Talk:University of Newcastle (Australia)

message: Just added the infobox.  The staff figures were 2004.  The student figures are a bit rubbery.  I have some official ones I will chase up.  Andrew Kepert 01:22, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Seconded! Wow what an advert! Also some content from outside 134.148.x.x would be nice. 211.31.253.230 03:02, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox 

message: Mentions in 1988 and 1989 someone jumping off the roof and breaking his ankle... well I was there for Autonomy Day both those years, and I don't recall these events happening. Sure you didn't dream it mate? And before you say my memory is dodgy, I remember the following events:
*Some idiot broke a glass in the fountain thereby stuffing up the Iron Man contest
*In the same contest a guy ate his own puke so as not to be disqualified
*Someone transposed the 'w' in old Commonwealth Bank sign (now the drama theatre IIRC), to read "Common ealth wank".
--Jquarry 00:20, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Autonomy Day 

message: that i have just added some well sourced but unfortunately negative material. I added a real references section as well for inline references. DGG 21:30, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: I regret

message: To the user who has flagged the Autonomy Day section for deletion... it is customary to put something in Talk to explain your reasons. Ok I guess it's obvious in this case (trivial, unencyclopedic, etc.) but courtesy might have been nice. --Jquarry 06:19, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *The real question is whether autonomy day (AKA Amalgamoney day after the amalgamation with the HIHE and Conservatorium of Music) actually has enough significance for information about it to be upgraded to the extent of being encyclopedic. Oh, and I'm having flashbacks to a former student named Jason, but can't imagine why. :) --Athol Mullen 07:54, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Autonomy Day (again) 

message: :Image:UoN logo square.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 23:03, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:UoN logo square.gif

message: I note that the article has a photo in it.  Should the photo request now be removed? --Athol Mullen 00:12, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo request? 

message: As a graduate, I could hardly believe that this is the best treatment that you could accord my holy alma mater. Two stamp-sized piccies in the "gallery"! Staff and students, do you realize that most potential students would be looking up Wikipedia for additional info on the University, and that in many cases, the impressions formed there and in the associated talk page would have more impact than any number of glossy propaganda brochures? I remember a campus which could easily be classed as physically the most beautiful in Australia, possibly the world. And here I see two, count ‘em – TWO – blurry stamp-sized photos of some shrubs. And that’s in the section called GALLERY! I remember a Student Union building which was envy of the large Universities, a winner of Blackett prizes, short-listed as a candidate for one of the Wonders of the Modern World. And yet here it merits not a word. If you were set the task of designing a more drab and feckless article for a university, you could hardly improve on the one here. 
Do you really just want to fade away? What is wrong with you? If you don’t have any pride in your campus, then wouldn’t even an elementary instinct for self-preservation argue for an account of your campus that does not make it look like a cross between an old-age home for accountants and a Rotary convention? And then I turn to the Talk Page. Yes, it is nostalgic to read that someone was permitted to enter some sport contest because he was resourceful enough to eat his own vomit. This is perfect practice for the Psychology Department, sure, but what kind of image does it evoke for the general reader. 
And the great and much loved Professors Godfrey Tanner and Norman Talbot, amongst others – why do not these gods who walked the Earth and outdrank the students have articles in Wikipedia? For gorrsakes, my CAT is the subject of an article there! Is there really not a one of those who learnt at their knee who could put together a rousing portrait of such men and women? I am sorely disappointed. This is not the vibrant, idiosyncratic, wacky, beautiful campus that I loved and which made me the man I am today. LIFT YOUR GAME, and always remember I LOOK AHEAD.
(forgot to sign before) Myles325a (talk) 22:49, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  My alma mater deserves better! 

