Template talk:Infobox university/Archive 1

message: Similar to Template:Infobox_University2, I think the titles should be aligned to the left.
--Kushboy June 3 11:37 PM EST
:Yeah, what the hell is up with some of the fields being indented over a space.  It makes it look like things are formatted improperly.  I mean everything should be aligned left and and line up so it looks the same the whole way down.  -Thebdj 00:17, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed; the indent makes some sense in a left-justified box, but none where the labels are centred.  At this point it just makes sense to remove the indents, I think. /blahedo (t) 05:49, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought the point of the indents is that they are subcategories of staff and students, for example. If you get rid of the indents that will not be obvious at all. David D. (Talk) 05:52, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I think that was probably the original point, but it doesn't come across very well.  Especially when the top line of the group has no printed value; in the example given on this page, for instance, it almost looks like the undergraduate/graduate counts are part of the "Staff" section.  If the headings were left-justified so that the indent was visible there, this would be clearer, too (although I kind of like them centred, so I'm just arguing for removing the indent.) /blahedo (t) 21:48, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I like your template.  I agree it looks better without the indents.  It would look even better if it didn't have the embedded wikilinks. --Ttownfeen 03:03, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: One thing at a time, Tt.  Well, I'm not hearing any objections, so I'm going to go ahead and make the change.  See you on the other side. /blahedo (t) 07:48, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Ok, I just went through a more or less random sample of thirty or so universities and colleges, and I don't think I broke anything.  Still, keep an eye open.  /blahedo (t) 08:08, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Blahedo, that looks a lot better than before.  Great job!  David D. (Talk) 10:22, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Ditto, thanks for fixing it! --Ttownfeen 15:33, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Horizontal Alignment 

message: I have never heard the term "faculty" used to refer to the academic staff at a British university. It's very much an American term. "Academic staff" is the usual term used in the UK. -- Necrothesp 23:41, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, unfortunately the "University" template uses US-specific terms, as well as assuming a structure on the American model; I'd only recommend it for American universities.  Template:Infobox British University is available for British universities. TSP 16:13, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Faculty 

message: I very much believe the label should be "Website" (or "Official website") instead of "Homepage"; sounds more 'proper' and nowadays is more accurate--'homepage' implies a single page; 'website' implies a multi-page site. Also more consistent with Template:Infobox_City, etc. Looking at 'what links here' I don't think I want to suggest changing the variable name. Niteowlneils 01:49, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that it will be more appropriate to replace "Homepage" with "Website". --BenjaminTsai 06:50, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: "Homepage"

message: ::::By the way Netoholic, there aren't merely six university Template:Infobox_s as you claim.  There are 42 of them:  Template:Infobox_Ancient_Scottish_University, Template:Infobox_Australian_University, Template:Infobox_Austrian_University, Template:Infobox_Belgian_University, Template:Infobox_British_University, Template:Infobox_Czech_University, Template:Infobox_Danish_University, Template:Infobox_Dutch_University, Template:Infobox_Flemish_University, Template:Infobox_German_University, Template:Infobox_Greek_University, Template:Infobox_Hong_Kong_University, Template:Infobox_Hungarian_University, Template:Infobox_Irish_University, Template:Infobox_Israeli_University, Template:Infobox_Italian_University, Template:Infobox_Korean_university, Template:Infobox_Maltese_University, Template:Infobox_Norwegian_University, Template:Infobox_Peruvian_University, Template:Infobox_Polish_University, Template:Infobox_Portuguese_University, Template:Infobox_Romanian_University, Template:Infobox_Russian_University, Template:Infobox_Spanish_University, Template:Infobox_Swedish_University, Template:Infobox_Swedish_University2, Template:Infobox_Swiss_University, Template:Infobox_University, Template:Infobox_University1, Template:Infobox_University2, Template:Infobox_University2_India, Template:Infobox_University2_abroad, Template:Infobox_University3, Template:Infobox_University4, Template:Infobox_University6, Template:Infobox_University_India, Template:Infobox_University_Undergraduate, Template:Infobox_University_abroad, Template:Infobox_University_campus, a true offender Template:Infobox_University_of_Szeged, and Template:Infobox_malaysia_university.  Granted some of these are near duplicates of each other.  But on the whole, the conclusion can be easily drawn that one size does not fit all. optikos 01:59, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  That is extremely disturbing.  I've made some changes to this template to support some of the alternative reasons for these template forks.  I'm going to deprecate them, and as I go, I can make additional changes to this template.  There may be some growing pains that I've not foreseen (people do strange things in articles sometimes), but we need to get a handle on this.   Please report any problems here and I'll fix them as we go. -- Netoholic @ 19:55, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *I have orphaned Template:Infobox University campus. Lovelac7 05:52, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: * It looks as though that template is note a form of Template:Infobox University although the name is similar. We can keep that for now. -- Netoholic @ 06:13, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Netoholic, thanks for reverting those. Lovelac7 13:47, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Other university infoboxes

