Talk:Kings' School, Winchester

Schools Start‑class Low‑importance

	Schools portal This article is related to WikiProject Schools, a collaborative effort to write quality articles about schools around the world. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.SchoolsWikipedia:WikiProject SchoolsTemplate:WikiProject Schoolsschool articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Reasoning for assessment: All unfreferenced single-sentence paragraphs, needs a lot of work and expansion. Adam McCormick 02:42, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hampshire Start‑class

	Hampshire portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hampshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hampshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HampshireWikipedia:WikiProject HampshireTemplate:WikiProject HampshireHampshire articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Nominated for cleanup

The article needs wikifying, sources citing and expanding. --Jrothwell ^(talk) 12:49, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Former Pupils

I don't understand why former pupils section keeps getting changed, its information that has been correctly referenced. what is the problem?Snesboy (talk) 18:06, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Former schools

Montgomery of Alamein School (the previous boys school) was comprehensive, not secondary modern. It replaced Romsey Road Secondary Modern School in 1968. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robofw9 (talk • contribs) 00:21, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

School performance data unknown reference date

The date from here used to cite the first sentence of performance figures has been updated automatically many times since it was likely originally referenced (and does not store previous data). Should this claim be updated? Removed?

Also, in the future particular attention needs to be paid to accessdate. Zedrox (talk) 14:37, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]