Jump to content

Talk:Prior Park College

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Affilation with prep school

[edit]

I thought this had been scrapped, and now its official prep school is The Paragon? Anyone sure? Abbyemery 12:17, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, that is incorrect. Both schools are affiliated with the College under the Foundation.

Nature of Bath Stone

[edit]

Is Bath Stone not an oolitic limestone rather than a sandstone? A minor point, admittedly! Nomis62 15:47, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Protected

[edit]

Due to repeated vandalism of the contents and replacement of the image, I thought it best to lock the page for a while. FusionWarrior 14:30, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Haha. If you'd been there, mate, you'd understand the vandalism, believe you me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.153.153.62 (talk) 21:49, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Encyclopaedic article, or just an advert?

[edit]

This reads like the puff from a school prospectus. APW (talk) 06:38, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There doesn't appear to have been much cleaning up done since 7 October 2011. I've removed the UNDUE photo and am putting an {{undue section}} tag in #Overview. -- Trevj (talk) 12:16, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm removing the wide image again because this isn't the article on Prior Park Landscape Garden. Per WP:IUP, we should crop the image to highlight the relevant subject. Including such an image (especially in this enlarged format) gives it undue weight and therefore seems to be inappropriate. If anyone feels differently, please explain why here. -- Trevj (talk) 20:51, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the removal. The image is more suitable for the article about the park. --Bob Re-born (talk) 20:59, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
True the image is suitable for the garden. That doesn't make it unsuitable for this article. Other than this claim of UNDUE, which seem mostly based on the fact it is a nice picture so places the college in too good of a light, there is no good reason to remove it. That said this is my last word on the matter and I have removed this article from being watched. It is just not worth fighting over. Saffron Blaze (talk) 22:03, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it's a great picture - just as many of your others are. Perhaps in a significantly longer article (and if the landscape garden itself weren't notable enough to have a separate article) within a well sourced section detailing the setting of the college, then such a photo might warrant a place here. Anyway, as far as I'm concerned this isn't a fight, it's a reasoned discussion. And it sounds as if you may not read this anyway... cheers, all the same. -- Trevj (talk) 13:30, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I came to look at the cause of the undue banner. Was it just about an image which has now been removed, or were there other issues? If it is resolved can the banner be removed?— Rod talk 11:32, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As there have no been no responses in over 6 months I assume this is now resolved and have removed the banner.— Rod talk 14:25, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Prior Park College. 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:

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) 13:59, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:42, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]