message: Some of you might have noticed that over the last few days I have been heavily modifying The University of Newcastle page to provide a better overview of the University. I am a N00B, so thank you to those of you that have been correcting the mistakes I have been making in regards to correct formating and referencing. I am still learning so lease be patient with me!
Just to provide an overview of what I am looking to achieve through my modifications:
* Add reliable references to all content
* Construct a more logical structure of sections to better reflect the university
** Re-arranged order of sections: History > Faculties and schools > Campuses - Seems logical to me, great to hear your thoughts
** Added section Facilities and services - Included 
* Add reference and structured content to History, Campuses, Student body and organisations, Facilities and services sections
* Add Research section - overview of the university's research engagements
* Provide more photos from across the university - I will be doing this gradually and eventually hope to have notable images from both the Ourimbah & Callaghan Campuses
* Update the University logo appearing on page to be in line with that appearing on the university website
Basically my main goal is to bring the page up to a state that will provide a good base for other individuals to add more information. I am hoping that the my efforts will make future edits much simpler.
As well as this I would like to provide a number of notable sources I have found to be quite good for anyone else modifying this page:
*
*
*
*
Would love to hear any of your thoughts on what I am attempting to do. Thanks! Cortez2009 (talk) 07:41, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Great work, Cortez2009. Please date stamp contributions like this. You will see that my last one here was in 2007. In a few years' time, your reference to "the last few days" will confuse readers if there is no date. Thanks. Myles325a (talk) 08:43, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It's already confusing, as Cortez posted that over 17 months ago. --AussieLegend (talk) 09:03, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Modifications to provide a better overview of the university and its operations. 

message: The following is a multipart discussion, conducted at three user's talk pages regarding the corporate logo and the official crest. I've copied them here for convenience.
*Originally posted at User talk:Bev the great#The University of Newcastle Logo
=== The University of Newcastle Logo ===
I refer to your recent edit of the University of Newcastle, Australia wikipedia page. In this edit you restored the University's coat of arms to the infobox and referd to it as not being obsolete. Unfortunately this is not true. The University has refreshed the logo for a "bolder and more contemporary design". A simple search of the website will indicate this. Also note that the usage of the Coat of Arms is being phased out and can not be seen in any recent publications or on the university's website. Please refrain from making edits to topics you do not know anything about. [] [] []  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cortez2009 (talk • contribs) 10:32, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I've already replied on your talk page about this, and civility to others. As for sources, I've just consolidated several references in the university article into one that deals specifically with the Coat of Arms. There is no such thing as a "direct replacement" for a COA, other than the COA itself. The new logos are a marketing tool, not a replacement. --AussieLegend (talk)
The consolidation of references that I mentioned in the third part was done with this edit and the reference is:
* 
To summarise, :File:University of Newcastle Logo.png is the university's corporate logo while :File:Uni-of-newcastle-crest-150.png is the official coat of arms. The corporate logo can be modified, withdrawn or made obsolete at any time while the coat of arms remains valid until such time as the Grant of Arms is withdrawn. Even if it is not used in day to day operations it remains the official coat of arms/crest regardless of the existence of any corporate logo. The instructions for  state that "" is for a "university-related graphic, preferably the university's official seal or logo" while "" is used for "an athletics logo, corporate emblem, or similar graphic". Since :File:Uni-of-newcastle-crest-150.png is the official seal of the university and :File:University of Newcastle Logo.png is a corporate logo, the images in this revision of the article are in the wrong fields meaning this edit was correct, while this reversion was not. Accordingly, I'm going to fix the error with a link to this discussion. --AussieLegend (talk) 14:04, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  The University of Newcastle Crest 

message: I refer to your recent edit of the University of Newcastle, Australia wikipedia page. In this edit you restored the University's coat of arms to the infobox and referd to it as not being obsolete. Unfortunately this is not true. The University has refreshed the logo for a "bolder and more contemporary design". A simple search of the website will indicate this. Also note that the usage of the Coat of Arms is being phased out and can not be seen in any recent publications or on the university's website. Please refrain from making edits to topics you do not know anything about. [] [] []  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cortez2009 (talk • contribs) 10:32, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  The University of Newcastle Logo 

message: Regarding this edit that you made to User talk:Bev the great, while use in day-to-day branding is being reduced, this has absolutely no relevance to the Coat of Arms. The Grant of Arms is still in effect and therefore the University's Coat of Arms is still a valid, and the official heraldic logo of the university until such time as the Grant of Arms is withdrawn. 
Regarding the final statement in your post, "Please refrain from making edits to topics you do not know anything about", you should note that this breaches Wikipedia's policy on civility. --AussieLegend (talk) 11:22, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  University of Newcastle 

