Talk:William Ellis School

Number of students

I think it's actually 1000 rather than 900, or at least thats what my HOY told me. If anyone has a better estimate then please change it back. Felixwells 13:32, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Copyright violation?

Some of the srticke seems to have been taken from here although no copyright information is present. Should we remove the violating content? --Felixwells 22:21, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

earlier headmasters

I think that it may be appropriate to mention the leadership of the former Headmaster the late Mr. F.W. Lockwood and his Deputy Head the late Mr. A.E. Ball, under whose leadership the school developed considerably in the immediate postwar years. If there are contributors who support this, would you please post you comment here. thanks.Miletus (talk) 19:51, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Educational standards

There is no objective way in which current academic achievements can be compared to those of 160 years ago as claimed. Similarly, subjective quality assessments such as "fine" are inappropriate here. ExLibre (talk) 10:34, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

School song

I recently added the lyrics of the William Ellis School Song to this entry. It was removed by another editor, Fmph, quoting WP:WPSCH/AG#WNTI, which specifically precludes adding song lyrics. However, my opinion is that this School Song and its content reflect a particular, post-Victorian public school ethos, which contrasted with the liberal educational values espoused by the School in the 1970s. In addition, Fmph seemed unwilling to delete the School Songs which are present on several other school pages. I have therefore reinstated the lyrics of the William Ellis School Song on the grounds that they do have particular encyclopaedic value, and are not available elsewhere on the Web. ExLibre (talk) 15:40, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

I have removed them again. If you want other school song lyrics removed, just notify me on my talk page. There is nothing to indicate that these lyrics in particular are in any way special, notable or encyclopaedic except your opinion. If you can provide reliable independent sources whcih say that they have some especially noteworthy value, then of course we can reconsider. But as of now they are out. BTW, have a good read of WP:NOT which will explain why Wikipedia is not a repository for stuff that thats not available elsewhere. If you want to keep the lyrics somewhere online, why not try a wordpress blog or something? Fmph (talk) 17:18, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

I have replaced them again. The lyrics refer to the original ethos of the school as set down by the founder, there is reference to the original houses of the school and the erstwhile school motto. This would need incorporating and citing.Tmol42 (talk) 17:38, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm not getting in to an edit war but I have tagged it and it will be removed unless references are provided. There isn't even a reference to show that these are an actual song, never mind the school song of this school. Fmph (talk) 20:31, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

citation added tags removed.Tmol42 (talk) 21:08, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Given the minor nature of this publication perhaps you could add a quote of the passage that supports your assertions? Fmph (talk) 22:54, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

I have severe doubts about the reliability and independence of that reference. It has all the hallmarks of a vanity project. The 'publisher' is actually a run of the mill printer, and the author has only 2 other rather obscure publications listed against his name. And if the lyrics are extracted from that book then there is a clear WP:COPYVIO issue in play.Fmph (talk) 23:19, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Your doubts about the book is just a POV and as all it is providing is the text of a song the status of the book is hardly crucial anyway. As you clearly know more than I about copyright what is the legal timelimit over copyright on lyrics in the UK?

So are you telling me that the book reference is just the source of the lyrics? That it doesn't support the claim to notability that you are making? Fmph (talk) 18:16, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Your original issue with the lyrics was a WP:COPYVIO so I am looking for help in understanding the criteria as to the extent in years of copyright in the UK. En passant I observed I am not moved by your assumptions about the book's efficacy. So please help me with the copyright issue so we can move forward.Tmol42 (talk) 18:31, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

My original issue was most definitely not a COPYVIO issue. As per WP:SCH/AG my original issue was about the inclusion of school song lyrics. These were latterly re-added to the article - yet again without any references - along with some assertions as to their notability. It was these claims that I was most concerned about and tagged them appropriately. It was only when those tags were removed and replaced by the vanity book reference that I questioned the possibility of a COPYVIO. So to return to my original question, does the book reference support the assertions made about the lyrics notability? By the way, any book published in 1962 is most definitely still in copyright. if you want to provide an earlier source for the lyrics that might well be outside copyright. 1962 is in. Fmph (talk) 08:00, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Poss copyvio on lyrics

I've managed to get access to a copy of the book in the reference, and it does discuss the authors of the song. W.S.Robertson wrote the lyrics for a competition in 1927. He was in the 4th form at the time, so was maybe 15? That would make him 100 this year if he was still alive. Copyright lasts for a minimum of 50 years after the authors death, so he would have had to have died before the age of 50 in order for the lyrics to be out of copyright now. I think that highly unlikely and unless it can be confirmed the safest route would be to remove the lyrics. As an aside Mr Wheeler who wrote the music was a master at the school, definitive age unknown although was said to be young in 1902. Music copyright lasts 70 years after the death of the composer, so his copyright might be close to expiring. And I cannot find anywhere in the book that says the scong is a reflection of the victorian values of the school, so that part can come out as well. Fmph (talk) 19:08, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Removal of "non-notable" alumni

I have become aware that a large quantity of alumni have been removed from the lists on the grounds of "non-notability". In practice, this seems to have been determined by whether or not the individuals have a personal Wikipedia entry. This seems a drastic and misjudged pruning of the list - what do others feel? ExLibre (talk) 11:53, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Well any that I have deleted for which there are reliable independent sources which confirm notability can be restored without argument. But the presence of a wiki-article only confirms that a person is somewhat notable. It doesn't actually confirm the other defining criteria, i.e. that they actually attended the school. We need references to confirm that too. And none of the currently listed alumni from the grammar school days have any references to prove them.

The general principle is if it has a reference, it stays in. If it doesn't, it gets removed. Fmph (talk) 12:40, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Access to the school playing fields was via a seven mile bus journey.[why?]

Because they were seven miles away. Would the local newspaper's website be an adequately good source? http://www.harrowobserver.co.uk/west-london-news/local-harrow-news/2012/03/12/traffic-chaos-as-school-and-football-events-clash-116451-30513651/ (I was there at the time. We did indeed get taken on a seven-mile coach trip once a week for games. Just need to find an acceptable source.)