Talk:List of universities and higher education colleges in London

University of London Distance Learning Programme

I have cut this from Major Universities because - criteria for Major Universities is inclusion in the Guardian ranking [if you cna find a better one, let me know] - It's not even called the University of London Distance Learning Programme - The Link to # University of London Distance Learning Programme is to a non-existing page. --DuncanBCS 09:40, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Why use Guardian rankings here?

Ranking only by Guardian rankings without any comment on this page seems PoV, as this is one of only a number of newspapers that rank Universities, all of which use different criteria, and therefore by which the Univiersities come out at very different levels - also many Universities reject these rankings altogether. Seems more neutral and preferable to: (1) not include rankings on what should be a factual page of what Universities exist in London, (2) and then also have a separate page/section about Univerisity rankings, which could include the rankings themselves, what their criteria are, and arguments for/against.

If agreed, could somebody enact please?

We do need some way to separate major from minor universities. Roehampton, for example, is a 'real' university and is sure to be in the Guardian and Times ranking soon. However, it would be a distraction to include the minor private universities (AIU, UCK, etc) on the same par as the smaller ones. Using Guadian or Times rankings allows us to have a simple ranking. --DuncanBCS 11:32, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

The rankings system is a mess though as its highly subjective as to which set to use. This page should either be at something like Universities in London ranked according to X or should be an alphabetical order with perhaps a separate section for small & specialist and another for foreign universities. Timrollpickering 14:45, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

The ranking methodologies are objective in the sence that they use replicable methods, easily verifyable data and a rational selection of variables. Any method for doing anything can be disputed, but the Times, THES and Guardian rankings are as good as any other rankings. Since this page does aim to list all the universities, not just those listed in the rankings, there's no need to rename it. --Duncan 08:54, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

I just don't see why a "list of universities in a place" page needs to be a ranking page. What other article has such rankings? There's no real need to have them on what should be straight forward listing of universities within London (and what's Royal Holloway even doing on this page?). Timrollpickering 15:19, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Tim, I think that the shift to an alphabetical list removes information rather than adds it. It would have been good to suggest much a mjor change on the talk page before executing it, and checking that there was consent. I will revert that change until we see what others think. Without a clear sentiment for change, then perhaps we should not make such a large change. --Duncan 09:08, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Discussion so far has not really got anywhere - sometimes something radical is needed to get it going. Looking at the parralel articles for the rest of the UK they are all straightford lists of universities in the region, as the article name says - see List of universities in Yorkshire and the Humber, List of universities in the West Midlands, List of universities in South West England, List of universities in South East England, List of universities in North West England, List of universities in North East England, List of universities in the East of England, List of universities in the East Midlands, List of universities in Northern Ireland, List of universities in Scotland, List of universities in Wales and List of universities in the United Kingdom. It's only London that is offering not a list of universities but a rankings chart. There doesn't seem to be a broader sentiment for this information on the list pages - if it should exist anywhere it should be moved to something like Rankings of universities in London, leaving this page as a straightforward list that doesn't have to be updated every time the latest set of rankings come out, in line with all its peers. Timrollpickering 12:19, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi Tim, I take your point, but perhaps all those pages are edited by you! I don't see how the ranking hurts. I think it addes information, and perhaps we should add that ranking information to other pages? --Duncan 10:16, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

The only edits I've made to the pages have been minor to pipe the categories and use the correct current name of the institutions. Rankings are frankly highly subjective and variable (just look at the figures you've produced for Goldsmiths), especially for universities that don't have as their number one priority the traditional goals. For that matter many think an overall institutional ranking is irrelevant and look for how individual departments do. I really don't see why factual lists should be used for rankings - look for instance at the different pages for List of Presidents of the United States and Historical rankings of United States Presidents. Timrollpickering 14:48, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't quite see the comparison. I don't think these are subjective rankings; they are primarily weighting quantitative variables. That's very different from feelings about US presidents. --Duncan 19:05, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

The choice of what variables to weigh is subjective in itself - see the huge variance for Goldsmiths. It's particularly messy here because a lot of institutions are not covered by rankings that are primarily focused on only one aspect of universities (full time undergraduates). If you think the placings in league tables should be on Wikipedia then why not have a specific page for it, leaving this as a straightforward list?

