Talk:Queen's College, Hong Kong

The first sentence is still confusing - was it the first secondary school founded by a government anywhere, or just in Hong Kong? - RedWordSmith 17:17, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)

First one by the colonial government of Hong Kong. It was I think also the first English grammar school founded in Asia but I have to check on this.

The first English grammar school is perhaps St. Paul's College. — Instantnood 15:47, Apr 30, 2005 (UTC)

I've reworded the introduction. Hope it's clearer now. Aranherunar 07:47, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

---

Number of As

May I know if there is any sources providing number of As per student by year for secondary schools in Hong Kong? — Instantnood 15:47, Apr 30, 2005 (UTC)

what about A-level? and the # of As from 1975-1990. I believe QC also has the most 9A then.

Section "Brief History"

I suggest changing it to "History". "Brief History" sounds like a thing that existed only for a few months - Queen's College has been around for over a century. Aranherunar 07:36, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Misleading subtitle

I think 'commited crime' is quite misleading. I suggest 'criticism' instead. Yfjonas

Thanks for the suggestion, but I think 'commited crime' is a record subtitle in a historical way. So I think changing it into "Student's Crime History" would be more appropriate and prevent any misleading. Narold 13:39, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Nice suggestion. How is it criticism that the students committed crimes? Did they attack the herbalist to criticise the school? Aran|heru|nar 15:37, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I think all kind of school history should be included. Whatever is about the good or the bad side. We should base on neutral standpoint to make it clear. Narold 06:31, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Position of the paragraphs about criminal/suspected criminal incidents

In my honest opinion, those paragraphs about the crminal/suspected criminal incidents are part of Queen's College's history. Therefore, they should be placed under the heading "Brief history". However, there are some users (e.g. Archduke 2007 and Von thunen(Part of my statement was retracted by me, sorry to Von thunen for my mistake!)) who keep moving those parts to insignificant position of the article. That's why I raised this discussion.

I think we should not "hide" those parts just because they are "bad sides" of the school per WP:NPOV. They are objective facts widely reported by the mass media in Hong Kong. - INTELer 10:12, 5 April 2007 (UTC) (Revised by INTELer 17:56, 8 April 2007 (UTC), apology to Von thunen)

Thanks a lot for starting the discussion INTELer. How about we keep it as the way it is until we arrive a conclusion. --Cyktsui 10:26, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

As a matter of fact, the original contributors who wrote those parts put them at the top of the page (You can check this by looking at the history.). I agree with their actions since those incidents are part of the school's history. But there were some vandals (some of them were banned afterwards) who moved them to the bottom. I think we should keep it as the original way. Thanks! - INTELer 10:32, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

One more argument to put those parts in question to the top. They are SOURCED, in other words, they contain material that has been published by reliable sources. However, the other parts of the article do not cite sources. - INTELer 10:51, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

I just wonder what is the relation between students criming crime and the school. Besides, one of them is suspected only. Also, The position of two articles is doubtful. They are just are some incidents happened recently, but not the history of the school itself, such as the foundation year, the changes of school campus, etc. You can treat them as trivia, and put it at the bottom, but not in the history. Also, to INTELer, please don't abuse the word of "vandalism", as I believe wikipedia is a platform for everyone to edit. Everyone should have the a say on this article. Please don't suffocate our freedom of press. Thanks. By Von Thunen

In my opinion, the two articles are unjust to the school. The school holds no responsibility on the students that commit crimes. As criming crime is only a sole responsibility on that individual, it is unjustified to put the blame on the school. I don't mean to hide anything, but please do think about what is the relation between their behavior and the school. I do agree with Von thunen that the school history should refer to what Von thunen have mentioned. So it is inproper to put this articles on the school history part. --61.18.170.144 10:33, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

First of all, I have to apologize to Von thunen, sorry that I have mistaken you as a vandal. I am glad to see that you guys can discuss about the article here objectively, that's the reason why I started this discussion (Personally, I think that freedom of speech is inviolable so even if  I disapprove of what you say, I will defend to the death your right to say it. Concerning about the article, I do agree with your point that we should treat the incidents as trivia so it should not be in the part of history. On the other hand, those parts should nevertheless STAY in the article per consensus made above. Sadly, it seems that some user removed them so I'll add them back under the heading "Trivia". Thanks~! - INTELer 06:06, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

The two parts in question has been relocated to "Trivia" part of the article. Feel free to add more information to them, thanks~! - INTELer 06:23, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

It seems that you two doubted the position of the 2 paragraphs only, please let me know if you oppose the presence of those parts. In my opinion, those parts are notable enough to make them into the "Trivia" part, at least. Unfortunately, there are some users who keep removing them, I think it's better to have a consensus so that appropriate means can be devised to deal with those removal acts. Thanks~! - INTELer 17:56, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Agree, we need to discuss if those incidents should be included before we get into edit war. Personally, I don't have a problem of including them, despite the fact that I don't think they are significant for Queen's College. If you take an university as an example, it has so many students, it would be difficult to include all incidents... --Cyktsui 09:24, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

I just want to ask what is the purpose of posting the two articles up? No doubt they are facts. But, as Cyktsui said, there are so many students in Queen's College, it would be impossible for the school to control every stuedent and their behavior. Again, it is unfair to put the blame on the school as student's behavior is on his own responsibility. Besides, the Form 7 student is now having his advanced level examination. I think the incident had caused great hit to him already. This high-sounding post which included his full name will cause further blow to him mentally, let alone he is still in criticial time now. He is still assumed to be innocent until he is finally convicted by the court. Some people in Hong Kong may consider Queen's College as one of the prestigious school in Hong Kong. The public may put high expectation on the school. Therefore, this incident was exaggerated by the mass media as it had high "news value". Or some poeple may think the school doesn't deserve its name. They want to make up of this incident to censure the school. Finally, I appeal to delete the post as it is unfair to the school, to that Form 7 student and upset the schoolmates much. --Kianss 17:31, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Cover of Biography of Federick Stewart.gif

Image:Cover of Biography of Federick Stewart.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 21:16, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Activities & achievements

The final paragraph reads: QC old boys are traditionally well-represented in many of the world's best universities, including those in the People's Republic of China, the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore and Japan; while most other Form 7 graduates enroll in local univerisites such as University of Hong Kong, Chinese University of Hong Kong and Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. I find the construction a bit ambiguous and potentially non NPOV, and would depend on who exactly the "other form 7 graduates" are.... Ohconfucius 09:10, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Cover of Biography of Federick Stewart.gif

Image:Cover of Biography of Federick Stewart.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:58, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Infobox image

Hello all...

The image used in the article's infobox, specifically Image:100 0221.JPG, has a little bit of a licensing issue. The image was uploaded back in 2005 when the rules around image uploading was less restrictive. It is presumed that the uploaded was willing to license the picture under the GFDL license but was not clear in that regard. As such, the image, while not at risk of deletion, is likely not clearly licensed to allow for free use in any future use of this article. If anyone has an image that can replace this, or can go take one and upload it, it would be best.

You have your mission, take your camera and start clicking.--Jordan 1972 (talk) 00:03, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Queen's College, Hong Kong. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110721094014/http://youtharch.org.hk/en/osa_history.html to http://youtharch.org.hk/en/osa_history.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:02, 16 July 2016 (UTC)