Talk:Anglo-Chinese School
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
 An attempt to better coordinate and organise articles related to Singapore. To participate, simply edit this page or visit our noticeboard for more info. |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. |
 |
This article is also under the scope of WikiProject Schools. (Notice to all editing students and teachers) |
reads like an ad. --θαλαμηγός 02:29, Apr 8, 2004 (UTC)
Very big revision done, with related pages. --khaosworks 01:53, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Added the list of CCAs and a short intro. -- p 0 r + z 09:18, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Any intention of adding more information to match R.I.'s quality? -- p 0 r + z 15:42, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
feels somewhat lacking in information ... any suggestions for improvements/additions? -- GeCh 24 Jan 2005
- Keep in mind that the purpose of Wikipedia is not supposed to be exhaustive, but encyclopedic - there is a difference. It should be enough to give a person a general idea of what the school is about, not a detailed list of everything, which is unnecessary. I'm already leary of adding any more "achievements" since that can rapidly devolve into a pissing match between the various branches (not to mention RI), and that's not the point. -khaosworks 18:50, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
-
- Point taken; Thx for the heads-up. -- GeCh 15:17 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
i second that, it really is a big ad. c'mon people, spruce this up a bit, organise it better. look at raffles' one for a good example. and why is there one whole big section dedicated to the CCA in ACS(I)? that's totally meaningless for a encyclopeadia. please try to divde this page into sections for the various schools, or make a new ones dedicated to each.
Well, yes, the key thing is perhaps the impact on Singapore/the world/society? -- Natalinasmpf 15:32, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Concur with (who's that?) about the cca thing. making new pages dedicated to each sch is a good idea. it would encourage more sch-specific info instead of just generic info. although i dont really know about what the ac schools are like and i wont know any compelling reason to keep all the ac schools in one article. —Goh wz 10:45, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Therefore, I have deleted the entire CCA section, as it is specific to ACS (Independent), and not to the ACS family of schools. The Fascist 07:00, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
haha, it was me. a rafflesian, eh? your page is so much better. --Bluefreak 10:50, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
may i suggest, creating separate pages for each of the Anglo-Chinese Schools? --Bluefreak 15:08, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- The question is whether the individual schools are notable enough individually to deserve separate pages. What we don't want is a bunch of stubs or articles that duplicate one another. --khaosworks 15:49, Apr 29, 2005 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] orchid named after it?
The bare statement of this fact alone is kind of misleading: I believe the flower was named only because the school happened to genetically engineer / hybrid an orchid and thus had the authority to name the new species as it wanted? Stating this fact without the circumstances kind of misleads someone to thinking it was something where a national scientific authority in Singapore happened to give the school the honour. -- Natalinasmpf 18:16, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Issue Related to SG Articles
- One of the articles that needs to have its issues addressed - See Wikipedia talk:SGpedians' notice board for discussion. - Mailer Diablo 18:56, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
There should be one main page (like now), then pages for all the 6 ACS schools.
[edit] Standard of article
I almost never bite newbies, but the standard of writing in the subarticles and subsections about the various schools is positively atrocious. If these were written by a student or graduate of ACS I am appalled and ashamed. It's not even as if they are typographical errors - the consistent pattern of grammatical mistakes makes it obvious that they are done out of ignorance, not sloppiness. Looking at Ng Eng Chin's entry, for example, makes me wince in pain and makes me feel like calling him up and asking him what has happened since he was my form teacher. I dread to think what my fellow old boys would think about these pages if they read them.
Not to mention the other problems with this as an encylopedia article: POV, self-aggrandisement, copyright violations (which I have attempted to remove), and my general sense of horror at what this article (and its associated articles) has become. It makes me regret that I ever tried to improve the page in the first place, and the problems run so deep that I fear nothing but a complete rewrite will improve matters, and I simply don't have the time to do this, or keep chasing after the mistakes, at the moment.
I just had to get that off my chest. Bottom line: these articles need severe improvement. --khaosworks 12:48, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)
- "the school has a reputation for producing students who are, if not brighter, then possessing sharp and inquisitive minds" This is severely POV. Even Cambridge and Oxford articles don't boast about themselves that much. Mandel 15:52, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
-
- It certainly needs a lot of repair! - Mailer Diablo 28 June 2005 15:31 (UTC)
-
-
- Does it? I don't see why, it reads rather fine, unless of course, someone has edited it since these comments were added. Of course, I only barely proof-read it, and also, I may very well be biased being an old boy myself, but it isn't anything that insults ACS or anything to that extent. So maybe I don't get how wikis work and so don't get what the fuss is about, but how can you truly be fully impartial when it comes to something like this? Like the quoted sentence by Mendel, it only says it has the reputation of such, at the time of entry, would that really be wrong to say if that really is the case? And oh, it is the case. And I hear trash about this reading an ad, and then talk about RI's page, I went to look, and all I've got to say is give me a break. It'd need editing, but I wouldn't paint that bleak a picture as some of you have. --202.156.2.202 2 July 2005 15:13 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Consider this particular cleanup I had to do. Also, read some of the daughter articles created on the individual schools. --khaosworks July 2, 2005 15:29 (UTC)
-
-
If one wants to boast, I'm sure statistics will run in good stead rather than mere boasting - how the school is ranked in the local context, for example. And yes, the daughter articles read like ads. Join the school boys!Mandel 16:35, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Ong Teck Chin
FYI - Is undergoing VFD right now. - Mailer Diablo 28 June 2005 15:30 (UTC)
Mind voting? I see no reason why it should be deleted. -- Natalinasmpf 28 June 2005 20:53 (UTC)
The Ong Teck Chin article was kept as it was agreed that he is a rather prominent person and has contributed much to Singapore, and not only ACS.
[edit] Reputation
Should we put the molestation cases in the reputation section? --Terence Ong Talk 07:11, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
I don't think it should... What would be the purpose of that?
- It appear in the newspapers, we shouldn't cover up on this. Wikipedia is not censorship. Somehow, ACSians (if you are one as well, anon) should accept the fact that these infamous cases are part of ACS history and reputation. There is no use covering up as someone else may add it in again. P.S. Anon, the IP you are using is an infamous vandal IP. If you are making legitimate edits, I suggest you create an account. --Terence Ong 11:05, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] ACS Story
This talkpage may seem dead, but ACS has a long history. The ACS Story book can be found at the Lee Kong Chian Reference Library at National Library Building. Very thick book, any comments? --Terence Ong (恭喜发财) 17:39, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Objectivity vs. Subjectivity
Wikipedia is an encyclopedia for the provision of facts, not for you to praise subjects of articles, and so I made several key deletes of glorifications. I acknowledge that ACS is indeed quite successful, but we cannot make the judgement of ACS for anyone else by talking about "how good" or the "ACS Spirit is strong...". I hope you understand.--202.156.6.54 16:27, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] ACS schools achievements
Though ACS(independent) is the flagship of all ACS schools, i suggest the achievements of each ACS school should be shown more and not just the bulk of it from ACS(indepedent).
