Talk:Great Sankey High School

Schools 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cheshire Low‑importance

	Cheshire portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cheshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Cheshire 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.CheshireWikipedia:WikiProject CheshireTemplate:WikiProject CheshireCheshire articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Music Section

I don't think that analysing every teacher in the music department is necessary. I would like to summarise the merits and drawbacks of the department in a shorter section. Any objections? TheMoridian 09:26, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

At the moment, the entire section and most of the article could justifiably be deleted as it is completely unsourced (see WP:RS, WP:V, and WP:CITE for advice on what should ideally happen). If material about living people is added, particular care must be taken, as described in WP:BLP (this applies even though the article is not a primarily biographical article). I think unless you can add or restructure the material by also including citations at the same time, you will merely draw more attention to its unsourced status, and lead to it being dramatically reduced in size. The notices about it being unsourced have already been in place for a long time, and so deletion of text is becoming quite likely already. Good luck. DDStretch (talk) 09:32, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. I'm considering rewriting the article with citations - they're just so hard to find! TheMoridian 11:57, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

have added some refs. the Music section Violates policy I think with its listing of Music Staff ARBAY TALKies 15:44, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've wiped off most of the music section, because it is uncited and irrelevant. I'm looking for sources for what is left. All the best, TheMoridian 10:25, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On citing

If I go to the said school, would I be able to cite the artice? --Pure Whovian (talk) 12:18, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment

Borderline C/Start. The easiest way to hold a 'C' is to aim for 'B'. So look at the descriptions below, then look at the Judd School for what will be come possible.

C class

C class-The article is substantial, but is still missing important content or contains a lot of irrelevant material. The article should have references to reliable sources, but may still have significant issues or require substantial cleanup. It is useful to a casual reader, but would not provide a complete picture for even a moderately detailed study.Considerable editing is needed to close gaps in content and address cleanup issues.

More detailed criteria: The article is developed in style.; The article is developed in structure; The article is developed in writing quality.; The article will fails one or more of the 6 criteria for B-Class.; It may have some gaps or missing elements.; It may contain some irrelevant dross

Way forward to a B.

Edit to fulfil all 6 criteria for B-Class. So:-

B1:The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations where necessary. It has reliable sources, and any important or controversial material which is likely to be challenged is cited. The use of either < -ref-> tags or citation templates such as {{cite web}} is not required.

Rule of thumb 1 per paragraph- and one each time a wow fact is introduced

B2:The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. It contains a large proportion of the material necessary for an A-Class article, although some sections may need expansion, and some less important topics may be missing.

Try: Toponomy, History, Governance, Geography, dickie birds, geology, industry- military herige and history in general. Look to a similar article.

B3:The article has a defined structure. Content should be organized into groups of related material, including a lead section and all the sections that can reasonably be included in an article of its kind.

B4:The article is reasonably well-written. The prose contains no major grammatical errors and flows sensibly, but it certainly need not be "brilliant". The Manual of Style need not be followed rigorously- but it wouldn't hurt.

B5:The article contains supporting materials where appropriate. Illustrations are encouraged, though not required. Diagrams and an infobox etc. should be included where they are relevant and useful to the content.

It can fail on the relevance of the images - the old guard don't like too many pictures as it destroys the display on a smart phone. All imagtes need an alt= text for the non sighted reader describing the contents of the image.

B6:The article presents its content in an appropriately understandable way. It is written with as broad an audience in mind as possible. Although Wikipedia is more than just a general encyclopedia, the article should not assume unnecessary technical background and technical terms should be explained or avoided where possible.

It fails when it lacks too many sections and appeals mainly to a sectional audience.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Great Sankey High School. 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/20140503134414/http://www.robotevents.com/vex-uk-national-championships.html to http://www.robotevents.com/vex-uk-national-championships.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:24, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]