User talk:Cartitza

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

User talk:Cartitza

Contents

[edit] Caldicott School page

Could you please explain your recent additions to the page Caldicott School. They are of no encyclopaedic interest.


[edit] your observation

"Encyclopaedic" - Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)

1. pertaining to or of the nature of an encyclopedia; relating to all branches of knowledge.

2. comprehending a wide variety of information; comprehensive.

I hope this answers your question.

You may also wish to view the American Boychoir School

[edit] Caldicott School article

Please note that the links that you have given are of a defamatory nature and thus should be deleted under the guidelines of Wikipedia. The articles have no factual basis and purely allegations.

Knowledge/Information petains to fact according to the Oxford English Dictionary. These articles are not proven fact.

[edit] Caldicott School

Thanks for your message. I would have got back to you sooner, but 'real life' has kept me away from WP for a little while. Until very recently, I would have agreed with you that the references you used contained information that would have expanded the article. However, there is currently a controversy surrounding biographies of living persons. Depending on your point of view, there is an interesting discussion/train wreck at Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Badlydrawnjeff/Proposed decision and other related pages (check out the talk page of WP:BLP, and the various pages relating to Badlydrawnjeff's RFAR via the pink box at WP:RFAR). I suggest you wait a little while for the dust to settle and for policy/consensus to become clear. The article certainly reads like an advert, and when I get a few minutes I'll strip out the worst of the WP:PEACOCK terms (imposing, unspoilt, beautiful etc). Regards, Mr Stephen 10:55, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Caldicott

I have undone your changes to Caldicott School and would like to talk about them. The additions you have made both seem to be information on allegations of events far in the past; I am guessing long before any current teachers were at the school; though I could be wrong. You may say that this is part of its history and so should be included; but I would suggest that it is more to do with the people involved and not the school. These additions would clearly do more harm than good and if one correlates the School to a living person then allegations should not be included. Wikipedia is not a tabloid newspaper or playing ground for allegations. Please could we talk about this before this is published. Thanks, Browsw 10:51, 9 September 2007 (UTC

[edit] Caldicott Reply

Please refer to discussion page. Thank you (Cartitza 15:37, 9 September 2007 (UTC))