message: :I just tried adding both a chancellor and a president (instead of head) to the Indiana University Bloomington article.  President showed up correctly, but chancellor had unintended formatting that was so bad that although the intended text showed up, I removed president from the IUB article.  For now as a work-around, I added only a chancellor to Indiana University Bloomington and only a president to the systemwide article Indiana University.  IU is organized as a system anchored by two "core"/main campuses:  IUB and IUPUI.  Each campus has its own chancellor (including even IUB).  The IU system as a whole has a president whose office just happens to be located at IUB.  Although I have not tried it, this probably would affect those universities abroad that have two or more officers that they would like to see listed in the infobox. —Optikos 14:42, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Should be all set now. -- Netoholic @ 18:32, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

text: I just noticed that, when I added the president field to the Indiana University article, the President label in the left column was not rendered. —Optikos 14:57, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Should be all set now. -- Netoholic @ 18:32, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Also, at some point someone with a bot should change all of the head fields at points of usage of Template:Infobox_University to president fields as this would be correct in a majority of cases.  Plus each alumnus or employee of a university that views their particular university article can overtly notice "Hey, we have a chancellor not a president." and fix it under the new field-name scheme.  Currently, the head field just drops out without displaying as president (or as any other title).  Such silent omission will take longer for people to notice, I fear. —Optikos 14:57, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've run a bot, changing all occurrences of the older parameter names ("head" is now "president", homepage>website, etc.). As best as I can see, all of them are changed, so I've removed support for those legacy items from the template. -- Netoholic @ 18:32, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you make an option for "rector magnificus" as title of head? I also think it looks better having the name of the university inside the box, rather than on top of it. up+land 19:51, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  There is an optional parameter called "rector". "rector magnificus" redirects to Rector, and seems to be less frequently used than simply "Rector".   As for the location of the name of the university, the reason it is on top is because I set it up as a table caption.  It's better for people with disabilities who use screen readers; see Wikipedia:Accessibility. -- Netoholic @ 20:22, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Could we consider adding a provost option in addition to chancellor?  Some universities (such as Indiana University) now use provost for campus heads.  JACooks 18:52, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Optional fields changes: problems observed

message: In American colleges and universities, "staff" denotes all the employees, including janitors, food service employees, security, and so on.  It is confusing and inaccurate to have the label staff followed by the number of faculty.  I assume this is why other editors have created new university infoboxes. -Acjelen 21:40, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nobody really cares how many janitors a school has.  The term "Staff" is a compromise.  You can be as clear as you want when you define the parameter.  Something like "staff= 200 professors, 50 adminstrative" would be fine. -- Netoholic @ 22:17, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The term used here in Australia is "academic staff". Alternatively, "teaching staff" will do as well. CW 14:41, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'd be happy with "academic staff" from a UK perspective.  I'm not sure if "teaching staff" is necessarily equivalent - as most major UK universities have a strong focus on research, there may be academic staff who do not actively teach. TSP 18:26, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Faculty again 

message: At the United States Military Academy, United States Naval Academy, United States Air Force Academy, United States Coast Guard Academy, and United States Merchant Marine Academy the head of the school is called the Superintendent.  I realize that this is only 5 schools, but these are U.S. federal universities and probably get a lot of page hits.  Since this template is used by a lot pages, I didn't want to just be bold and do it without first discussing it here.  Will this be a problem? --rogerd 01:01, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I added a head/head_label combination of parameters to handle one-offs (or five-offs).  Take a look at this example. -- Netoholic @ 02:57, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks.  I see you updated the USMA and the USAFA.  I fixed the USNA.  The USCGA and USMMA don't have infoboxes yet.  As soon as I get around to getting the image and info needed, I will add it to them (if someone else doesn't beat me to it).  Thanks again.  --rogerd 03:44, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  addition of new optional field 

message: When looking at the html source of Dartmouth College I see:




