's title with the edit summaries "that's not how we do things here" and "we don't do that", is neither helpful nor true. Including the title conveys additional information and breaks no Wikipedia rule that I am aware of. - Scribble Monkey 07:45, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Headmaster's title

message: We must have a reliable source for the inclusion of anyone in this list. The fact that I know that, eg, Tim Tolkein went there is not sufficient as it would be original research. I welcome the return of alumni sourced. Thanks, SqueakBox 19:09, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Strongly agree, are we going to look though to make sure we can find references for those that we know attended the school? -- Roleplayer 19:52, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Source alumni

message: I removed the paragraph on claiming the school sued a TV show. Complete lies. The link provided showed a clip from the show, and the footage showed nothing at all like ANY building on the school's premises. 
Adding to this is the fact that the school buildings are not very distinct in the first place (so would have trouble starting a lawsuit), state schools are not particularly litigious and only idiots try to sue a comedy programme... I think this is a joke that has slipped through the wikipedia editing net.
86.129.220.197 (talk) 19:27, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Television "Paedogeddon"

message: These are unfounded opinions, likely posted by a member of the team. The SLST is not particularly well known even within the school, and the facilities are hardly noteworthy; maybe good for a school in Bucks, but compare it to the new Hall at Hampton School or the facilities at St Pauls, to just give two examples. If no objections, I'd like to remove it Sage1314 (talk) 20:00, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: No objections to removal, removed Sage1314 (talk) 10:40, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

text: Undone by Javindo (talk) 20:00, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm afraid that the two references you have added still do not account for the claims you are making - I still believe this content is irrelevant to this wikipedia entry. However, in the interests of politeness I will wait for you to justify your opinions rather than simply reverse your edit. Pointless speculation as far as my involvement in the school is concerned is equally irrelevant, and I refuse to dignify it with a response. Sage1314 (talk) 20:36, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Edit: I also refer you to the wikipedia notability guidelines. This also applies to the seperate page you have created for the RGS SLST Sage1314 (talk) 20:44, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: SLST

message: Since the departure of two members of staff very fond of the gown attire (Tim Dingle, Peter Cowburn) this has become far less of a tradition. Perhaps the article should read more along the lines of "Gowns are occasionally worn by members of staff however the tradition has slowly faded in recent years."
--92.1.158.111 (talk) 17:50, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems that during certain events, such as the annual remembrance service held in school, many of the staff including almost all senior staff do wear their gowns as a formality and to follow the tradition. Should this be reflected in the article? MattIPv4 (talk) 15:08, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Gowns

message: In September 2016, the RGS distributed a set of maths questions containing "homophobic and unnecessary" comments which sparked outrage in students and parents alike. The school made headlines on many news sites including the Daily Mail, The Sun and many LGBT+ news sites. It also prompted the response of several LGBT+ activist groups, many condemning the question, but a few praising RGS' actions to prevent this occurring again.
:The question concerned was as follows: "If in a town 70% of the men are married to 90% of the women (and each marriage is between one man and woman, as God intended when he made humans male and female) what percentage of the adult population are married?"
The questions were produced by a retired teacher who had left the school many years ago, however the questions were distributed by the school's maths department with seemingly no-one proof-reading them. The maths department strongly encourage students of a higher maths ability to complete these questions and the sheets are sometimes set as homework to classes, however they were not compulsory. When the mistake was noticed by students, staff quickly removed all copies from circulation where possible. However the incident quickly blew up on social media, where many outraged students complained.
:The Bucks Free Press ref would not be sufficient on its own since it appears to be just a local media outlet, but since this has coverage in national media too it's OK. However, the Bucks Free Press ref does not support the use of the direct quote  "homophobic and unnecessary" as I said above. We cannot use unattributed direct quotes.
:The Daily Mail and Sun are acceptable sources but three is not "many news sources". If we cite a source that says that many news sources have reported on the issue then we can say that, otherwise it is non-neutral language based on your opinion and cannot be included. Similarly Pink News is one LGBT site, not "many" and not "several". And why the redundancy? "news sites" is included twice in the same sentence, and LGBT sites are mentioned in two separate sentences. You are citing Pink News as a news source, so where are the sources showing that there is even one, let alone many LGBT activist groups commenting on this? There is no evidence of "many" groups condemning the events, or of "a few" praising the school's reaction. 
:I'm not certain that Pink News qualifies as a reliable news source. They state that they are "pro-LGBT" so there is certainly a possibility of biased reporting, but they do correct factual errors. Their coverage of this event consists of a statement by an anonymous student, an unnamed student's social media comments, and a series of quotes lifted the local Bucks Free Press coverage. Opinions on whether this is a WP:RS news source?
:Who "prais[ed] RGS' actions to prevent this occurring again"? Stonewall is said to have "prais[ed] RGS for dealing with concerns quickly" but that's not the same thing.
:The question is, again, an unattributed direct quotation. Just source this to the Daily Mail article where the question is given.
:The final paragraph needs sourcing, and some of the material appears to be WP:OR. None of the cited sources say anything about whether the material was proof read, or that the maths department strongly encourages  students to do these questions, or that these questions are sometimes set as homework. For that matter, does it matter if these types of questions are sometimes set as homework? It would only relevant if this question was set as homework (and it appears not to have been). The statement about the issue blowing up on social media with many outrages students complaining is unsourced and non-neutral.
:I have to say that the  coverage of controversies in this article seems a bit over the top, and I'm wondering if there is any conflict of interest in play.  Anyone editing this article who is a student or has some other conflict of interest should follow WP:COI by declaring their conflict of interest and proposing edits on the talk page. Meters (talk) 20:40, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed: Posers Homophobic Comment

