Talk:Latymer Upper School

Year 11 drug taking

Who keeps removing the content surrounding the year 11 drug abuse in ravenscourt park? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.141.198.240 (talk) 11:13, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

I removed something like that recently from the controversies section. There was no independent coverage from reliable sources, which indicates it is not of interest outside the school. Did it make the news? Did it have a wider effect on school policies in the region? Who considers this controversial or worthy of note? Where are the independent reliable sources? -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 11:26, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Semi-protected

As this article is subject to continual vandalism, I have semi-protected it (meaning that unregistered users cannot edit it).  — Scott • talk 22:28, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Davidsteed, 13 May 2010

Add under in other fields

• Giles Milton Author and Journalist

Davidsteed (talk) 22:43, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

• Done  — Scott • talk 00:20, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Geenweg24, 3 June 2010

Controversies: Repeat of Prom drugs scandal in 2010 http://www.fulhamchronicle.co.uk/fulham-and-hammersmith-news/2010/06/01/private-school-rocked-by-drugs-scandal-82029-26566745/

Geenweg24 (talk) 22:44, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

 Not done Hi there, I've declined this request as no request has been made to edit the article. Please make sure that in any future requests that you make you use the format "Please change x to y", otherwise it can be difficult for us to find out exactly what edit you would like to be made to the page. Thanks, Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) - 01:01, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 86.163.68.128, 8 June 2010

Please add information on the latest drug taking to occur at the school prom. Specifically, something to the effect of "Students have again been found to be in possession of drugs at the school's end of year prom." Information is available here: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1284962/Sixth-formers-private-school-expelled-cocaine-drunken-end-year-prom.html http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23842436-boys-expelled-over-cocaine-after-latymer-upper-school-prom-ends-in-chaos.do

Please also consider moving the section further up in the article - since it is a repeat occurrence, one would argue it is worthy of more attention that a list of alumni.

86.163.68.128 (talk) 21:38, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

I would say WP:NOTNEWS applies here, but will leave it open for other opinions. CTJF83 pride 02:44, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Not done: per previous editor. Not an outstanding and/or notable event. SpigotMap 12:14, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

"Controversies" section

I removed the section, which consisted of the following:

A group of students caught the attention of the tabloid press in 2007 after they were caught giving out ecstasy at the school prom. They were subsequently expelled.

This gets added to the article from time to time but is really unnecessary; an incident of kids expelled for drugs does not reflect on the whole school (I doubt there is any public school in the land that has not expelled a pupil for drugs). That a tabloid newspaper chose to run a sensationalist piece on the incident gives it entirely disproportionate weight, and certainly doesn't merit a section headline of "Controversies" [sic].  — Scott • talk 01:28, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

In fact, if you read the Evening Standard article linked in the talk section above this one, the headmaster is quoted as saying "The fact is that every school in the country has a drug problem — not one is immune from the scourge." Not that this will obviously stop the tabloids salivating over anything with the faintest connection to some celebs, such as former Latymer pupils. Wikipedia articles can do better.  — Scott • talk 01:31, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

You speak of the headmaster's quote as though it should be taken as God's word, and that Latymer doesn't have a drugs problem over and above the average school (with two separate events caught by the British press). I should argue that the fact the headmaster seems to border on endorsing drug use by virtue of parental usage/acceptance is worthy of note "Most Latymer parents welcome this strong line, although by no means all". 86.161.117.187 (talk) 22:53, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

References

Editing Request: Oxbridge figures

In fact 25% of Latymerians do not go to Oxbridge, the figure is at most 12%. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lat646 (talk • contribs) 11:14, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 30 August 2012

Please change fees from £14,955 to £16,035 as of September 2012 2.26.238.60 (talk) 21:16, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 08:12, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Andrew Slaughter

Since 2010, Andrew Slaughter has been the MP for Hammersmith. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.1.246.244 (talk) 02:22, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Addition to 6.2 - musical alumni

