Talk:University of Warwick/Archive 1

message: I just want to say: nicely done to the anon that re-wrote the departments bit. That was a good edit, and resolves my concerns. Thanks. -Harmil 18:07, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remarkable departments 

message: A suggestion: Since the article begins with a description of the campus, it would be nice, I think, if you could place the images of the Claycroft residences and the Humanities building just next to the contents (in the empty space there). (I am unable to do it myself!)—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.14.135.155 (talk • contribs).
:It's not a bad idea, but that's not quite how the MediaWiki software works. It really wants to do the layout for you, and you just describe the content (even more so than HTML). Because the TOC is added automatically, the best you could do is put one of those images there, but when you do, it ends up butting up against the bottom of the table on the right and that looks kind of lame.
:What I would suggest is just getting better photos to match the actual content of the article. I think the Mystic image captures the sense of the campus just fine as it is, and is thin enough that it's not too obtrusive when sandwiching the text with the table. -Harmil 15:35, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The helix photo is of the Vatican museum (a dupe of :Image:VaticanMuseumStaircase.jpg). If the somehow the staircase photo is related to warwick uni i appologise for making the revert. After some research it would appear the original image is likely to be a copyvio from  - if its not then it needs a license tag. johnSLADE (talk) 09:48, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Nec, you work at the Uni. Can you confirm that the previously listed staircase does not appear in the maths building? It did seem to show student-looking people at the bottom, but I suppose that might happen at the Vatican museum... -Harmil 21:49, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: That staircase certainly isn't in the new maths building. And judging from it's size and cast-iron-looking floral bannisters, I can't imagine it fitting in well anywhere else on campus. I'll try to get some new pictures of the Warwick campus when the weather's better:- everything looks pretty miserable in the rain. Mike1024 (talk/contribs) 09:56, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

text: PS: Thanks in advance for the leg-work, Johnteslade, however in the future, could you please leave a comment like this on the talk page of the image so that folks like me know what's going on? Thanks! -Harmil 21:49, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: An anonymous user deleted my addition:
:"The University was once known as the University of Coventry and Warwick, and removed Coventry from its name around the time when Coventry Polytechnic became Coventry University."
The edit summary of this deletion was:
:"Such information firstly is not mentioned in the official Warwick website and secondly is irrelevant."
What's that to do with anything?  Firstly, Wikipedia articles aren't supposed to be mirrors of institutions' official websites.  Secondly, what's "irrelevant" about it?  I consider a note on how it came to be called the University of Warwick to be perfectly relevant. -- Smjg 12:18, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that it was a stupid deletion and a stupid reason for deletion. However, it was always referred to just as the University of Warwick from its foundation. Is your addition just an official name that was never actually used in practice (in which case this should be noted)? I have to say that I've never heard it. -- Necrothesp 13:08, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's something I remember being told during my time at Hereward College.  Do you know any explanation of how the name came about that's more likely to be true? -- Smjg 09:42, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Simple snob value. The explanation is buried in one of my posts above, so I'll repeat it here. The people who set it up preferred to name it after Warwickshire (a wealthy high-status area) rather than Coventry (regarded by many as one of Britain's ugliest cities). This makes more sense when you consider that it was established before the 1974 boundary changes when Coventry was technically still in Warwickshire. -- Necrothesp 18:02, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  So why wasn't it called the University of Warwickshire?  Because back in those days they liked to confuse people by dropping the "shire" from county names? -- Smjg 09:35, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No idea, but in those days no university was named after a shire county. Maybe they thought it sounded odd. Also remember that the official name of shire counties doesn't have a "shire" in it  - it is officially called "The County of Warwick". -- Necrothesp 01:22, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Some information taken from the book "Making a University", published for the 25th Anniversary, may shed some light on this. When the original proposal for a University was made the grant of land was split between Coventry Council and Warwickshire County Council. It was felt by the organising committee that to call the new university The University of Coventry might be seen as denying the role that the county had in establishing the institution. Other names that were suggested included the University of Mid Warwickshire. The name University of Warwick was proposed by Bishop Bardsley. The Coventry City representative on the committee declared that "Coventry didn't care what its name was as long as the bid was successful." Coventry's concession on the name helped secure broader funding from Warwickshire and other bodies and ensured a unanimous vote on pursuing the case for the establishment of the University. Tomabbott 12:23, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

text:  What's your source for this?  Do we have "The County of Che", "The County of Berk" et al just the same? -- Smjg 21:36, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Umm - see comment below on source. There are copies in the University Library and Modern Records Centre if you want to go and see the physical copy. Or I have one on my desk... Tomabbott 08:14, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