I think we should follow the broad consensus on all similar pages - I'll put a message up at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Universities to see what others think. Timrollpickering 22:34, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

London Metropolitan University objects to ranking

Why is LMU 'refused ranking' ?? --218.111.48.207 14:30, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

LMU refuses to take part in such rankings. Scroll down at [1] --Duncan 08:56, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Number of Universities and Colleges

DuncanBCS has changed the number back to 28, suggesting that we should count the colleges of the University of London as one institution. I am rather dubious about this figure because what we are counting is not very clear. If we were only counting 'Universities' then that would be one thing, but if we are counting 'colleges' too (and the page says that we are) then all of the University of London institutions are technically individual Colleges of the University of London, and to most intents and purposes are individual institutions under a blanket authority rather than really one gigantic institution. If we are counting 'Universities and Colleges' then the University of London is one University, but many Colleges. What do we do about this? We should at least make it clear.

In addition to this, outside the University of London, what sort of Colleges are we counting? Further Education colleges if they offer Higher Education courses (perhaps not, but the wording certainly includes them)? And what about University Colleges (like St. Mary's University College in Twickenham, London) which award their own degrees, and also places like RADA (which does not belong to the University of London, you're thinking of Central) which are seperate insitutions of Higher Education but usually have courses validated by larger Universities. They aren't Universities, but they are presumably colleges, and the page says that we are counting "Universities and Colleges".

What about institutions that have courses running in London locations, but are principally based elsewhere? The UCAS institution search lists 70 institutions which are technically 'Universities and Colleges' (although some call themselves 'School's) running undergraduate Higher Education courses in 'Greater London' (including Rose Bruford, which is actually based in Kent, and does not as far as I know have a London base, so the UCAS figures too may need checking), and that is without counting the institutions that don't recruit via UCAS.

Where does the 28 figure come from? And what is it counting?

ThomasL 13:50, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I might add that if we count all University of London colleges as one institution (which we clearly don't in the list of 'major Universities', which counts and numbers them seperately), then the current page lists only 14 British and 9 non-British 'Universities and colleges' (many of the non-British Universities and Colleges are not based solely in London and some seem to offer only 'study abroad' programmes for their main University, and apparently do not offer full degree courses, in which case it seems odd to count these). Whichever way you count it, the figure of 28 seems to be wrong. Either that or the instiutions that we list on this page are incomplete. We need to make the numbers and the insitution list of the page fit together somehow.

ThomasL 14:25, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I think I've found the answer to this in the official HEFCE list of 'Higher Education Institutions' funded by the government (which is seperate from the list of FE colleges with HE courses). See http://www.hefce.ac.uk/unicoll/HE/ . This lists a number of instutions that were not listed in the page, and contains a total of 40 Higher Education Institutions in London. I've altered the page to fit the HEFCE list.

ThomasL 15:23, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

RADA is part of King's College, and is therefore part of the University of London. --Duncan 21:38, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I may be wrong, but I don't think RADA is officially part of King's College or the University of London. The RADA website merely states that King's College validates RADA degrees (which doesn't mean that it is part of KCL or belongs to it - for comparison the University of Kent still seems to validate research degrees from Canterbury Christ Church University, but this does not signify ownership, and CCCU is clearly an independent organisation), and that KCL and RADA jointly run one MA course (KCL also runs two courses jointly with Shakespeare's Globe, so this doesn't signify anything). I wonder what "administered by King's College London" means in the Wikipedia entry on RADA, however. It doesn't seem to reflect anything mentioned in the RADA website. Anybody got any more information on this? I am open to being shown to be wrong (which I may well be). ThomasL 07:30, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

One of the largest concentrations

The page currently states 'London has one of the largest concentrations of universities in the UK'. Shouldn't this be 'the largest concentration of universities in the UK'? Even if we count the University of London colleges as one University, there are 13 or 14 full Universities in London (depending whether we count Imperial, which is just about to become independent). I can't think of any other British town that has more than two or three full Universities (except Edinburgh, which has four).

