Talk:Scottish Qualifications Authority

Error in page

Second sentence reads "It was established in September 2006, and took over the functions of the Scottish Examinations Board and the Scottish Vocational Education Council in April 2007."

It should read - It was established in September 1996, and took over the functions of the Scottish Examinations Board and the Scottish Vocational Education Council in April 1997.

Sources: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/all?title=Scottish Qualifications Authority http://www.tes.co.uk/article.aspx?storycode=41831 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.254.158.76 (talk) 15:53, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

You link to Scottish Qualifications Authority Act 2002. It was established in 1996 by a 2002 act? I don't think it... --Thrissel (talk) 19:46, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Who says it was established by the act? The act is merely the most recent governing legislation. – Smyth\^talk 15:50, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Controversy

The section on Controversy should only contain publicly verifiable claims. There was a computer failure in 2000 which resulted indeed in thousands of incorrect certificates being sent out (though the underlying results were correct, as verified by government scrutiny). The two senior members of staff who were responsible were removed. There were no major ancillary problems - certainly no more misordered or misplaced exam papers than in previous years - and no repeat of the mistakes in any subsequent year.

Fair use rationale for Image:Sqa 188x100.gif

Image:Sqa 188x100.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 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 (talk) 19:51, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.understandingstandards.org.uk/markers_ccc/mark_main.jsp?pContentID=7813&p_applic=CCC&p_service=Content.show&. Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. John of Reading (talk) 20:26, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Scottish Qualifications Authority. 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 https://web.archive.org/web/20141126012725/http://www.sqa.org.uk/sqa/37893.2080.html to http://www.sqa.org.uk/sqa/37893.2080.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131112164200/http://www.sqa.org.uk/sqa/58590.html to http://www.sqa.org.uk/sqa/58590.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120805195155/http://www.sqa.org.uk/sqa/58571.html to http://www.sqa.org.uk/sqa/58571.html

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) 01:21, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Scottish Candidate Number

All that can be said about this number is better said in the article about the body which issues it: a redirect will of course be useful, but this number does not seem to merit an article of its own. PamD 20:28, 6 January 2019 (UTC)