the statement re. no. of prime ministers produced by oxbridge colleges is untrue and should be removed. Trinity Cambridge has 6; St. John's Cambridge 4, Balliol, Oxford 3, Trinity Oxford 2 etc.;— Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.224.166.252 (talk)

Yes - some retard said ChCh had produced more PMs than the whole of Cambridge (which is not true, Cambridge has produced 15 compared to ChCh's 13). This is the problem with Wiki: retarded f**kwits are allowed to broadcast mistruths.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.43.70.84 (talk)

The comment about proportion of privately educated students and tied scholarships is untrue. Christ Church does NOT have significantly more privately educated students than other Oxbridge colleges; it does not take a disproportionate number of people from 'posh' schools and it is not filled with members of the aristocracy any longer. This article does not state all of this but insinuates it, and appears to be thinking of the pre-war college (well ok, later as well, but it is not like this any more! Overcome your outdated prejudices, it is a modern college now and is not full of 'toffs'!

How long was Einstein actually at ChCh? I thought he only stayed there for a couple of nights. Can ChCh really count him as a member? I guess it basically comes down to: did he sign the books of the House? Do we have proof?

There is no mention of his time at Oxford in the current Wikipedia entry for Einstein. I shall remove the reference until such time as someone responds to the above question.JPF 15:37, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

See [1]. It states that Einstein was elected by the Governing Body to a research studentship for five years from 1931, with an annual stipend of £400. He spent about a month a year between 1931 and 1933 in residence, but after 1933 could no longer take up residence and asked that his stipend be used for some other worthy cause. Clearly if he was a research student he would have been part of the Foundation of the college, and not even just a mere member on the books. Andrew Yong 11:49, 8 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, not sure about the 'modern college' thing. I heard some undergrads talking about a party the other day where they were all snorting champagne and caviar with the college hunting society or something. Also the fellows still pass the snuff in the SCR after dinner. And there is at least one titled aristocrat there at present.

Is there anything wrong with people consuming champagne and caviar if they want to afford it? The statistics are clear: Christ Church is no more public (i.e. private) school-dominated than any other Oxford college, as was pointed out to the student press by the JCR president in Michaelmas 2005. The fact that titled aristocrats are members of the house says just about as much as the fact that other members formerly went to inner-city comprehensives. Admission to Oxford is probably as fair as any system could be. The fact that privately educated students have a higher likelihood of succeeding at interviews underlines the problems of secondary state education, but not a problem at Christ Church or Oxford Uni in general. --Geetee 15:59, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

It was still fairly aristocratic when I was there in the mid 70s. The Duke of Northumberland and a lot of Etonions were there. It is also the only Oxford college with a beagle pack (I wonder what they do now hunting is banned in the UK?). Jschlesinger 12:01, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]