And what about internationally? Paris, according to the Wikipedia article on University of Paris has only thirteen universities, all under the 'University of Paris' name. And the Wikipedia list of Universities in Berlin names only nine full Universities, although it apparently has more than London's 40 Higher Education institutions if you count its many technical colleges and institutes. Would we be justifed in changing the London entry to read 'London has one of the largest concentrations of universities in Europe'? Or even 'in the world?'. What does everyone think? ThomasL 09:22, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

These 40 are universities and university colleagues, not technical schools (which would be further education). It certainly is one of the largest in the world. --Duncan 23:41, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes. Looks like it's behind New York City, but definitely 'one of the largest concentrations ... in the world'. ThomasL 13:18, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Non-universities like Conservatoire for Dance and Drama and Trinity Laban

Since we already list the affliates to those shared services organisations, need we also link to them? They are not universities or university colleagues, in that they do not have the right to award degrees, and don't really teach either. They are devices to get targetted funding into their affliates, much the the Institute for Advanced management and other ESRC centres. It's also confusing, since, for example, RADA is part of King's and of the Conservatoire --Duncan 17:07, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Hmmmm ... I agree that this needs thinking about, but I guess my reasons for wanting to keep them is that they are listed on the HEFCE list of 'Universities and Colleges'/'Higher Education Institutions' as individual bodies, and on the HESA statistics as Higher Education 'institutions' too, so - since those are the published sources that we are using - it seems advisable to list them in the page, to avoid an accusation of Original Research if nothing else. Looks like HEFCE funds them as combined bodies, and HESA counts their students as combined bodies, so we should probably consider them as combined bodies too. By contrast the 'University of London' (which also doesn't teach, but does award degrees) does not appear in these lists and is instead represented by its constituent colleges. There must be a reason for the difference. I'm still not at all sure (pending a reliable source outside Wikipedia) about RADA being directly part of King's, as I've stated above. Its degrees are validated by King's, just as The Circus Space's degrees are validated by Kent, but from all that I can tell from web-based sources, other than Wikipedia, these are both independent Higher Educational institutions. Even if the Wikipedia reference to RADA being 'administered' by King's is true (and I can find no supporting evidence immediately, and there are no cited sources - doesn't mean that it has never been true, or may not be true now), administering something and owning it as a constituent part are two different things, and the fact that RADA apparently gets its funding from the Conservatoire and not from Kings suggests that it is not a wholly owned constituent part of Kings (so does the fact that King's teaches an MA 'in association with' it). The bottom line is that HEFCE and HESA seem to regard the Conservatoire and Trinity Laban as authentic and independent Higher Education institutions, and - unless we switch to using other sources - probably so should we. ThomasL 17:46, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Good points. Of course, HECE should not be our only guide. Buckingham and the foreign universities are not funded by it. PLus, this page is about Universities, not HE institutes. Trinity Laban and the Conservatoire don't teach, or do research, they just funnel funding. --Duncan 17:20, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I will think about this some more. I tend to think that it is worth retaining the non-University higher education institutions (and possibly even changing the name of the page to do that, if necessary) as the HEFCE and HESA information is too valuable to ignore (and provides the independent source for this page that Wikipedia officially requires, and which was not really present, at least for the specialised institutions list, before). Because of the University of London being divided into colleges, we - quite rightly I think - individually list a range of institutions that are not officially independent Universities in any case. Since this is effectively a list of Universities and Colleges as soon as we include Imperial, UCL, LSE, and the rest, it seems reasonable to include other colleges too. I do wonder what we should do about the Foreign Universities list, however, (which you mention briefly above) as many of the institutions listed there seem to be study-abroad programmes only open to students at the main US institution, offering a year or a semester or even less away, rather than independent London Universities offering degrees to students in London. I tend to think that the study-abroad programmes shouldn't be counted as 'Universities in London', but I can't think where we could find a source to easily differentiate between the two. ThomasL 16:54, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Foreign Universities

ThomasL makes a good suggestion: we could make a difference between the different colleges. In fact there might be three or four variants:

• Overseas universities running degree programmes on their own campus: Notre Dame and Chicago, for example, have self-contained degrees here.
• Private universities issuing degrees from overseas universities, like the ESE issuing Grenoble degrees
• Private universities ussing their own degrees, validated abroad, like Richmond
• Study abroad centres, like NYU in London and so on.

