Talk:St Michael's Prep School, Otford

Some problems with previous edits to this article

First, there are several words and phrases that have no place in an encyclopedia article: (a) 'exceptional', (b) 'popular', (c) 'the most stunning'. The first two at the very least require some kind of definition and evidence provided, e.g. 'Radley is exceptional in requiring all boys to wear gowns' would seem an acceptable use of the term in an encyclopedia; likewise, 'X School is popular: it receives 10 applications per place compared with a national average of only 3' (an invented statistic) would also seem not unreasonable. There is no excuse for claiming that the site is particularly aesthetically pleasing unless there is an independent source, e.g. 'John Smith, professor of the built environment in the University of Otford, described the site as 'stunning' ([reference])'.

Secondly, some of the edit was simply sloppy: mis-spelling of 'Michael', use of the abbreviation 'Prep', lack of a hyphen in '90 acres', use of the plural 'acres' rather than the correct singular form to be used adjectivally.

Thirdly, a search on Google reveals that a whole paragraph has simply been copied from elsewhere on the internet. This is called plagiarism.

Fourthly, there is absolutely no way in which inviting people to visit the school is appropriate in an encyclopedia article. This was simply advertising. I would hazard a guess that as the edit was made by somebody who has only edited this article it was intended to be a form of advertising for the school.

Finally, it was completely inappropriate for the paragraph relating to abuse allegations to be removed. These allegations were made by John Hurt in an interview with one of the country's most respected newspapers. The text of the interview can be consulted both online and in hard copy in any library which maintains a newspaper archive. Here is what the article says:

But never before has Hurt spoken about the abuse perpetrated by Donald Cormack, the senior master at his prep school, St Michael's, Otford, near Sevenoaks in Kent.

This comes up early in our conversation only because we have a mutual friend who was at St Michael's with Hurt. I mention the friend as the trim and relaxed-looking actor settles into one of the huge zebra-skin chairs in the hotel's screening room. He told me, I say to Hurt, that Cormack used to remove his two front false teeth and insert his tongue in boys' mouths. "Oh yes, he used to do that," says Hurt, equably. "He thought it was a trick, like rubbing your face with his stubble."

I ask Hurt if it had happened to him. "It happened to me, yes. It happened to lots of people, I think." Actually putting his tongue in a boy's mouth? "Yes." What did Hurt make of it? "Human beings are very good at adapting to what happens," he replies. "You just accepted what was happening then. If it happened now he'd be behind bars. Without any question."

At that time St Michael's was a school of only 48 boys. There was no television, the pupils were not allowed radios, and, if a degree of quiet brutality was inflicted on their hapless offspring, the view of traditional parents was that such discipline was "character-forming".

The school's isolation meant that the boys had no other models of behaviour. "You had nothing to refer to," he says. "I don't think anyone believed that that sort of thing could go on at that school. It was incredibly high church and had such a high moral tone. Now it's co-educational, has 250 students and no boarders. But then ... Anyone who started off there has got a story in terms of life."

I ask him how this experience affected him. "Hugely, actually," he says. "I thought I swam through it all, but it must have affected me, because it's the only part of my childhood that I remember with absolute clarity. From arriving to leaving, there's hardly an event, the lifting of a desk lid, that I can't recall." ('John Hurt: I was abused, too', The IoS Interview by Sholto Byrnes, Independent on Sunday [16 October 2005]).

If St Michael's wants to pursue legal action to force a retraction of these allegations it ought to pursue Hurt and the IoS through the English law courts. Nobody should be trying to remove the information from Wikipedia.--Oxonian2006 (talk) 23:02, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Copied from another editor's talk page (see User talk:Tractor5000)

You do not appear to understand that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an advertisement for St Michael's Preparatory School. See for example the article on Eton College, which contains a lot of information about the history of the school, including a certain number of details which do not cast the school in a very good light (e.g. a history of abnormally severe corporal punishment). That article links to Anthony Chenevix-Trench, which includes details of the abuse which Chenevix-Trench is said to have perpetrated in the course of his career at several schools. The article on another prep school, Caldicott School, includes reference to the abuse which was perpetrated at the school up to forty years ago. I am sure that Caldicott has subsequently taken steps to ensure that child abuse does not take place there but it happened in the course of the school's past and is a historical fact which ought to be included in an article about the school. So no, I am sure that St Michael's today does not have masters like Cormack abusing the pupils, but according to very well sourced information this is alleged to have taken place in the past and there is absolutely no way that it is appropriate for the information to be removed by somebody who is pretty obviously intent on presenting the school in a good light.--Oxonian2006 (talk) 14:47, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Editing of abuse allegations

Obviously, there has been quite a bit of effort to remove the allegations from this page by editors. It does seem there is a lot of detail given to this 15 year old topic. May I suggest that the details of the assault are not included?

Cheers, AussieWikiDan (talk) 14:40, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

I will remove some of the details of the allegations, if not objections? AussieWikiDan (talk) 14:04, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi there, I have made edits which I hope will keep a balance between representing the modern school and ensuring these allegations are acknowledged. I am not linked to the school or any of the stories.

Cheers, AussieWikiDan (talk) 18:29, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

details

It seems that this article is low on details. Some suggest Eton College as an example of an article about a school. A one sentence description and two sentence history seems pretty skimpy. Though also the article should not read like an advertisement, but still should give information that prospective students would want to know. Gah4 (talk) 18:13, 24 November 2020 (UTC)