Is this intentional and correct? --Adrian Buehlmann 13:15, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In general, yes, so that institutions whose chief officer is not named president, chancellor, dean, etc that have explicit called-out labels.  Similarly, this is also useful for institutions that have two chief officers (such as a for-profit university, which may very well have a corporate CEO as well as a chief academic officer analogous to a president in a traditional university)  Which portion do you think is unintentional and incorrect? —Optikos 15:36, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  head_label 

message: You guys should also be aware of the Template:FLSUS taxobox.  I'm not sure if other states university systems have implemented this style of infobox, but it's unique features should be incorporated if possible.  --Reflex Reaction (talk)• 04:30, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That extra bit of navigation seems to duplicate the intent of Template:State University System of Florida.  -- Netoholic @ 04:45, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh I agree, but I'm sure someone will be annoyed if features of the old template are removed for the sake of consistency.  I just wanted to make you guys aware of it and potentially incorporate it for other large school systems.  --Reflex Reaction (talk)• 15:34, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Template:FLSUS taxobox]] 

message: I added an optional entry for faculty within the infobox after there have been complaints about the wording between "staff" and "faculty," especially for North American universities. PentawingTalk 03:59, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Faculty entry 

message: I notice in the January 2006 history for this template that the label that corresponds to the "|type=" field of this template went from "Type" to "School type" to "Type of institution".  What was wrong with simply "Type"?  We do not have "of institution" on any of the other labels, such as neither "Endowment of instutition" nor "Established date of institution" nor "Institution established" nor "Name of institution" nor "Website of institution" nor... need I go on?  The "Type of institution" needlessly lengthens that label so that it line-wraps to two lines in many articles where the listed type(s) all fit on one line.  I would like to shorten it back to simply "Type" on 15 February 2006 unless there too many objections appended below. Optikos 04:38, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree shorter is better in an info box. David D. (Talk) 04:41, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Type, School type, Type of institution

message: If it's okay, I'd like to reduce the width of the template from 25 "em" to 20.  I would be bold and do it now, but this is a template that would affect hundreds of pages, so I'm hesitant to piss anybody off. --Ttownfeen 17:22, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's been a week and no one has objected, so I reduced the width to 20. --Ttownfeen 01:56, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Width 

message: Someone please fix the fact that Rector, President, and possibly the others that correspond all have the name of the person indented.  It looks ugly and non-uniform.  --Cromwellt|Talk 16:02, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Was any action ever taken on this? It seems the field continues to be indented, and I agree that it doesn't look right at all. I nearly changed it myself but I wanted to check here first. --SuperNova |T|C| 06:06, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I adjusted the template so that there isn't an indent. Cpastern 18:26, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rector, etc. 

message: I'd like to suggest that the campus label not be a required field.  I've been working on a lot of university pages for universities I haven't visited, and there's most of the time no easy way to tell what the built environment around the campus is.  I also don't think that it's really essential information.  It is nice though, so I think it's fine as an optional field, but I don't think it's worth all the empty spaces in so many infoboxes. Cpastern 20:05, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done, if there's any objections it can be changed back (it'll just result in the ugly  showing up in articles). —Locke Cole • t • c 20:44, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Campus label 