How to move forward? Just segment them in that order? --Duncan 06:09, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Can someone tell me why has the list of foreign universities been removed? I have not beeen here for a while but I once remember that there used to be a listing. Someone has done it without discussion and has now only put in information on what they are. If that person wanted to they can have a seperate article about foreign universities in London and not use this list as the article. I would be grateful if the list was put back on and there are a few things one of them is that Richmond does not award American only degrees but also degrees from the Open University. Also Regents College should be included as well as a lot of other places which offer degrees for example there are a lot of distance learning providers based in London as well as priveate colleges which offer degrees like Greenwich College of Management and Whitechapel College. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abdulha (talk • contribs) 09:09, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

I removed the list of foreign universities, as those listed were (for the most part) either diploma mills (with dubious or non-existent accreditation) or study-abroad programmes for universities whose students had to be registered and based in the US for the vast majority of their US-awarded degrees, so not really independent universities. The two Universities that might be worth mentioning are Richmond and the American Intercontinental University in London, which do award degrees validated in the UK and the US, but AIU is currently having problems with its validation (in the UK and the US - see the footnotes in the current entry). Beyond these two, since this is a list of Universities in London (and by extension, University Colleges - which also award their own degrees), it doesn't seem right to list all the organisations that award degrees belonging to other Universities, and which are not independent institutions with degree-awarding powers(University of London colleges being a special case, since they act in most ways as independent institutions, and are listed as such in most documents and league tables). In any case it would be very difficult to make a list of all the London institutions that award degrees from other universities, and we would end up with an incomplete list, and possibly more diploma mills. The HEFCE list of Higher Education institutions that we have used in this entry, by contrast, is clear and complete in its listing of Universities, University Colleges, and colleges of the University of London. ThomasL (talk) 13:05, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

For the moment, I've removed Christie's Education from the page, on the grounds mentioned above, as it is not a University or University College, but awards degrees validated by a different University. If people think that we need a list of institutions awarding other people's degrees, then we need to work out how we would make such a list, without it being incomplete and unrepresentative on the one hand, or full of diploma mills on the other. Personally I don't think that such a list belongs on this page, nor even justifies its own page, but I'm open to hearing other people's views. ThomasL (talk) 13:18, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

None degree awarding bodies I think maybe you are right and we should create a new list as I have stated it is wrong to exclude certain organisations. As far as I am aware AIU London is legal organisation. Also you forgot to mention Huron as well as Regents College and Schiller University in London. HEFCE is a government body and it has nothing to do with whether something can be considered an univeristy for example Buckingham recieves no funding from the HEFCE nor does Richmond yet they are both valid. I think that a new list should include all organisations including Christie's and the rest which either award degrees from other organistions or provide teaching for the University of London External Programme as well as study abroad centres for foreign universities. I agree we will never have a complete list but the list we have here has been selected as is not a complete list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abdulha (talk • contribs) 22:38, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

I have found a list of bodies awarding UK degrees validated by other UK Universities on the government's education website - Listed Bodies for UK Degrees - all we need to do, if we use this list, is work out which ones are based in the London area. This means visiting the websites of those without obvious titles (those which don't have London in the college name). This should allow us to produce a fairly accurate and complete list. I will try to do this when I have some time, if nobody else beats me to it. ThomasL (talk) 14:00, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

New list

I think that we should have 2 new lists. One could be of universities and colleges that award degrees from either UK or abroad. Including training students for extenal degrees. The second one study abroad prgrammes in the UK which do not award degrees but the students are only here for a short time. The former list would include places like Richmond and AIU (as AIU is still on the list despite problems) as well as places like the London School of Commerace and West London College. The latter list would include places like NYU in London and Notre Dame. That does not solve the problem of all the professional colleges which should be listed somewhere as they are not tradicitional FE colleges nor are they HE colleges as they offer things like CIMA, AAT. I would personally like to rename this higher education in London but I suspect I will not get any support. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abdulha (talk • contribs) 09:23, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't know what other people think, and would welcome other viewpoints, but I think we need to look to the other lists of colleges and universities on Wikipedia of which this page is an offshoot (see List of universities and colleges by country for links to other pages of this type). This page is most like List of colleges and universities in New York in its intentions, being a list for a major city rather than a country. This page is already more complicated than the New York page, which just straightforwardly lists degree-awarding public and private Universities and Colleges by name with Wiki-links. Having found a source, I think we can agree to include a list of private colleges awarding genuine UK degrees from other universities (the equivalent of those private US colleges). I do think however that a list of study abroad schemes, some of which only last a term, and which we could never realistically complete, would be stretching the point of this title. Rather than renaming this section completely, and therefore breaking away from the 'List of Universities and Colleges' Wikipedia pages found for other areas, I would suggest that you start a new page on 'Study abroad programmes in London' and we can make a 'See also' Wiki-link from this page to take people to it. I don't really think that non-degree providers (offering CIMA or AAT) should be listed with Universities either. They are providing another, very different, sort of education, and if you want to list them, should probably have their own page ('Professional Training in London'?). I think listing Universities and Colleges that award degrees from abroad is difficult. Although we would probably all agree that colleges with genuine US regional accreditation should be included (for example), we would also have to reach a judgement about which types of accreditation to exclude. I hope this page would not list diploma mills or colleges with doubtful accreditation (my original reason for altering the section on foreign universities). I would be interested to hear any proposals about how we might include foreign-accredited courses without letting in the dubious or the fakes.