Suggest that Anthony Hose be added to the list of musical alumni from Latymer. Biography from the website of the Welsh Chamber Orchestra.

http://welshchamberorchestra.com/anthonyhose.html

76.176.116.69 (talk) 17:28, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Note: removed the block of copyrighted text that was pasted above.  — Scott • talk 22:08, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 January 2017

Under the "Facilities" heading it states the school plans to construct a new sports centre which houses a swimming pool etc. As of the 16th March 2016, this said facility has opened. Instead it should say something along the lines of: "As of March 2016, the school has opened a state of the art sports facility, including a six lane swimming pool with fully adjustable floor; basketball hoops; badminton markings; a fitness suite and a rock climbing wall whilst at the same time offering an area for all pupils to take their examinations in." Source: "http://www.latymer-upper.org/about-us/extra-curricular/sport/new-sports-centre-opens" Ninja1205 (talk) 17:48, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Done — Iambic Pentameter _{(talk / contribs)} 18:20, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 November 2017

Could we try again? Best wishes. Add Philip I. Murray, Professor of Ophthalmology, University of Birmingham to Old Latymerians. Edit to read in the list:

  'Philip I. Murray, Professor of Ophthalmology, University of Birmingham'

Source: https://www.birmingham.ac.uk/staff/profiles/inflammation-ageing/murray-philip.aspx Shamdasm (talk) 22:33, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Not done: Philip Murray has no article to link to so there's no point in adding. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 22:58, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

 Done, In future, please avoid editing the original request when the request was answered, make a separate request at the end of the section than editing the declined request. Please refer → talk page guidelines. regards, DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 14:42, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

HMC membership = public school

Um, not quite sure why there's a kerfuffle here. Latymer is a long-established member of the Headmasters' Conference, and as such, as defined in the Fleming Report 1944 (cited in the article), it is unquestionably a public school in UK education terminology. If people want to say "independent" as well, I guess that's all right, though it's redundant to the more specific term: all UK public schools per Fleming 1944 are independent, but not vice versa. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:42, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Completely agree with you here. I don't even think the independent is needed, as it makes the lead sentence a bit wordy. SerAntoniDeMiloni (talk) 15:36, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes, we'll be better off without it. Feel free. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:38, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Latymer Upper School/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 10:29, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: UndercoverClassicist (talk · contribs) 22:09, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Many thanks! Chiswick Chap (talk) 04:47, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

This looks to be in good nick. Commenting as someone with no connection to the school or, really, any particular knowledge of it:

• With approximately 1,200 pupils, most students are admitted to the Upper School through examination and interview: this sentence implies that there exists a Lower School (or similar), but doesn't actually say as much.
  • Added.

• Latymer's English spelling seems distinctly more modern in the second quotes sentence: are these from the same text?
  • Yes.

• "Puritan" has a capital when it's the religious group.
  • Fixed.

• He owned Butterwick Manor and the land round about: I would give an indication of what/where that was/is.
  • Added.

• former and current members of both Houses of Parliament: could cut former and current for brevity; I don't think it adds much, and is vulnerable to WP:ENDURE.
  • Done.

• All footnotes, even a, should end in full stops.
  • Done.

• Can we convert the acre units into metric, for those so inclined?
  • Done.

• Edward Latymer deed of conveyance 1627: should be "Latymer's"?
  • Fixed.

• Captions which include at least one full stop should end in a full stop, even if the last bit is not a complete sentence.
  • Done.

• Dr. Thomas Edwards (d. c. 1618): generally, abbreviations should be spelled out in article text, as space is not limited: if you really want the brevity, use the abbreviation template so that readers can have them spelled out on mouseover. Circa has its own template, which is best used.
  • Fixed.
    • I don't see a fix here. NB that there's a picture a bit further down that could do with the same. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 15:46, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
      • Thought you were objecting to "Dr."? So it's the d. c. you wanted fixed... done those.

• The existing school was to be conducted as an elementary school to be known as the Latymer Lower School: was the term elementary school used in BrE at the time? It isn't really today.
  • It was. I guess "primary" isn't too glaring an anachronism for the period, so let's use that.

• Trips cater both for the energetic, including outward bound camping, mountain walking, and sailing, and the cultural with visits to Barcelona, Paris, and Venice: this is a bit prospectus-ese for me. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 15:46, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Done.

• Under the name of the Latymer Foundation School, this became a London County Council school, not charging fees: immediately? It sounds like it, but as written it's ambiguous. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 15:46, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Edited.

• The cost, however, proved a serious drain on the income of the charity and the numbers were reduced to 15 boys and 15 girls: any idea of when?
  • No further than is stated: it's bracketed between 1755 and 1819.

• Do we know anything about e.g. the curriculum to include in the Latymer Charity School section?
  • No.

• , who were educated on the 'National' system: what did this mean? Per MOS:', use double quotes rather than single, but generally don't use scare quotes at all.
  • Fixed.

• this became an L.C.C. school: what was one of those?
  • Spelt out and linked.

• My point on curriculum again: we have In 1961 the governors decided that a modern education could not be given in the existing building, which alludes to the fact that a lot had changed in the expectations of schools since 1628, but we haven't really talked about that at all.
  • We can only go with the available sources.
    • Indeed. There are many of those that talk about what the usual curriculum at an English public school was in the seventeenth, eighteenth and nineteenth centuries: this doesn't have to be a general history of English education, particularly as few of those sources are likely to namecheck the school directly, but I do think we're going to have to make use of them. The GA criteria require us to cover the "main aspects" of the topic, and I don't think an article on a school can claim to do that without saying something about what all those pupils were learning for all that time. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 13:44, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
      • But we don't know. The very limited sources don't say; and assuming it's the same as other schools of different types at a time when the curriculum was in rapid flux is just guesswork. I'll note that the history section of (to take a school at random) Eton College says nothing about curriculum; and frankly I can't see any reason why it should.

• the fees were £5: can we contextualise this: was it a lot? How did it stack up with other schools at the time? Who could afford it? What sort of boys got scholarships, and how many?
  • Added a note on the amount subject to inflation. Other details not known.
    • I'm struggling to find good sources for this one: there's some raw data here, which is not particularly usable in its current state but does have a data source (Whittaker's Almanac) that could be followed up if desired. A bit above and beyond for the current exercise, but it does show that Latymer fees were pretty middle-of-the-pack in the mid C20th. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 13:44, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
      • Indeed.

• Subjects taught included practical mechanics and experimental chemistry: was that usual in 1895? Do we know if they taught anything else?
  • The claim implies innovation, i.e. it was not usual at that time. These were the unusual highlights, so the reader can presume, probably correctly, that the other subjects were the usual ones from English and Mathematics onwards.

• a room on the top floor was converted into a chapel, consecrated in 1938: this is the first we have heard about religion at the school. Can anything be said a little earlier?
  • The fact that there wasn't a chapel in the original buildings says something about how secular the school was, but we can't say that without an explicit source.
    • Can we find a source which gives the original buildings and note that they didn't include a chapel? It would probably be easy enough to find another source that points out that most public schools did have one. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 13:44, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
      • I haven't seen anyone state the negative in so many words (people usually don't say what isn't present); what we have is the later addition of an ad-hoc chapel, which clearly implies that there hadn't been one before; and indeed, there's no trace of one in the current building.

• whose fees were paid by the local authority, solely on the basis of merit: it might be worth saying a little about how "merit" was determined (and, if you wish, to point out that grammar schools, while good for social mobility, were and are hardly perfect meritocracies).
  • Added.

• with the introduction of girls into Year 7: for those not familiar with the British system, I would clarify a) how old these pupils are and b) that this is the normal point of entry into secondary school. Likewise, in a moment, with Year 11.
  • Wikilinked.

• Spell out HMC on first use.
  • Done.

• The "Student Body" section is very brief, and I'm not sure about the NPOV of giving it almost entirely over to the school's own PR team, even if that statement is well qualified. Can we say anything about its numbers and demographics, for example? How many are on bursaries (this comes later, though without a date: better here?)? Some of this stuff should be in the ISI report.
  • Removed. The later stuff is all that's needed.

• Similarly, the finances section. Do we have any historic data, or sense of how the school's wealth compares with others? Did they have any involvement in the price-fixing scandal?
  • No, not least because the school has switched between income models. It was not involved in price-fixing.
    • The section does seem pretty bare on the school's actual finances: crudely, how much money has it got? Most of these schools publish quite detailed reports for their foundations, particularly for bursary appeals, which will give an indication of reserves, turnover, bursary funds etc. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 20:51, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
      • I've added brief details on income, surplus over expenditure, and bursaries. I'm rather reluctant to list figures in an article as they go stale quite quickly and don't say much about the school as such, but I guess it's good to know the parents and alumni have a conscience and the place is well-run.

• The Duke of Edinburgh's Award is now formally called "DofE", though I can see the benefits to using the "full" name.
  • Noted.

• The Boat Club has gone on to win Henley Royal Regatta, most recently with the win of the Diamond Jubilee Challenge Cup: when was that, for those of us not up on our royal jubilees?
  • Added.

• locally-based activities : MOS:HYPHEN says not to bother when it's with a regular -ly adverb.
  • Fixed.

• A few sentences on the facilities read a bit promotional, like they might come from a school PR person. See, for example, Van Heyningen and Haward Architects were responsible for the design and delivery of these four buildings during a ten-year working relationship with the school: we could more neutrally say that the architects were these people and it took them ten years.
  • Done.

• paulatim ergo certe should be in language templates. The use of bold text for emphasis is discouraged for accessibility: the em template is an option.
  • Added.

• Latymer Upper School is one of the highest academically performing schools in the UK: this is sourced to Tatler, and is twelve years old. Can we have a more authoritative and recent source?
  • Archived (per the next). The source is authoritative as it's extremely public and close to the target audience of public school parents.
    • I'm not seeing how that fits into our sense of WP:HQRS -- our standards are to do with the degree of editorial review and fact-checking the source can expect. Tatler is not an academic publication: being well-known and beloved of private-school parents is interesting, but gives it the same level of academic credibility as (say) the Daily Mail, Nigella Lawson or a Labrador. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 13:46, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
      • I think you may be confusing the magazine (high society chat, no academic about it) with the Guide to schools which is sold alongside it. The Guide caters for a real, wealthy, and discerning audience who want to know the best places to school their children, so it is effectively ruthlessly reviewed every time it is consulted and trusted: if it was inaccurate, it would have died long ago, but it has persisted for many years now.
        • I don't disagree, but I'm still not seeing anything here that fits with WP:HQRS ('reviewed' in its context refers to internal processes like peer review, not readers and commentators critiquing it after publication). I'd be happy with something like "the Tatler Schools Guide rated it one of the top academic schools in the country", which is perfectly verifiable and within the weight that our evidence can bear, but not to present its being "one of the best" as a matter of fact (especially because the data is so old: a lot has changed in education since 2012). UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 15:20, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
          • No problem, done.
            • Done on second mention, but not where quoted in this comment, which is sourced to the same place. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 16:43, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

• Tatler Schools Guide commented in 2016 that 'competition for Latymer places is hotter than ever: 1,100 applicants sat the exam last spring; 400 were interviewed for 168 places'.: this seems to be a 2012 article, but the link is dead.
  • Removed the date.

• an increasing number went to US universities such as Brown, Columbia, Dartmouth, Harvard, Princeton, Stanford, Pennsylvania and Yale.: increasing is pretty meaningless unless we can say what it increased from and to. This is another section that smells a little of school prospectus to me.
  • Edited.

• Seems to be rather little on sport in the article body, given the amount of ink that gets spilled on school rugby and cricket, in particular?
  • The focus is obviously on the school and academia, but sport gets a fair mention.

• Why is "Year" capitalised in the tables?
  • Fixed.

• The GCSE table seems to be sourced, but the A-Level one doesn't.
  • Both are covered, repeated ref for clarity.

• I wouldn't use an ampersand in body text.
  • Fixed.

• Date ranges need endashes, not hyphens.
  • Fixed with a global search, feel free to fix others if I missed any.

• Suggest giving birth dates, where known, for living alumni.
  • Noted.

• The title is General Secretary of the Labour Party: I can't see much reason to invent a new one rather than giving it as such.
  • Fixed.

• decap Ophthalmology.
  • Done.

• The Gelehrtenschule des Johanneums isn't mentioned at all in the article. Can we say anything about the relationship between the two schools.
  • Twinning (as with twinned towns) is a pretty marginal thing that may involve the occasional visit; it does not imply any sort of academic co-ordination or governance.
    • I understand, but it does sometimes represent a long-term relationship that has a story to it, which is sometimes to be found in school histories, magazines and so on. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 13:44, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
      • I'll read on, if I come across an item on it sometimes I'll cite it (but don't hold your breath).

• Sourcing: one or two errors (endashes, not hyphens, needed in page ranges; a couple of ALL CAPS titles; 83 is missing its url.
  • Fixed several, feel free to make tweaks if you see any others.

• There seems to be a tiny bit in here that mentions Latymer in the context of IB vs A-Levels: it's a while since I read it, but it might also be good for some broader context on public school history. See also here (some more detail on who qualifies for bursaries) and, partisan in the other direction, this general history.
  • I think the wider context is best left to Wikipedia's wider articles. Latymer is in terms of its history not at all a typical public school, in that it has been in and out of the state system (and is a day school).

• In general, I'm a little concerned by how much of the article depends on sources that are not independent of the subject. I understand that, by the nature of the beast, the school is more interested in itself than most people are in it, but there does seem to be some NPOV knock-on from the self-interested nature of the sources currently employed.
  • These have been cut down; obviously the school has to be accurate in its facts, but effectively salesy as well; I think we've cut out all the sales talk now.

• A couple of other possible sources, in no particular order: here, here, here,, here (much less rosy than we have been about the Direct Grant), here. Not all seem to be easy to get hold of, unfortunately, and no guarantees that this particular school will feature heavily in them.
  • Noted.

• A lot of the URLs seem to be dead links. Advise checking the ones that aren't archived.
  • Checked and archived several.

• The Latymer Upper School Boat Club has been open for over a century to school pupils, and offers rowing to both genders: I don't see this supported in the cited source.
  • Fixed.

• In 2004, the motto was simplified, before being changed again to its current form in September 2020.: do I take it right that it was changed back? What was it in 2004?
  • Found and added a newer source. It was the crest that has been changed, twice, not back to the original; in 2004 the motto was dropped from the crest design, and it hasn't been restored, but it's still the school's motto.

• In BrE, the St in St Paul's usually doesn't have a dot after it, as it's not an initialism.
  • Fixed.

• The examined subjects are in English and Maths; the examination is followed by an interview. There were 33 Oxbridge places in 2017, and several pupils went to US universities such as Brown, Columbia, Dartmouth, Harvard, Princeton, Stanford, Pennsylvania and Yale. This lot seems to be cited to the wrong source: none of it is in the article cited. I suspect the bit about "the examined subjects" is meant to go with the information about Y6>7 transition: it's oddly out of place at the moment. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 16:43, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Repositioned, reworded, cited.

I enjoyed reading this one: most of the above is fairly small nit-picks, though I think the neutrality aspect perhaps needs a little more thought and attention. Please do let me know if I've been unclear or unfair on anything. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 22:09, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Many thanks, very helpful. I believe I've addressed all the items. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:25, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

A few replies above, though I haven't gone through this in full. Will get to the rest when I can. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 13:44, 18 June 2024 (UTC)