Jump to content

Talk:University of Edinburgh

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleUniversity of Edinburgh has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 22, 2013WikiProject peer reviewReviewed
September 13, 2021Good article nomineeListed
Current status: Good article

Thomas Jefferson quote

[edit]

I commented out the quote from Thomas Jefferson as I'm not sure it belongs with the history of the university. link The fact that Thomas Jefferson wrote to a family member doesn't seem relevant, also the emphasis seems POV (ok Thomas Jefferson thought the courses were great in 1786, but...). Any other opinions?

Why change the Short Description?

[edit]

@Revirvlkodlaku: The short description was changed from "Public university in Edinburgh, Scotland" to "Public university in Scotland". Chrisdevelop (talk) 01:58, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Chrisdevelop, the reason I did that is because the title already mentions Edinburgh, so it's not necessary to reiterate it in the short description, IMO. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 03:15, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Arcaist: As the main editor for this article, would you like to chime in here? Do you agree with this reasoning? Chrisdevelop (talk) 01:02, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for looping me in @Chrisdevelop. My main consideration is consistency, and it does indeed look like most, if not all, other UK universities that are already named after their city (e.g. Aberdeen, Aberystwyth, Glasgow, Oxford, etc.) omit that in the short description. So I'd be happy with the change. — Arcaist (contr—talk) 09:32, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Chrisdevelop (talk) 13:36, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gaza protest

[edit]

Does this really deserve the space and picture it has been given on the main article? The protest lasted from May-June, making it far more ephemeral than many previous student occupations (e.g., those of the recent UCU strikes!) which are (rightly) not given the same space. It seems, to me, to simply fall under the banner of student activism (i.e., should be left to footnotes in articles). The Anti-Apartheid Society of the 1980s, for example, does not even earn itself a mention on the Wikipedia page, despite it being far more effective, significant, and long-lasting. A University as old as Edinburgh cannot live under the tyranny of the present! Psychopompologist (talk) 20:38, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I added this section while the protest was in progress. Given that it was widely reported in the MSM at the time and there were sister protests in campuses across the country, and internationally, while hostilities in Gaza are continuing and protests are being conflated with antisemitism, the section covers matters current and notable enough for it to remain as is. Moreover, the UoE protest brought to everyone’s notice related concerns of responsible investment, causing uni admin to revisit the university’s entire investment policy with students as consultants. Moreover, remarkably, the students were not evicted from the quad, and more than 600 staff signed an open letter supporting the students’ actions. The hunger strike by 8 students took the protest beyond the common or garden variety. If you look through Wikipedia starting with the articles linked to, it is obvious that this remains a hot button issue. As world events change, and the Gaza situation is resolved, your footnote suggestion could be considered when the time comes. I’ll look into the Anti-Apartheid Society you mention too, as it may warrant a sentence, just as this Gaza protest probably will become in a few months/years time. I already added a section on UCU Industrial action here a while ago. Chrisdevelop (talk) 14:57, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nobel laureates

[edit]

The phrase used here is "Nobel Prize laureates" not "Nobel Prize prizes". My understanding is that the word "laureates" refers to the people who have been awarded a prize, not the prizes themselves. Hinton has won 2 of the 20 prizes. So there are still only 19 laureates. What are other editors' understanding? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:20, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by he "won 2 of the 20 prizes"? You're making it sound like he won two Nobels, and thus the number of people should be lower than the number of prizes.
As the table shows, 20 different people were awarded a prize (we're obviously not double counting Edwards here), so what am I missing here? — Arcaist (contr—talk) 15:21, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I had assumed, for some reason, that Hinton's Turing Award was deemed equivalent to a Nobel Prize, and that he was already counted for the former. But if there are 20 different names in the Nobel table, there now seems to be no problem with Hinton. But the text should say "As of October 2024, 20 Nobel Prize laureates, with 21 awards..", because Edwards has two? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:29, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]