message: Would anyone mind if I added a field for the number of alumni, just as we have a field for the number of students? Djegan
: How would you establish such a figure?  Does any university keep an accurate record of every one of its former students?  I am reasonably confident that my university would not know if I had died.... TSP 18:51, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Certainly all universities tend to keep a record of the degrees they have confered, and many do their best to determine how many are dead, etc. For instance in the Republic of Ireland, universities keep records for the electoral roll of Seanad Eireann - the upper house of the national parliament. I propose that a alumni field would be optional. Djegan 20:27, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Mmm.  But that only applies to members of two universities in the world, that I'm aware of.  Certainly other universities would LIKE to keep track of their graduates; but unless they have any legal reason to, this largely consists of hoping that alumni will write in with news.  I wouldn't expect most universities to have anything approaching an accurate figure - probably barely more accurate than (average lifespan - 20) * size of the university, which the reader could work out for themselves.  I don't have a problem as such with this being in the template; but I think that a vanishingly small proportion of the world's universities will be able to give anything like an accurate figure, making it of dubious usefulness as a comparison fact to include in the template. TSP 03:48, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I disagree.  While I would concur that few if any universities would claim to have precision records regarding their living alumni population, it is foolish to think they don't have some modestly accurate idea.  There is a great deal of money in keeping track of people to ask for donations later.  For example, my own alma mater has this information readily available: Boston University Degrees Awarded and Number of Alumni Pjorg 23:36, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, fair enough; though we can only guess whether "available addresses" bears any realistic approximation to the real number of living alumni.  Is it actually a useful thing to know?  Does this fact really tell you anything about the university that the number of students doesn't?  I suspect that the major thing it tells you is how enthusiastic the university's alumni relations department is at making sure people stay on its mailing lists.  I still think it's the case that only universities legally obliged to keep records of alumni will be able to provide a meaningful figure; for all others, it's "number of alumni we are still in contact with", which is dependent on so many factors that it doesn't seem to be a useful indicator of anything except itself, which is not particularly interesting. TSP 23:52, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  On reflection, I'd have to agree.  The situations where this information would be useful are few and far between, and anyone who needs it probably knows right where to find it anyway.  Certainly it doesn't merit the prominence afforded by a spot in the infobox.  Pjorg 00:40, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alumni 

message: FYI, the Australian University articles have been switched over to this template and I've listed the Australian Infobox University for deletion (WP:TFD) -- CHANLORD [T]/[C]  03:08, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[:Template:Infobox Australian University]]

message: Please note, if you are going to make "Urban" in the campus field a link, you should point the link to Urban area instead of Urban. Urban area is the article you want, Urban is a disambiguation page. Also, can the template be changed to bring it up to date, or are these links done by hand afterwards? -Mulder416 02:01, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Campus field - Urban

message: This is intended as a holding pen for old University templates that have been deprecated and delinked so items can be mass listed at WP:TFD rather than as they are accomplished. The numbers indicates the number of items using the template.  Please update this list as templates are delinked.  Thanks! --Reflex Reaction (talk)• 17:18, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template items to be deleted 

message: Templates for deletion - April 25
#:Template:UC taxobox 17:18, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Deleted items

message: Template:Infobox Irish University has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. →AzaToth 19:43, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  TfD nomination of Template:Infobox Irish University 

message: I say 23em, looks better in general. →AzaToth 17:59, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  20em or 23em 

message: What do the other editors think would the optimal width for the template?  I say it should be narrow (say 20em), but AzaToth prefers a wider template (in this case, 23em).  I know it doesn't sound like a lot, but it is a considerable difference in width.
--Ttownfeen 18:05, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think 20em is to slim, in my eyes 23em looks pefect, not to slim and not to wide. →AzaToth 18:24, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

text: 20 is too slim, and with longer entries - see Columbia University - there are too many lines and the infobox become harder to read and unneccessarily long. --Reflex Reaction (talk)• 14:28, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps paring down the information provided in the infobox (whose purpose is to provide information consiseley) would solve your problem in the Columbia article and others instead of widening the template in pages where widing the box would create empty space in the template as the text is off-centered. I don't know...an infobox being too long doesn't seem to me to be as unappealing as one too wide. --Ttownfeen 22:28, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

text: I have no opinion on 20 v 23em for the width, but I think the amount of information listed under "Campus" on Columbia University is a bit excessive. Most schools I've seen just list suburban/urban/rural, etc., not the area in acres and square km of each campus. —Jnk[talk] 00:18, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm running into a problem especially with foreign universities where websites are too long for the width specified.  See University of Venice University of Urbino University of Siena University of Pisa Pisa Sant'Anna University of Ferrara Foreigners University of Perugia University of Salerno University of Perugia.  There is also a problem for english subsections of foreign websites, which tend to be longer addresses. I know that long addresses can be hidden but I personally do not want to have to go through these and other pages.  Also looking through the depricated infoboxes, nearly all prefer the larger size. I'm going to change it to 22 as a comprimise for the moment rather than the too slim 20. --Reflex Reaction (talk)• 15:38, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The problems I run into with the widened width are related to white space (or grey space, in this specific instance).  See University of Alabama and Vanderbilt University to see what I'm refering to. --Ttownfeen 18:20, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If there was a way to adjust the alignment of the text, or something to that effect, I'd have not objection to any reasonable changes to width. --Ttownfeen 18:21, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Width 

