Talk:St Cuthbert's Society

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What was the reasoning behind removing the list of past presidents and principles?

+ Why include either of them at all? Too Much Information. And it smacks of desperation. Do other self-respecting collegiate bodies in Durham and further afield bother? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.140.254.74 (talk) 13:50, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

It is part of the distinctive history of Cuths - unlike more recent upstart Collegiate bodies - that it is represented more by its people (including Principals, and perhaps especially its Presidents) than by buildings.OldFaw (talk) 15:53, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

smacks a bit of amateurishness.

Comments (especially snide comments) should always be signed. Read the history of Cuths ( e.g. Tudor, Henry, St. Cuthbert's Society, 1888-1988 : the history of 'a modest but exciting institution in the University of Durham') and you will see the point of my earlier remark John Hamilton (OldFaw) (talk) 19:07, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

"Dcb0sr" has made several changes, mostly constructive, but remains anonymous John Hamilton (talk) 18:16, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Anonymity is not banned and is barely even frowned upon in Wikipedia. On the other hand, the user isn't particularly anonymous - that is quite clearly a Durham username, and dcb is the departmental code for St Cuthbert's Society; dcb0sr appears to be Sharon Richardson, senior tutor of Cuth's. TSP (talk) 02:09, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Most "outsiders" have no knowledge of Durham codes, but it seemed likely to me that this anonymous contributor probably has some direct connection to the University/the Society, and that his/her contributions come from an authoritative source. It is good to know that this appears to be so. I agree that Wiki contributions should be judged by their merit, rather than by who makes them. But the source has some relevance, especially when someone else contemplates making an alteration. John Hamilton (talk) 12:18, 17 April 2008 (UTC)