message: I don't know WHERE you are getting you information but from what I have read the new logo is a modernization of the old crest and hence a direct replacement. The University has refreshed the logo for a "bolder and more contemporary design". A simple search of the website will indicate this. Also note that the usage of the Coat of Arms is being phased out and can not be seen in any recent publications or on the university's website.[] [] [] 
If you have any sources of the usage of the crest then please use them.
--Cortez2009 (talk) 11:20, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I've already replied on your talk page about this, and civility to others. As for sources, I've just consolidated several references in the university article into one that deals specifically with the Coat of Arms. There is no such thing as a "direct replacement" for a COA, other than the COA itself. The new logos are a marketing tool, not a replacement. --AussieLegend (talk)
</div>
The consolidation of references that I mentioned in the third part was done with this edit and the reference is:
* 
To summarise, :File:University of Newcastle Logo.png is the university's corporate logo while :File:Uni-of-newcastle-crest-150.png is the official coat of arms. The corporate logo can be modified, withdrawn or made obsolete at any time while the coat of arms remains valid until such time as the Grant of Arms is withdrawn. Even if it is not used in day to day operations it remains the official coat of arms/crest regardless of the existence of any corporate logo. The instructions for  state that "" is for a "university-related graphic, preferably the university's official seal or logo" while "" is used for "an athletics logo, corporate emblem, or similar graphic". Since :File:Uni-of-newcastle-crest-150.png is the official seal of the university and :File:University of Newcastle Logo.png is a corporate logo, the images in this revision of the article are in the wrong fields meaning this edit was correct, while this reversion was not. Accordingly, I'm going to fix the error with a link to this discussion. --AussieLegend (talk) 14:04, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  The University of Newcastle Crest 

message: My edit adding info that Callaghan campus is built on Awabakal land was reverted for being 'non-notable trivia'. I'm still fairly new to editing Wikipedia so I wasn't really sure how to put something so that it's clear it is notable (and am still working on grasping the concept to be honest), but here are some sources that I think support its notability:
http://www.newcastle.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/41868/Research-document_John-Maynard_whose-land.pdf - 55 page research paper commissioned by the university looking into whose land Callaghan was and is built on so that it could be (and has been) incorporated into University practice.
http://www.miromaa.org.au/Culture.html - timeline on bottom half of page showing relationship between the University moving onto the land and the local Aboriginal people.
http://www.newcastle.nsw.gov.au/council/committees/advisory_committee/guraki_aboriginal_advisory_committee - Wollotuka Institute, University of Newcastle listed as a stakeholder in Aboriginal advisory group in Newcastle.
http://www.culturalsurvival.org/publications/voices/australia/awabakal-youthvisions-strengthening-voices-aboriginal-youth?page=58 – University taking part in programs for Awabakal youth.
http://uoncc.wordpress.com/category/aborigines/awabakal/ - website for the dedicated Awabakal section of the University Cultural Collections division
http://www.desailly.com.au/blog/why-academics-love-newcastle-nsw#.Ut4haBB9LIU – links with Aboriginal community listed as a selling point of the University.
‘Political Performances: Theory and Practice’ edited by Susan C. Haedicke: a book which documents on p 312 research relationships between the Awabakal community and University based on the land
http://www.abc.net.au/local/audio/2013/07/02/3794249.htm - talks about a students perspective on learning at the University and the effects of being on Awabakal land  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Angelbird72 (talk • contribs) 07:53, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Info on Callaghan being Awabakal land 

message: A lot of the edit warring on the article and bickering on this talk page is pretty unimpressive.  I recommend that everyone familiarise themselves with WP:AGF.  In particular, insinuating that a fellow editor might have ulterior motives for wanting or not wanting this particular matter to appear in the article is a real problem.  Concentrate on the content and considering how best to present this information to the reader, and cut out the Wikilawyering.  Lankiveil (speak to me) 10:27, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: What I think is unimpressive is how some editors want to ignore our policies and guidelines while referring to essays such as WP:LAWYER and their own opinions of the content's relevance and significance.  The same thing happens on Safe Schools Coalition Australia and is occurring on Australian Marriage Law Postal Survey.  Editors are insisting their biased content is included contrary to our policies and guidelines even when consensus has not been achieved.  Calling out bad faith is not a real problem.  Failing to ensure editors follow our policy and guidelines is the issue. - Shiftchange (talk) 00:54, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Youhave just broken the WP:AGF policy Shiftchange and revealing some bias on the topics you mention. Suggest you agree to listen to advice of Lankiveil and we look forward to your amendments and addition of the sexual harassment subject into the site. Or are you just involved here in order to 'stonewall'? 49.181.170.116 (talk) 00:34, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  See, your post was exactly the kind of thing that I was talking about.  If all you've got to contribute to this discussion is snide remarks and passive aggression, I suggest you go someplace else.  Lankiveil (speak to me) 03:23, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Admin Note