message: AFAIK there are three universities with individual templates for it's constituent colleges.  Template:Durham college, :Template:Oxbridge College Infobox and :Template:Oxford College Infobox.  Some of these have unique fields that make them difficult to convert to this infobox and I personally do not think that they should be converted.  The main university pages have the updated infobox and these colleges should probably be left as they are. See Colleges of the University of Oxford for an example. --Reflex Reaction (talk)• 03:42, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've been converting the Durham colleges ones as I came to them, for example College of St Hild and St Bede.  I think the Durham box is kind of ugly and not formatted well.  But the Oxbridge and Oxford have those scarf colors, which is out of our infobox league.  I have no problem with any of them staying, really. Cpastern 17:00, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Are we okay to use these templates then? I was going to add in the last few Template:Oxford College Infobox (mainly PPHs), but the template is marked as deprecated? Mtpt 19:44, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: From the discussion above I'd say the balance of opinion is that we need to retain a separate template for constituent colleges as opposed to universities. However perhaps there'd be a case for migrating Oxford college infoboxes to the more general Oxbridge template (after adding any missing fields of course). New Oxford infoboxes should use the Oxbridge template IMHO. Any thoughts? --Ed hazell 14:09, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would prefer a generalized constituent college infobox rather than separate items for each. --Reflex Reaction (talk)• 19:37, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have made use of Infobox University for both United College, St Andrews and St Mary's College, St Andrews and it has worked well enough. Davidkinnen 18:08, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What to do about constituent colleges 

message: I don't mind at all, in fact I'm quite happy someone finally decided to create one size fits all template for it. However, I must say I liked the 's design more. Is there any chance to make this new template less transparent? //Halibutt 05:45, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please put in your specific suggestion about what you like about the polish infobox so that it can be discussed.  Also, what do you mean by less transparent?  There has been a long overwrought discussion about using meta templates to hide parameters that are not being used.  This is what has allowed for standardization of the infobox. --Reflex Reaction (talk)• 13:15, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: By transparent I mean lacking any colours. What I like about the Polish infobox is the colours, the blue and grey seem quite a decent option. As to the transparent (hideable) fields, I love them all, it's only some eye-catcher that's lacking in the current design IMO. //Halibutt 19:00, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortuately, I think that the very light pastel background is going to stay because there are so many different color logos, and the blue and gray, while somewhat neutral will clash with some entries.  --Reflex Reaction (talk)• 19:25, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In my honest opinion the pastel background clashes with all of them, as most logos have either no background at all - or a white background. And white background with some pastel sticking out looks... bad. However, I mean not the pastel background beneath the logos (which is bad), but the background beneath the text fields. //Halibutt 17:52, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know if this is the color scheme being discussed (University of Illinois at Chicago), but I find it much nicer than Template:Infobox_University. It gives a crisper feel to the article. --Eliyak 20:14, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Polish University 

message: I see that the Alumni variable (which was proposed above, but I think was generally thought to be a bad idea) has appeared as a result of the Irish University template being merged in.
To an extent, I think this bears on a wider policy decision: do we want this template to be as versatile as possible, allowing different universities in different countries to use different subsets of its fields?  Or do we want to limit it mostly to the most important and universal features, so that universities will tend to have similar data in their infoboxes and can be more easily compared?  My inclination is towards the latter, but others may feel differently. TSP 15:52, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think "important and universal features" will be quite difficult to define in many cases, for instance "endowment" variable will have limited usage outside the United States. Similarily the name of heads of universities vary widely for countries and even within countries, yet we have no less that eight such variables in this template! Indeed we even have one variable for "colors" and one for "colours"? In the end if it is to be a universal template then its going to be a compromise otherwise we might as well go back to the old system of a different template for every country/issue, anything else is bogus. Djegan 16:10, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Djegan.  Some country infoboxes were "compromised" when they were consolidated into the larger template and it would be a disservice to exclude the information that is locally useful, relevant and applicable for the small inconvenience of removing inapplicable field. However alumni does not appear to have ever been part of the Irish Unibox and was likely a later addition by an intersted party.--Reflex Reaction (talk)• 16:16, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Keeping values from deleted templates 

message: Someone added "profess" to the empty syntax, but it hasn't actually been added to the template.  I support adding this field, since there are thousands of community colleges both in the US and abroad with both professional/continuing ed and undergraduate degree students whose infoboxes would be much clearer with its inclusion.
However, I don't support the address and telephone number fields.  One of the things wikipedia is not is a phonebook: Wikipedia: What wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information see numbers 6 and 7, not a phonebook, not a directory. Cpastern 18:23, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Professional students and addresses 