text: My source for it? Well, it's not particularly arcane or little-known. Cheshire is the County of Chester, not the County of Che. Chestershire, corrupted to Cheshire. Berkshire is unusual, in that it comes from a description instead of a place and has always been Berkshire. Hampshire, before you ask, is formally the County of Southampton. You'll find them referred to in this way in many old documents. -- Necrothesp 17:03, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think you mean "formerly" not "formally".  See Hampshire#History.  Similarly, Cheshire is "Cheshire (or archaically the County of Chester)" over here.  Just as you say, old documents.  If you can find any evidence of the "County of Warwick" styling having any current official status or even use (besides in organisations that just haven't bothered changing their names), I'd like to see it.  Maybe it was at the time when the university was named (whenever this was), IWC it might make sense to state that the name is short for "University of the County of Warwick". -- Smjg 10:37, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, no actually, I can spell! However, maybe "traditionally" would be more accurate. What I was replying to was your apparent questioning that Warwickshire had ever been "the County of Warwick" (referring to "The County of Che", "The County of Berk" et al). -- Necrothesp 00:33, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

text: Sure - the information is from "Making a University. A Celebration of Warwick's First 25 Years", pages 16-17. The footnote says "This account is compiled from Barrat's [Barrat was chairman of the promotions committee] diaries Vol.VI, from notes made by Henry Rees and from correspondence held in the Coventry Record Office". The book was written by my colleague Roberta Warman with the then Registrar Mike Shattock as part of the 25th anniversary celebrations. I should mention that I work at the University in the Comms Office. If you want to fact check anything in your history please let me know. I can also look at copyright issues for any photos you may wish to use. BTW - we have no record of Ainsley Harriot receiving a degree from Warwick, honorary or otherwise.Tomabbott 09:59, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

text: I've added a copyright tag to the image of Clinton. Unfortunatley the image of the Maths building was taken by a member of the Maths department and so the copyright lies with them, not the University. Likewise the picture of Scarman copyright lies with Warwick Conferences. I can source alternative images that have established University copyright and provide thise for use. Tomabbott 08:36, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm in the mathematics department, and could take a replacement photograph (of the Zeeman building and/or Scarman House) which I'd be happy to allow to be used.  I'm intrigued by the Ainsley Harriot matter - I'd understood that he was an alumnus (on reflection, I think I read it here) but he's not listed anywhere in the Graduate Association directory, so if he was ever here, he never graduated. - Nicholas Jackson 08:07, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Random deletion 

message: Well, it seems several images have been zapped from the article, probably due to our policy of no "by permission only" images. This means all the images 'by permission of warwick comms office only' have been removed.
Needless to say, if anyone has any "properly free" replacement images, now's the time.
Mike1024 (talk/contribs) 08:50, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  "By permission only" images deleted 

message: "The University was ranked 5th among the UK's 100 universities for quality of research in the UK Funding Councils' 2001 Research Assessment Exercise."  Was it?  According to the Times Higher Eduation table of RAE results it came 6th (see http://www.scotecon.net/publications/Chatterjireport.pdf for the THES rankings as part of a report by another body), after Cambridge, Imperial, Oxford, LSE and the Institute of Cancer Research.  I suppose the Institute of Cancer Research is not a University, but it was RAE listed, and ranked higher than Warwick in the tables, so should not be ignored.  I have made the changes, please list an alternative source before reverting.  ThomasL 23:02, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Research Assessment Exercise 

message: The most direct translation of mens agitat molem is "Spirit moves the matter", but the english equivalent is mind over matter. Iridium77 15:11, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mens Agitat Molem 

message: :This is far too long, if you compare it to Oxford's or some of the other universities. It has too much info, is confused and doesn't give a concise sense of what Warwick is about. Any takers on an edit? --RingoStarr 08:02, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Owzat? Iridium77 21:59, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Summary Paragraph

message: The introductory para now contains pretty detailed info on the location of the Uni, including that Warwick the uni is nowhere near Warwick the town. While this is important, and part of our idiosynacratic identity, are we spending too much time telling people where Warwick is rather than what it's about? I'm torn; what does everyone else think? --RingoStarr 12:52, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Summary Paragraph / Location 

