Talk:Dollar Academy

Schools High‑importance

	Schools portal This article is related to WikiProject Schools, a collaborative effort to write quality articles about schools around the world. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.SchoolsWikipedia:WikiProject SchoolsTemplate:WikiProject Schoolsschool
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Scotland Low‑importance

	Scotland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sorting out introduction

Perhaps it would be best to remove the second two paragraphs of the introduction, as these appear to be mainly promotional? Foeod 20:33, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I completely agree. Especially when the article just simply fails to mention the University of Strathclyde. From my own knowledge I could tell you that that is the most common university that dollar academy students attend. Yet they fail to mention this, like the school do not deem the university of Strathclyde good enough but that doesn't stop them mentioning Oxford or Cambridge. Totally promotional. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.205.225.28 (talk) 21:08, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What evidence is there for Garfield Sobers studying at Dollar?

None at all. He visited the school last year to support Dollar's Barbadan scholar programme, but never studied there himself.

When did the Academy go co-ed?

It may have been the first co-educational institution in the United Kingdom.

A date would be useful here. Or was it founded as a co-educational institution? Flapdragon 15:15, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Academy has always been co-educational since its foundation in 1818.--Dtp500 19:30, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

Can somebody sort out the infobox, their is some information in it that is not showing up.

The infoboxes are pre-set. You cannot just add in information on the article edit page - a whole new template would have to be created.

Assess

This is an excellent well-written start class article with an impressive collection of data. You need to focus on references to bring the article up to B class. You make some impressive claims but they are not backed up by references. Alumni without Wiki articles should be referenced. The school hymn in particular needs a reference. Have you checked that it is out of copyright? It is recommended that you change the infobox to the standard UK infobox. Please ask at WikiProject Schools if you need any help with any of the above. Dahliarose 22:49, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Changed importance to "high" because of the fact that the school is the oldest co-educational school in Britain (and oldest co-ed boarding in the world). Also one of Scotland's largest and most well-known independent schools and impressive alumni list, particularly George Reid, James Dewar, Alan Johnston, Fraser Nelson, Alfred Gardyne de Chastelain, Amha Selassie I. Scotanica 12:21, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was erring on the side of caution as the claims are not backed up by references. If true then the high importance is justified. Dahliarose 23:24, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

School Song - The correct words are "Here in a fair green valley. . . :" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.142.20.89 (talk) 12:12, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Source for Prize Day speakers

The list of Prize Day speakers was added with this edit back in 2007. There was no source provided then, and I can't find one online now (in 2012). Is anyone who is watching or reading this page able to provide a source? I suspect it was typed out from a list in a programme from one of the Prize Days. That would be OK, but something like a published yearbook or webpage on the official school site would be even better. Carcharoth (talk) 02:15, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sabotaged

This whole page appears ridiculously "sabotaged" by someone rendering most of it useless. This appears a reaction to a perhaps "correct criticism" that some of the text read like an advert... get your act together everyone and sort this lot out. It might be best to revert to an older version?----Stephencdickson (talk) 16:42, 9 January 2013 (UTC) As a former pupil just checking the site I am really embarrassed to see the flagrant breach of wikipedia policies in the current format of the article. This sort of thing BACKFIRES. Will the numbskull who added all this self-promotion remove it and KEEP IT OFF.----Stephencdickson (talk) 16:58, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Dollar Academy/CommentsTalk:Dollar Academy/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Impressive article, possible nomination for good article status when sufficently sourced. Franko2nd 15:50, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 15:50, 20 August 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 13:35, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Long

The long list of Prize Day speakers is close to being to petty to include here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.147.32.22 (talk) 17:41, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:Lesendroits is behind the long list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.147.32.22 (talk) 17:45, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cluttered

Does anyone else feel that this page is a little cluttered? To me it feels like there are too many photos and not enough content. I'm thinking it might be worth adding more content to space out the photos, or maybe just removing some photos. It might also need a bit of reorganisation. What do you all think? FeelingDizzy (talk) 18:29, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Slavery section at the start.

Is this really that relevant? Anyone with an understanding of Georgian history realises how important a role the money from slavery played in the domestic economy. You might as well say they used slave sugar in their afternoon tea.

Any investments in ship building or insurance or cotton mills would have some connection with the slavery economy, just like the small grocers selling sugar or pubs selling rum and the barges transporting these products around the country. It's like in the last 15 years, people in this country have been shocked to find that we had an empire and colonial slavery while remaining oblivious to the fact that empire was the most common form of geo-pol organisation throughout global history just as slavery was the dominant socio-economic system from the time cities and agriculture replaced hunter-gathering.

To me, it just seems tedious virtue signalling and of little relevance to the history of this institution. Is every single CofE school on Wiki going to start with a section explaining the Church's ownership of slaves? Is the history of every single African country going to start with a few paragraphs explaining how the sub-Saharan countries used to fight wars to capture PoWs to sell as slaves and how the north African Arab countries bought and transported them?

Why stop at slavery? Why not explain that everything from these periods would have benefited directly or indirectly from empire?

We're meant to try to keep Wiki objective but all this seems to be doing is allowing the page authors to remind us that slavery is bad and people in the past didn't think or behave in ways they consider to be politically correct in the C21st?

Obviously, in some cases it is relevant, such as Gladstone, later seen as the paragon of liberal, Victorian morality having derived family wealth from slavery and spoken out in favour of it.

But the vast majority of the Georgian economy would have some indirect connection with the trade and the slave economy. Most of the secondary and tertiary sectors of the economy would have gained some benefits from slavery and empire. I would have taken that as read.

Will the page on nails need to tell us that they were sometimes used to make boats that transported slaves, or steam engines were used to power machines that worked slave-produced cotton or bronze was a metal that the Portuguese swapped for slaves etc?

And what does this obsession achieve? Does it change the past? No, it just allows people today to feel morally superior to the past which is a subjective value judgement.

I clicked on this page from Frazer Nelson's page as I wanted to know if he was privately educated or not. Why doesn't his page's education section say "Nelson went to a school that was founded in part by slave money" if we now deem this to be the most important point on any subject?

If you're going to have sections about slavery in every article like this school's one, then you need to explain within that {or given how many articles would require it} those sections the importance of slavery in the country's domestic economy. Everyone rich would have some investments directly or indirectly linked to slavery. So you'd have to write paragraphs about it in every page if you want balanced objectivity.

As I said, I'd have taken it as read.

Ganpati23 (talk) 23:26, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]