message: I propose replacing the template with the following wiki only code:

style="color:;"  Established
 style="color:;"	
style="color:;"  Location	, 
                         	



University
ko:Template:대학 정보
fr:Modèle:Université

It is exactly the same infobox (except you can use province or state, and Alumni is lower down and does not depend on the staff variable), but with the following optional formatting options:
* box_width
* font_size
* border_color
* name_color
* back_color
* label_color
* value_color
The existing template is quite a bit more difficult to follow because comments are needed to split out onto different lines. If you oppose some or all of the new options, but would agree to removing the HTML tags for a wiki-only table, please specify your preferences. --Usgnus 02:16, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Here is the test template User:Usgnus/Template and example User:Usgnus/Sandbox. --Usgnus 02:18, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm no template editor, but that looks much easier to edit when need be.  Alumni should be removed though.  --Reflex Reaction (talk)• 15:02, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In the strongest terms, I think alumni has to go back. No formal decision was made to remove it. If we are going to "integrate" other templates into this one then removing information is just a bogus way of doing things. Its not unreasonable. Djegan 17:36, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Can alumni be covered by using free label and free? If so, that might be sufficent, especially as I can't see any template using the alumni parameter at the moment. Regards, MartinRe 18:19, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Several of the Irish university articles use the alumni variable and by just unilaterally deleting the variable this information is no longer displayed. The free label should be retained for the occassional usage rather than the same usage in several tables, additionally the alumni varable should be displayed near the student/faculty/staff numbers in order to have consistancy. Djegan 18:26, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: i've looked at TCD and the NUI's, but can't find it used there (as they'd be the most appropiate, due to seanad elections, etc) Do you have an example of where it is used now, so I can see what it looks like? PS something put forward for discussion can't really be described as "unilateral"! Regards, MartinRe 18:32, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Examples: Dublin City University, National University of Ireland, University of Dublin, University of Limerick, Dublin Institute of Technology, Queen's University of Belfast and University of Ulster. Djegan 18:35, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

text: (de-indented) Ah, typical Irish luck, the first four I picked didn't have it, but yep, the others all do. In that case, I would also support the retention of the alumni variable (or oppose its removal). Regards, MartinRe 18:43, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps moving "Alumni" from its present position just before faculty to after the enrollment fields (i.e., just after doctoral) would make it more palatable.-- Usgnus 19:47, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I dont mind where the variable is exactly located as long as it is in the same general area as the other enrollment and staffing variables. Djegan 19:59, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm also neutral on the exact positioning of the field, but in the general area as your suggested above sounds fine to me. Regards, MartinRe 20:02, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like I owe Djegan an apology for removing the alumni field.  I looked around and didn't see that it was being used when it clearly was.  I had supported Djegan earlier when integrating the alumni field (despite my confusion) when it is used by several universities.  It should be lower though. Following up on the other discussion by Cpastern I agree that address and telephone are not relevant enough to be be included even though they were heavily used by Polish universities.  They need to be fixed if this template is going to be migrated. --Reflex Reaction (talk)• 20:55, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Do you want me to add profess to the existing template as well, or should I convert to the new wiki-only one now? And since the addresses are part of the existing template, they can be removed before or after migration. -- Usgnus 15:19, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  wiki-only table and cleanup 

message: Pardon me if this has been discussed previously.  My question relates specifically to the "Type" attribute of this infobox.  It seems to be a poorly defined attribute mixing governance with other poorly defined descriptors.  I recognize that this may be intentional to ensure this infobox is applicable to all institutions of higher education.  I also recognize that this is greatly complicated by the lack of international classification standards.
Would it be possible or desirable to:
# Create a separate governance attribute to help separate the poorly-defined "type" attribute from the more clearly defined governance
# Create an attribute specifying the highest degree awarded
# Create an optional attribute for the Basic Carnegie Classification and extended/advanced Carnegie Classifications for US institutions
--ElKevbo 04:51, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Type vs. governance 

message: Currently "postgraduate" links to Graduate school. I think Postgraduate education would be a more appropriate link, rather than a very US specific one. Timrollpickering 16:58, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Changed. --Usgnus 17:05, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Postgraduate link