message: I say lets keep the Gibbet Hill article separate... the more the merrier and people can add more detail on Gibbet Hill specific stuff there without cluttering up the main Uni article. They're all linked together anyway by the template at the bottom of all Warwick entries. What does everyone else think? --RingoStarr 12:54, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There's more discussion on that page's talk. As it stands, the article about Gibbet Hill is worthless; it could potentially be worked up beyond the stub that it is, but unless that happens I feel it should be merged. Iridium77 22:54, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gibbet Hill Separate Article 

message: We need to include information on WBS or create a separate article. Its one of the biggest parts of the university, highly ranked for research and with (dare I say it?) an international reputation. The article isn't complete without it (especially as WBS redirects to University of Warwick). I don't know enough about it really and a trawl of the website didn't help much (although I did find this article ) Any volunteers? --RingoStarr 13:33, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Warwick Business School 

message: This list is getting a bit long, with people without wikipedia articles, each listed as a leading authority in their own particular area. This list is getting rather long for inclusion in the article, and I suspect some of the individuals are below the threshold for notability implied by WP:BIO. I am sure many Warwick academics, as at any good university, are leading authorities in their own area, but if they are not known outside it, or have not got significant public recognition like an FRS, or a major prize, I feel we should leave them out. Anyone else agree to a cull? Billlion 16:04, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Its just getting worse.Suggest we delete all the red link people. If they are notable enough to meet [[WP:BIO}] then someone will at least write a stub!Billlion 19:12, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: List of academics

message: Template:Academic Departments, University of Warwick 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. Ian3055 14:02, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  TfD nomination of Template:Academic Departments, University of Warwick 

message: I was just thinking yesterday of taking my camera over to campus for a few snaps to replace the ones that seem to have been removed since last time I visited the page, but it seems somebody has beaten me to it.
Nice pictures, but they would be better if they didn't have a visible datestamp on them.  I think most of them (all except "Warwick LRC") could be cropped to remove the stamp without losing anything important.  BTW: What does "LRC" stand for?  The only time its used in the page is in the caption of the photo, which seems to show the back of the manufacturing centre and a bit of the computer science department. JulesH 09:17, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Some of the new pictures seem a bit dark and have been taken at night it seems.  Perhaps pictures taken in normal day light will show more detail and look better on the page.  Snowman 10:52, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New pictures 

message: The picture of Arthur Vick, does not look like Arthur Vick at all. Anyone else agree?
:I think you're right.  I think it's Heronbank instead.  There are some photographs (including a few panoramic shots) at  - have a look and see what you think — Nicholas Jackson 22:51, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arthur Vick Picture 

message: (I'm posting this to all articles on UK universities as so far discussion hasn't really taken off on Wikipedia:WikiProject Universities.)
There needs to be a broader convention about which university rankings to include in articles. Currently it seems most pages are listing primarily those that show the institution at its best (or worst in a few cases). See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Universities#University ratings. Timrollpickering 23:33, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: University ratings

message: This is a continuation from a lower topic (apologies if this is not standard practice) which has been bought to light because of some recent vandalism:
Maybe I should be added to it - current Warwick Maths student (3rd year) and was on Channel 4's Beauty and the Geek (Jamie).  Please note that I am kidding here.  But there does seem to be some vandalism to this article of late regarding the famous Alumni, re (just copy pasted straight from the article, so no formatting):
General, Other, Playas
    * Ben Stewart (Mathematics) – Old St Tobbacco Magnate
    * Chris Watson Mathematics Currently IT/Maths Geek, about to become a greek
    * Ali Butler Economics Collector of Asians
    * Rob Walsh Economics Famous 70´s footballer
    * Nas Islam Economics Famous Cockney
    * James Bois Maths Discreet Playa
Well, that needs to be sorted - Chris Watson forwards to someone who died in 1941 and was the 3rd Australian Prime Minister!  In all seriousness though, this needs a look. JebJoya 23:21, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Names removed. — mholland (talk) 03:00, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alumni (2) 

message: Why are Links with other universities being deleted? They can be sourced to the Warwick website. Why would the university make false claims?http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/international/collaboration/agreement/exchange/  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.99.177.135 (talk) 13:10, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed this twice.  "Student Exchange" is nothing special: almost every British university offers a year abroad as part of an exchange programme.  Warwick is not unique in offering international exchanges with "prestigious" universities, nor is prestige a good criterion to use when selecting institutions to list here. — mholland (talk) 18:04, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Links with other universities

message: It might be worthwhile starting a project to improve the pages on Coventry.  Anyone can express an interest at: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals#Coventry. Snowman (talk) 12:57, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikiproject Coventry