Does anybody other than myself and Abdhula have a view on all this? Please chip in, if so. ThomasL (talk) 12:05, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree with views as we should only put in organisations which we know are to be guine.

What you said about having study abroad programmes in a seperate page called Study abroad programmes in London is a good idea as is Professional Training in London as I had no intention of having study abroad and things like CIMA providers with universities in London on the smae page.;

As for the foreign universities it should not be that difficult if people can source them

I to look forward to people's views. I shall not be adding to the debate until other people have added to it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abdulha (talk • contribs) 15:41, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

I was wondering about colleges in the private sector which offer degree level courses but also offer other courses which are not at degree level for example if one college offers University of London External Programme but also offers A Levels or other things like CIMA. Is anyone going to make a start on the new list as I have been waiting to hear the views and to get the list started but it does not appear to be happening. I think that we set start the date of March 1st as a date for someone to redo the article. If no one else does it then I will do it but it will very incomplete.

Can someone else start the articles on Study Abrod Programmes in London as well as Professional Institutions in London? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abdulha (talk • contribs) 18:46, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Rankings

Why are the universities in the first list ranked in order of the guardian results? Surely it should be an average between all the rankings we have chosen to use here, i have changed the order accordingly, were two universities have an equal ranking i have orderd them alphbetically.

To my knowledge no other list of universities in a place uses rankings at all, instead in lists them either alphabetically or divided up by geography. This has been an issue in the past but deadlocked between two editors and no-one else previously contributing. Personally I think the rankings are irrelevant for this kind of list. Timrollpickering (talk) 13:05, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

The reason for listing the universities according to the Guardian ranking, as I understand it, was simply that the creator of this page originally used the Guardian rankings. I am a little concerned about using an average of the three league tables, however, as this smacks of original research (and what about the various league tables that are not listed in the article?). I am also a little concerned by the possibility of the recent edits being POV to advance a particular institution. I would suggest that - as a compromise - the universities be listed alphabetically, but with the league table data retained alongside each institution, so that people can make their own comparisons as they choose. This would mean that we didn't have to choose an arbitrary order for the universities, but the league table data would still be there for those who wanted it. ThomasL (talk) 13:59, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

This sounds like a good compromise, it would certainly remove any accusations of POV. I dont think the rankings are entirely irrelevant, any way removing them would only be removing information from the article.

Well the question is whether the information is really relevant to this sort of list. Since every other list of universities that I'm aware of is just what the name says, I can't see why the London unis particularly need ranking data listed here (as opposed to on a page about UK university rankings), when rankings are a source of controversy in and of themselves (how to choose which rankings without getting into OR?) and it doesn't really add anything beyond academic boosting. Timrollpickering (talk) 15:25, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Major Universities. Birkbeck?

Should we include Birkbeck, and possibly the Open University in London, in the first list? Birkbeck is one of the larger University of London institutions, certainly bigger than the School of Oriental and African studies, and was excluded from the list because it does not appear in the league tables. It seems odd to include London Metropolitan University (which refuses to participate in rankings) but not Birkbeck (which has a good reason for being excluded from the full-time student oriented rankings). Other University of London institutions are specialised, so fit easily into the second list (Central only does theatre-related courses, and so on) but Birkbeck and the Open University offer a full range of subjects and are only excluded as part-time institutions. What do you think? ThomasL (talk) 15:16, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Its a difficult question. Technically none of the UL colleges on this page are major 'universities', they do however like to style themselves as 'university insititutions' based on the idea that they share many aspects of independent universities; running there own admissions programs through UCAS, independently teaching traditional full time undergraduate courses, post grad courses as well as publishing research, providing the usual university facilities such as thier own halls of residence and students unions. There is also the question of institutions having indidvidual identities, such as kings college and university college, that are internationally recognised as univerities in thier own right and largely unasociated with the umbrella institution of the UL. Birkbeck does provide higher education degree programs, but is largely populated by mature and part time students, in effect if fills the role of the ULs adult and part time college. I am hesistant to have it considered as a university in it own right as it does not fit many of the criteria mentioned above, let alone classed as a major university in London. Perhaps the section should be changed to 'major higher education institutions' and include all of the larger institutions that offer degree programs, after all Birkbeck does have a larger student body than some of the institutions currently in the list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Natterjack1 (talk • contribs) 12:39, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

