Talk:Leysin American School

Latest comment: 2 months ago by Tacyarg in topic Quality of references

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Leysin American School. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 09:42, 22 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

Student/Faculty ratio edit

In the infobox the student/faculty ration is given as 8:1. However, the number of students is fiven as 340 and the number of faculty as 72, which yields a ration of 4.7:1. Why the discrepancy?Bill (talk) 04:25, 23 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

Quality of references edit

This school doesn't seem to have been well-covered by reliable sources, which partly explains the current primary sources tag. If we can avoid references to the school's website, that would be good, as it is not an independent source. I'm not hugely keen on Business Insider as a source either. I can see that has been discussed at WP:RSN, with no consensus. Currently the article has three broken refs and two or three incorrectly formatted ones, but I don't want to sort these at the moment as I'm aware a new editor is working on the article.

Opening discussion here if other editors want to discuss quality of referencing and the article in general. Tacyarg (talk) 15:00, 1 March 2024 (UTC)Reply