Talk:New College Worcester: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 11:40, 28 February 2008

Closed Down

further info on seperation?

I think it might be useful to elucidate further on why exactly NCW split from RNIB, as this is a key moment in NCWs' history, and as the article notes, was somewhat drawn out and controversial. It would give the reader further insight knowing exactly why this is so, as currently it only briefly mentions what is a relatively important point.

I have attempted to add some information on NCW's split from the RNIB - but really need information to do this --Blindtimelord 17:37, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Worcester has contacted me with some info, which has been included. --Blindtimelord 13:02, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+Closed Down
-==Cleanup?==
-I can understand fully that perhaps the article was a tad rambly. However, as Worcester was once the premier, elite of its kind in the UK, surely it deserves to have a far longer article? Especially considering that its a boarding school - surely some of the accomdoation should be discussed?
-EDIT
-There's one very very big issue in that "as a student" we are not allowed to express our points about the school or is it college no wait.. 6th Form?,  The public only see the brightside of the Compound and they don't see the real life s*it that happens and its not right.
-* In response to the 'EDIT' comments: I think that any substantiated, valid criticism of NCW ought to be expressed, as most encyclopedic articles on various schools/colleges/institutions include comments on various criticisms, as a means of explaining the overall reputation of the particular place, along with the 'positive' aspects. After all, without such comments, articles would cease to give 'rounded' views and would become pseudo-advertisements. However, these 'negative' aspects ought not be framed in purely subjective terms, eg. 'the courses offered are of a poor standard'. They should, rather, be objectively verifiable, and only communicate said negativity by implication.
---[[User:Wheelzsc|Wheelzsc]] 07:42, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
-Although this is supposed to be for constrctive comments for the article. This person does make a valuable point about NCW. Although it should be pointed out that that is exactly what all schools do.
 == further info on seperation? ==