Talk:Ladypool Primary School

Latest comment: 7 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified

Merge proposal

edit

Oppose: I oppose this proposal for the fact that this article is less about the school itself but more about the architecture of the school which has resulted in it being given Grade II* listed status. I understand that primary schools generally do not have much notability to warrant them having their own articles but the building itself does warrant it's own article. - Erebus555 (talk) 14:25, 26 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

This article could say more to indicate how notable the buildings are. Further workup of the page with an infobox might help this page. Snowman (talk) 17:24, 26 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Oppose: As per Erebus555. The school is noteworthy for being in the distinctive Martin and Chamberlain style, which pioneered the technology and decoration of a new breed of school following the Birmingham-promoted Act of Parliament which eventually led to access to schooling for all in England and Wales. Further described by link to Birmingham board schools. Oosoom Talk 23:40, 29 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ladypool Primary 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: 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) 12:33, 10 May 2017 (UTC)Reply