PS I also agree that it is definately not a specialised institution. Natterjack1 (talk) 12:44, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Speaking as one who has studied at Birkbeck, I don't think the differences are that sufficient to make it any less of a university institution than any of the other large & mutli-faculty colleges in the UofL. Yes it focuses on evening teaching and has hardly any full-time undergraduates (although most taught postgraduate and all research programmes are available full-time) but this is really just a different delivery mechanism from the norm for a somewhat different target market, with virtually all the other differences noted (not using UCAS, no halls of residence of its own - although as some of the UofL intercollegiate halls are literally the other side of the road any Birkbeck student who does need accomodation is not badly served) stemming from this. But it does teach undergraduates & postgraduates across a very wide field of subjects (hence it doesn't fit the bill of "specialised institution teaching a narrow subject area), publishes high quality research, has its own students' union and has a strong individual identity of its own. The term "major university" is rather poorly defined for the UK but the list seems to be using it as a way to distinguish large multi-faculty institutes from small and subject specalist institutes and I think by any stretch Birkbeck falls into the first of the two definitions. Timrollpickering (talk) 12:39, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Tables instead of free-form text and lists

It is difficult to extract information at a glance from the lists on this page. The Major Universities section, for instance, is a bulleted list, and each list item has several data items on it: name of institution, accredition (AMBA etc.) or no accredition, and three rankings from three sources. Proposition: make it a table! The data presented would map naturally to columns Institution, Accredition, Rank (Guardian), Rank (Times), Rank (Sunday Times). Not only would it be easier to read, you would introduce the possibility of sorting by column.

The specialised university list could also be presented as a table, even if it only has two columns. Aligining the type of specialisation would again make the data easier to read and comprehend.

83.217.111.202 (talk) 16:18, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

UCAS List

I went through the list of higher education institutes on UCAS website so they have all be added to this article. Quite a few of the new ones I have added are red links and it would be good to create at least a stub for each of these. Any help would be greatly appreciated.Mephiston999 (talk) 22:59, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Requested move

List of universities in London → List of universities and higher education colleges in London — As suggested in the discussion of featured list status, this page deals with all higher education institutions in London, not just universities, and therefore needs retitling. 'List of colleges and universities in London' might be simpler, but would result in confusion, and the repeated addition of further education colleges, a different category in British education (most do not offer degree level or higher education). Similarly a 'List of universities in London' that excluded colleges would also be confusing, given that University of London colleges, and colleges of higher education are major providers of higher education in London, but not technically universities. Would 'List of universities and higher education colleges in London' be acceptable? Does anybody have a better title suggestion? ThomasL (talk) 17:44, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

• I agree, and i think the article title you suggested is perfect Mephiston999 (talk) 17:54, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
• Support If HE colleges need to be mentioned in the title then they need to be differentiatified from FE colleges, certainly. Good suggestion. Someoneanother 16:08, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
• Support. Title is a bit unwieldy, but proposer makes it clear why it is the best title. Ucucha 10:46, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
  • Moved as agreed in this discussion. ThomasL (talk) 21:32, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of universities and higher education colleges in London. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110608154445/http://www.hesa.ac.uk/dox/dataTables/studentsAndQualifiers/download/Table_0b_0405.xls?v=1.0 to http://www.hesa.ac.uk/dox/dataTables/studentsAndQualifiers/download/Table_0b_0405.xls?v=1.0
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091212234231/http://www.londonhigher.ac.uk/294.html to http://www.londonhigher.ac.uk/294.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:35, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

New sections

It would be better to make three distinct sections for Specialized, Private and Defunct universities and higher education colleges — Preceding unsigned comment added by GS-216.1993 (talk • contribs) 17:06, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Proposed universities

I have just deleted the section on "Proposed universities" added in 2009 ahead of the 2012 Olympics, which failed the WP:CRYSTALBALL test. Current (2019) plans are for new campuses for University College London and University of the Arts London, so there will not be a new institution as envisaged in 2009. TSventon (talk) 12:27, 5 October 2019 (UTC)