message: I am not happy with just shoving all the notable alumni into a cat, we should illustrate the most notable fo them, which currently includes Grayling, ♫ RichardWeiss talk contribs 13:57, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, he can be added. ♫ RichardWeiss talk contribs 08:17, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Notable alumni

message: I see the Timothy Dingle section has been restored, without addressing all of the issues I previously raised , for example, the drug allegations were completely unfounded, so we should not mention them, and terms such as "sacked" are not neutral, particularly when he had already left the school. Note also that the  Daily Mail is now generally not accepted as a reliable source. See the RFC on this: Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_220#Daily_Mail_RfC Meters (talk) 17:54, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Timothy Dingle again 

message: I've restored the material I recently removed but in a more accurate version (practice material not a test, volunteer not a teacher, more detailed response). The latest version restored by the IP was better than when I first raised the issue  but still did not address all of the problems. I'm not convinced this belongs in the article at all, but since it was restored by yet another different editor let's at least start with an accurate version. Meters (talk) 18:28, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Maths question again

message: One using claiming COI for a few edits by a pupil 5 months ago is not sufficient justification. And we do not COI tags to warn off others frome diting as if we don't want people editing ehre. I will take this to an admin board if you persist in this deply mistaken tagging. ♫ RichardWeiss talk contribs 16:07, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: another user has again flagged the page as COI due to my contributions, could you take a look to ensure it is still neutral? MattIPv4 (talk) 12:44, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: You don't appear to be employed by the RGS, based on your user page. Are you? Ex-students from there (including me) don't have COI for contributing, even heavily. I also notice that  re-added the tag without explaining themselevs here first, and for that reaosn alone I would revert but its already been removed. SovalValtos, please explain your inclusion of the COI tage here, if you add it again without explanation you will be reported. And please do understand that ex-students can edit without having a COI, as with all educational instituion articles. ♫ RichardWeiss talk contribs 15:10, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not employed but am a current student (three weeks left). Does that change anything? I am being careful with my edits to ensure they are sourced and neutral. Where there are issues, content is being proposed on this talk page (as below), per the instructions given on COI cases. MattIPv4 (talk) 15:15, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I am pleased to see MattIPv4 has made a CoI declaration for this article. I had not seen it when I added the tag but removed it as soon as I did.SovalValtos (talk) 18:25, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

text: IMO being a current student isn't a COI, being a teacher is, or an ex headmaster. However, if you can point out a place in our COI policy talking about this I'd be interested to read and we could always go to the COI noticeboard for clarification. Being a student does not mean one os going to love the school, or even hate it. I'd also be interested in seeing any diffs where Matt's edits seem to be non-NPOV, which to my mind is typical COI. ♫ RichardWeiss talk contribs 19:37, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: COI

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Royal Grammar School, High Wycombe. 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/20110831002659/http://www.uel.ac.uk/about/history.htm to http://www.uel.ac.uk/about/history.htm
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) 09:47, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Does anyone have any objections or thoughts on adding Christopher J. Date to the notable alumni section of the article?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by MattIPv4 (talk • contribs) 11:30, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chris Date 

message: raised the concern that the statement in the SLST section regarding providing services for the Jeans4Genes was unsourced. The current proposed sources are the team's YouTube channel playlist for the event https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL58EAE56B7ED5EA76 as well as a letter from the school's headmaster making reference to the Jeans4Genes performance https://www.rgshw.com/_site/data/files/documents/letters%20to%20parents/school%20comms/1903D12DBC48D52139312411F8544FD4.pdf - There was concern that the playlist isn't a reliable source but I believe in tandem with the letter, these are good sources for the statement? MattIPv4 (talk) 12:42, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: One of the proposed 'sources' (Youtube) is not a reliable source and there is no support for all the proposed text. So not agreed.SovalValtos (talk) 13:18, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Why in this situation is the playlist regarded as not reliable? The articles yo had previously linked about video sources implied that they could be used if deemed reliable, so I'm curious as to why in this situation it isn't reliable when backed up by the secondary source? MattIPv4 (talk) 14:05, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

text:   Any thoughts on this, what could be done to ensure accuracy and correct sourcing here? MattIPv4 (talk) 19:48, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jeans4Genes 

message: The team provides lighting for school events (such as concerts and Jeans 4 Genes) and sound for assemblies whilst also being a prominent contributor to the school's drama scene with the annual school production, such as the March 2019 production of West Side Story.
:One of the proposed 'sources' (Youtube) is not a reliable source and there is no support for all the proposed text. So not agreed.SovalValtos (talk) 13:18, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Why in this situation is the playlist regarded as not reliable? The articles yo had previously linked about video sources implied that they could be used if deemed reliable, so I'm curious as to why in this situation it isn't reliable when backed up by the secondary source? MattIPv4 (talk) 14:05, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:   Any thoughts on this, what could be done to ensure accuracy and correct sourcing here? MattIPv4 (talk) 19:48, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed content