Talk:Wellington College, Wellington/Archive 1

Archive 1

Untitled section

Again, why the disambiguation? RickK 02:29 20 Jul 2003 (UTC)

... there's a prestigious school in the UK called by just the same name in Berkshire, which is regarded by most as a leading independent school. To just have one "Wellington College" page might seem a bit odd, when some old Wellingtonians (of the Berkshire type) might be told that the only WC is in the South Pacific!



Lord Freyberg and Lord Grey were rewritten to show only their title (Lord of X). The ommission of Sir NN would make sense since the full name can be seen by moving the mouse over the link, where it could show the person's full real name. 203.97.2.243 04:43, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Wgtn Coll & Univ of NZ

202.180.71.156 removed a reference to Wgtn College being affiliated to the Univ of NZ, stating "This is true though it had no major effect on the school. Also it was misleading becuase the charter ambiguously worded the name. Therefore, removed."

This is not quite correct. In Victoria University of Wellington 1899 ~ 1999 A History (Victoria University Press, Wellington) [1] Rachel Barrowman, writing about the early years of Victoria University of Wellington, states:

(in 1874) "The nascent University of New Zealand was re-established as an exclusively examining university, consisting of a Senate and a chancellor, and a Court of Convocation. To it the University of Otago, Canterbury College and several secondary schools affiliated – among the latter the Wellington college and grammar school (which was thereby renamed Wellington College) in order to become eligible for a 63-acre endowment from the provincial government.

In 1878 a royal commission was appointed to review what was by now widely agreed to be an unsatisfactory state of affairs (the affiliation of secondary schools was of particular concern)."

Cheers, Neil Leslie 09:05, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the input. While I didn't know of that source IMO that statement, on its own and unqualified is not appropriate, since it lends undue importance to the school (which I should have included in the edit summary). The school's charter, which I;ve read, indeed calls it a "college and grammar school" as Barrowman repeats. However, without the proper context I felt it was highly inappropriate even if the subject matter is 100% spot-on. My motivation behind my edits is that I strongly suspect that the article was written by a ex/student who wanted to "jazz things up", and hence I felt the need to prune (evident by my edits). Trying to remove weasel terms, the passive voice etc etc has been quite a mission, but I realise now Ive got the rest of the WP school articles to do now as well :D Generally now this particular article is truthful and hopefully free of bias. 202.180.71.156 07:37, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Zavos, advantage etc

Irrespective of what Zavos states have a look at the Wikipedia page history of Rugby Union, particularly the section on 'The forming of the International Rugby Football Board'. This certainly contradicts the assertion that advantage was invented in Wellington in the 1890's (which seems hugely unlikely in any case - had no-one thought of cheating before the 1890's?) I don't have access to the original documents, but I suspect that the details of the dispute between England and Scotland are well documented. Whether Zavos is more relaible that Wikipedia is a moot point, of course.

Also you might think about registering -- it make contributing easier

Happy New Year Neil Leslie 08:23, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

A happy and prosperous new year to you too. I've added page numbers to the claims, so at least now the claims are verifiable. I had no time to photocopy the extracts, but someone with his own copy can now go make up his own mind about advantage and whether or not to believe Zavos. Apparently it seems that he is an influential sports historian.

202.0.40.103 03:29, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Zavos is a NZ sports journalist who lives in Australia, AFAIR. His column sometimes appears in the Dom Post. None of this make him unreliable, of course. But if you think that he backs up the assertion that 'advantage' was invented in Wellington in the 1890s be bold and edit the history of Rugby Union page to correct the assertions made there. From that page it is clear that the English believed in the 1880's that (what we would now call) an advantage should have been played. The assertion that Firth invented advantage by shouting advantage during a game is just too pat to be believeable. Imagine the scene:

Firth: (Yelling) Advantage!

First Player: Sir?

Second player: What did he say?

Third player: He yelled 'advantage' indicating a new interpretation of the rules in which we should play on after this infringement to see if play develops to the benefit of the non-infringing side, and if it does not then we should return to where the infringement occurred and the infringement will be punished as appropriate.

First Player: Of course, I should have realised.

etc etc

This isn't to say that Firth was not involved in developing or refining the rules for Rugby, but the original story has the look-and-feel of an urban legend.

But anyhow, having a link to Zavos does let people check for themselves.

And this is far from the worst thing on a page about a New Zealand school. I have been adding infoboxes to give them a similar look, and to present consistent information, and I'm getting heartily sick of reading 'School X blah blah leading blah blah most prestigous blah blah achieve blah blah excellent blah blah many famous old boys/girls blah blah'. All but a few are very dull and lack noteworthiness, and could easily be deleted or merged.

Best wishes. Neil Leslie 05:53, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

I think we have cleared this up now. Zavos asserts that Firth invented the penalty try *not* the notion of advantage. (In many ways a penalty try is an odd notion, as a team is awarded points even though they have not actually scored. It is certainly the sort of thing that needs inventing.) The original story "advantage was invented when someone shouted advantage" is just silly. Cheers Neil Leslie 03:19, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Zavos's views seem to be uncorroborated with the rubgy sources I have tried to find in the public library (the only one I have access to...). Since its a minority viewpoint I will remove it, and in the process side-step the issue of invention of stories until other sources agree with Zavos. Text is in History if anyone wants to find it. 202.180.71.156 09:11, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Pruning of exaggerations

heading changed 202.180.71.156 10:27, 27 June 2006 (UTC)---this is my comment under another IP

Important: Anyone wishing to use the data below is well advised not to, since the names removed were added most probably by ex-students wishing to exaggerate things. 202.180.71.156 10:27, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

In the spirit of above comments along the lines of I'm getting ... sick of ... '...blah blah leading ... blah most prestigous...' , I've done some pruning. What's here now should be mostly verifiable and free (as far as I can see) of self-promotion etc. 124.197.4.10 23:39, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Removed text heading moved 202.180.71.156 10:27, 27 June 2006 (UTC)---this is another one of my comments under another IP This article as it stands needs major modification. Some claims seem out of place without citations. The text removed can be seen in History. 202.0.40.109 04:58, 2 January 2006 (UTC) Names removed:

202.0.40.109 05:05, 2 January 2006 (UTC)


Note: These links used to be on the article page but were removed. These have been edited since it was from an anonymous IP; by the same token feel free to ignore/modify this comment. Also, the headings have been moved. 202.180.71.156 10:27, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Moved these links without articles to talk page:
202.0.40.91 11:38, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Heading of this thread changed.202.0.40.109 05:06, 2 January 2006 (UTC)