Coatesville

Wikipedia rules state quite clearly that value judgements and matters of opinion are not to be posted in the encyclopedia.

Please honour this and refrain from removing information from the page describing Kristin School and replacing it with your value judgments and personal opinions.

Remember, if this was apage in the encyclopedia about physics then I assume you woudl not insert opinions about physics professors being paid too much.

In particular:

1. It is unfair to edit a page which is descriptive by simply removing the information provided in good faith

2. The page shows that this is an international school and that there are 42 cultures represented at this school but your edits are aimed at removing this and describign it as white middle class pakeha only

3. your edits suggest that the fess are high as a matter of choice. Fees are what they are because that is waht it costs to run the school. You have unfailry removed the reference to for example the fact that the school is a non-profit making charitable trust under which all fees go to expenses and facilities.

4. You appear to also be making an assumption about the degree of wealth or otherwise of the students' families at the school. It is in many cases factually incorrect - many parents struggle to send their children there.

Overall your edits appear to be critical of the school. Why? Because it charges fees? IS it beause it is somehow unfair that charging those fees is a barrier effectively to those that simply cannot afford them? If that is the case that suggests that there are those that want to go to this school but cannot. But why does that reflect badly on this school?

Please think about this a bit more carefully. In what sense is anyone who cannot afford the fees disadvantaged? Is it a better school do you think than the other schools in the district? If so, if it did nto exitt those that cannot atend it are no worse off. Is it a worse school than the other schools in the district do you think? If so then why is it relevant to talk of barriers to entry? it is neither better nor worse than other schools in this distict do you think? If so then why is it relevant to talk of barriers to entry?

If you wish to make the point that the school is an independent school and that therefore like all independent schools in NZ the school has to charge fees, then by all means go ahead. If you want to edit this so that it says that the barrier to entry is therefore high, then do so. But if you do it is surely only fair you should also mention:

a. the lack of the government funding given to state schools is the reason for tose fees (though the school is not complaining about that. Parents choose to forgoe education paid by taxpayers and thus save taxpayers that cost and instead pay for this particular education by themselves for all sorts of reasons which it is unfair for anyone to generalise about).

b. that although the parents at the school are taxpayers, they do not get the funding that state school parents get from those taxes.

c. that if the parents were not paying these fees and this school did not exist, these pupils or at least those who come from NZ, would have to have a school built for them at the cost of millions and all of their education and that of the last 30+ years of them would all have to come out of taxpayers' pockets.

But this entry is not the place for debates like this, The place for a debate over independent schools versus state schools, or so called barriers to entry, and the other matters of opinion you have edited in by removing factual information, is surely in a separate Wikipedia entry about that.

If you have some facts to add then go ahead. If you have opinions to add then I repeat: please refrain.

Facts vs Opinion

Rodfee: I stand entirely by the substance of my edits as a past pupil: many students and parents do not identify as Christians, the school is overwheleming comprised of Pakeha and East Asians, Maori and Pacific Islanders are significantly underrepresented, you have to by relatively wealthy to send you kids to the school, and the established elite of Auckland do generally choose to send their kids elsewhere. Your comments on taxpayers and independent schools are entirely irrelevant and your attempts to portray the school as a multicultural, financially accessable institution are at best spin. My facts are equally as valid as your facts even if they do not fit in with the way you want the school to be imagined - see Feyerarbend. Furthermore the school cannot be seen outside of its social context.

Please don't edit war over the contents of this page. Instead, add an explanation of why you think your version is better on the talk page, and try to find a compromise that suits both of you. Do not call other editors vandals simply because they disagree with you. Read WP:AGF.-gadfium 18:56, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Be sensible please

I have no idea why you find it necessary to edit by removing the information that is on this site. By removign references to charitbale non-proit making, to the size o fthe school roll, to the number of cultures, to the values the school emphasis you are effectively censoring and what you are censoring are facts, not opinions.

I remain of the view that what you have substitued is in large measure opinion. Value judgments about the types of people who attend, value judgements about the status of the parents who choose to send their children there, value judgements about the racial or ethnic backgrounds of the students (you seem not in fact to be aware of the facts, that there are Maori and Pacific Islanders, that the Head Girl this year for example is of Pacific Island background, that there are cultural clubs and so on). These are generalisations that is insulting to the parents and to the pupils. It is also insulting to call the pupils socially insular and so on.

It is also unfair to say that the school is under repreented in Maori and PAcific Islanders. You know nothing of the actual cultural backgroudn of many of the studnets. Nor do you know anythgin of the percentages of those cultures compared to the general population of the North Shore. You might be surprised if you did that actual analysis. Besides, this is an international school. Whatever the mix is in fact, it is a value judgemetn to say that some sectors are under represented because the implicatin is that this is in some way a bad thing. That is a matter of pure opinion.

It is also opinion to refer to matters such as Auckland's elite and nouveax-riche. It is based on assumptions and prejudices of all sorts. It is also an insult to those many familes who struggle to send their chilren to Kristin, who you would probably not regard as either Auckland's elite nor nouveax-riche.

An encyclopedia is about facts not opinion. And please do not respond with general statements about facts versus opinions in a post-modernist context.

By all means add facts to what is there. Correct any spelling errors in what is there. Correct any actual facts that are there. But please do not deface the page I started by simply removing what is there. And be very careful about putting on what are opinions as opposed to facts, particularly those involving assumptions.

As to the last point, if the school is to be seen in its scoial context then it must be seen in all of it. The only way to do that is to also desctribge the social context that leads to the school existing at all and the funding context in our society that requires fees to be paid.

Before you act, please do me the courtesy of responding to each and every point that has been raised on this talk page.

I am sure the principal would be happy to meet with you to discuss your opinions and to give you information. All you have to do is call.

Finaaly a plea to leave the material which is currently there alone, whatever you may decide to add. The material there is perfectly accurate.

M Fay - banker

Thanks for your input, that article had been neglected.RichardJ Christie 10:51, 26 May 2007 (UTC)