Talk:University of Kent/Archive 1

message: Has more university news p.c.i. as KRED, possibly more cover-to-cover readers too.  Likely to be interesting to any student who hasn't heard of it.  Seems niggardly to remove it - have you an agenda AverageEarthman? shroth.
I am not AverageEarthman, but am a Kent student (part-time, mature, hence focussed on the degree rather than social activities or union politics on campus).  I have nothing to do with Kred, Kent Union, or any other anti-KUNT forces.  Nevertheless, I see no point in a link to a non-official University paper, which has less claim to representation than the Kent societies, which - in my opinion - should not be listed individually (too many of them), and which seems largely aimed at presenting the personal agenda of a very few people.  Mind you, I think it is pretty daft that KRED has a wikipedia entry all to itself as well.  KRED shouldn't have more than a link in the University entry, if that.  If KUNT belongs anywhere, then, it belongs in the KRED entry (which itself should be considered for deletion) not on the main University entry.  Otherwise all other student websites and societies will want to jump on the same bandwagon and post their link.  ThomasL 21:18, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly my sentiments. Average Earthman 23:30, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

text: KRED shouldn't really have a wikipedia entry, and KUNT and CATR certainly shouldn't.  None of them seem to fit the Wikipedia criteria for an entry, nor as sources for articles.  Where have you been mentioned in newspapers or published (non-vanity) books, or similar independent and authoritative sources?  You haven't, I'm guessing.  KRED might warrant an inclusion on the University of Kent entry, as it is mentioned in Kent's own website - which Wikipedia does recognise as a source (the subject's own website) - but is not worthy as a subject in itself, and neither KUNT nor CATR even reach this level of mention in an authoritative source.  Again, you may interest students, but you're not worthy of mention in an encyclopedia.  Would you really expect to appear in one?  Just because this is Wikipedia, not the Encyclopedia Brittanica, doesn't mean that everything should be entered without quality control. ThomasL 20:09, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm not being particularly immoderate in tone as far as I can tell.  I did assume that "section" meant an independent entry like KRED's.  Looking again, it probably means a section in the original University of Kent article, but as I say neither KUNT nor CATR warrant a "mention in an encyclopedia" either, which - in Wikipedia - would include links.  As far as I can see KUNT and CATR don't fit the criteria for any sort of presence in Wikipedia.  The only answers to this so far have been that the sites might interest Kent students (who aren't the primary audience of a Wikipedia entry), and that it is informative about the University, but in this second case the Wikipedia policies fairly explicitly state that these sites would not be regarded as sources that Wikipedians can reference in articles (too unreliable), and if they are so unreliable that we can't reference them in articles, why should we link to them?  If anybody wants to see the chapter and verse of Wikipedia policies on sources, no original research, and notability, I'm happy to cite it here. ThomasL 21:21, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

text: You're misinterpreting me if you think I'm being aggressive.  I'm not.  I'm just trying to keep the Wikipedia entry to Wikipedia standards.  I don't have anything much invested in denying KUNT or CATR a mouthpiece, I just don't think they should be included in this article.  The Wikipedia regulations make it fairly clear that KUNT and CATR would not be recognised as reputable sources, and cannot be cited in articles.  There seems no reason to make links to what Wikipedia would regard as unreliable sources.  ThomasL 21:21, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I don't think there was an "attack" in my comments, but I certainly didn't intend them to be aggressive or offensive, and if they came across that way, then I apologise.  ThomasL 12:21, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Link to KUNT mag

message: It may be a Robbins Report uni, but to many nowadays, "New University" generally means a post 92 former polytechnic - a nearly 40 year old institution has less call on this. Anyone got a better term to describe it? Timrollpickering 11:29, 31 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Glass Plate universities?, see British university. Djegan 18:08, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  New University / Glass Plate University 

message: In addition to these college accomdations there is also Tyler Court, a new block catering mainly for final year and postgrad students...
When did Tyler Court admit undergrads? And how new is it? It was established back in the early 1990s. Timrollpickering 13:42, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Tyler Court

message: According to the University of Kent web site the Chancellor from 1990-95 was DR Robert Horton, not Robert Horton.  Ben W Bell 08:00, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Doctor Rober Horton perhaps? Is it clear that those are his initials? Timrollpickering 17:44, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry shouldn't have capitalised that. On the UKC site he is listed as Dr Robert Horton (as in Doctor). It's just IceAxeJuggler removed the Dr in this article for some reason. Ben W Bell 19:40, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chancellors 

message: The Conservatives the dominant political force on a UK campus? Really? Can we have some proof of that? Average Earthman 14:11, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure where the Union President is now, but in my last years there, when he was a fresher, he most certainly was a Conservative. Timrollpickering 16:09, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

text: In the four years I was there the Labour students were the dominant political force on campus, however this information is only to 1998. Since Labour has been in power for a while since then things may well have changed. Ben W Bell 18:33, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The Labour Club pretty much collapsed by the end of 2001 due to a combination of disillusionment with New Labour, multiple graduations of key people at the same time, disorganisation and some key members realising they were socialists rather than Labour. The current Kent Labour Students is a new organisation formed since. Timrollpickering 19:26, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

text: KUCA currently has a larger and more active membership than KLS, however KLS has more people in the Union- I don't think KUCA has any, come to think of it.KLS styles itself the "Number One Political Force on Campus", KUCA styles itself "The Dominant Political Force on Campus" 129.12.234.51 03:50, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

text: When I was at UKC, the dominant groups were the International Marxists and the International Socialists, with the Communists holding the ring. Labour was barely tolerated (the Clause IV group were respectable), the Liberals described, in print, as "fascists" and the Conservatives (in Government) were way beyond the pale. Things have changed.  82.152.198.192 00:05, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  dominant political force 

message: A recent controversial move? They closed down Elliot Dining Hall about 7 years ago, it was closed the finaly year I was there and I left in 1998. Maybe it should be reworded? Ben W Bell 08:07, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Not quite as Elliot was reopened in 2000 when they closed Keynes Dining Hall, although there wasn't as full a service, and with Rutherford as the "main" hall. This was because Keynes's design made it suitable for conversion to something else, whereas Elliot's was dead space. Timrollpickering 08:52, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hall Closure 

message: I was looking for information about Kent State University and it took me a while to realize I was on the wrong track with this page.
I think disambiguation info belongs into the first paragraph here. .~.
: Sorry but I don't think it's needed. This article is called University of Kent, not Kent State University, the two are quite differently named. It's close to saying you need a disambiguation page on United States of America in case someone was looking for United States of Mexico. A disambiguation page is more for things with the same name like Firefly (insect), Firefly (TV Series), Firefly (locomotive).  Ben W Bell 13:11, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ambiguity: Kent State University