Talk:University of Derby
|WikiProject Universities||(Rated C-class)|
|WikiProject Derbyshire||(Rated C-class, High-importance)|
Fact vs hype
My feeling is that the wholescale deletion of the previous article on 13/04/06, and replacement with promotional material, is not appropriate. My edit on 15/04/06 removes those parts of the new text that I thought were just opinion. Obviously what is left is not good, but it might at least form the basis for a more factual entry. I also reinstated SU information, which seemed fine. Before doing this I looked at the talk for one or two other universities. There is a good discussion on fact vs hype in discussion of the opening paragraph of the LSE article (Talk:London School of Economics) which perhaps might usefully inform future development of this page. 18.104.22.168 21:49, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
The section on the student union neglects to mention the former venues Union 1, 2 and the Late bar located on Willow Row which were successful and major parts of the Derby nightlife at the time (including non-student scene), and have since been demolished to make way for temporary NHS buildings and the Derby College building. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 01:48, August 26, 2007 (UTC)
(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 22:38, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:University of Derby logo.gif
Image:University of Derby logo.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 11:40, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
Inaccuracies in this article
At the University of Derby, we are aware that there are a number of inaccuracies in this article that we would like to correct so as not to cause confusion to any readers. We have now attempted to do this on two separate occasions but have had our amendments reversed by other editors. If any readers would like accurate information about the University, please visit the University of Derby website at http://www.derby.ac.uk —Preceding unsigned comment added by Penmire (talk • contribs) 15:12, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- The current article looks like a advert with all the course listed. Please read the Wikipedia policies such as conflict of interest and adverts & promtional material on Wikipedia. I will be looking to clean the page up as he current lists of course that can be applied to any university, college etc are not encyclopedia material. I'll look into the Edit history when I come back to this later (earlier in the day). - BulldozerD11 (talk) 02:08, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
I have placed a 3 day protection on this page. Can anonymous users please sign in if they want to claim to be be (say) the university. At present the page is like a website where you got an extra hit in Yahoo if you mentioned a particular term (ahhh those were the days). Wikipedia doesnt work like that. This is not meant to represent the uni's view of itself but a fair academic evaluation of it. Being a university you will understand the scholarastic process. Thats how it works. Claiming to be important won't work. Having 3rd party citations to prove things will. The university of Derby does not allow http links to be thrown in half way down a dissertation ... we dont allow it here either. This article does need to be wikified and "cleaned up". The assistance of all who have an argument will be valued. Please help .. you re very welcome. signed Victuallers (talk) 17:04, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
- Clean up, the Unencyclopedic list that fail various Wikipedia article guidelines and accepted policies have been removed. The external links also inserted into sections have also been removed, as looking at the pages they provide insufficient relevant content to use as references for the sections (which they had been used for before by some editors before being turned back to Ext links ) External links are not accepted in the main body of articles and they appear have to been there purely for advertising purposes, along with others to various places in Derby which had also been removed by past editors. The removed Links are all accessible via http://www.derby.ac.uk as sub pages.
- For the record: The page appears to have been edited by several accounts used just to Edit this article and if these editors work for the university then WP:Conflict of Interest may be involved. The history also has several different ? IP editors acting in a manner that could be taken as claiming ownership of the article or engaging in actions that may be WP:edit wars (reversions and removing wikipedia maintenance tags on several occasions over the last 2 year with no rational given or discussion in several casses). Material added needs to be verifiable. The bulk of the article is reasonable (not brilliant), but with a shortage of references to back up some sections.
- Feel free to discuss any of my changes here, and if suitable reason or sources to back up inclusion are provided I will gladly revert them. The article needs some work to bring it up to the standard of most UK university articles, there is plenty of scope to expand its coverage and make it into a Good article candidate by working to meet the criteria in a constructive manner of cooperation not conflict. - BulldozerD11 (talk) 02:57, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
Its a quiz
Now who can guess... which dept "delivers a vast spectrum of programmes representing prospects in further education on through to multiple masters and doctoral degrees." Surely someone can remember! Come on lets rid this article of the marketting phrases and see if this university can give the impression of scholarly study. Someone here must now how to write an article with references and citations without including adjectives like "polished", famous and world-renowned. Oh and if you're still stuck about the dept then clue its at a high altitude! . Victuallers (talk) 16:47, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
- Very cultured, fixed that one now 'watered' it down. Carn't see the wood for the trees, a fresh set of eyes is always good for spotting the obvious mistakes. - BulldozerD11 (talk) 17:09, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Uni Quality Scale
I have surveyed a couple dozen or so 'start class' universities, a couple dozen or so 'C class', and a couple dozen or so 'B class'. These scales are so terribly non-standardized that they are more or less useless in terms of reliability. Nevertheless, this page at very least seems to deserve a 'C class' rating and by comparison to some of the rankings of its peers it deserves a 'B class' ranking. I think a 'C' is legitimate. I don't think I would argue with a 'B' however but this would be by the proverbial skin of its teeth. Although the article has a tremendous way to go for a 'GA', I think the evidence dictates that 'start class' is no longer warranted. I will await feedback and if there is none I will proceed to escalate the ranking of the article.....thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 19:35, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
After hearing no rebuts and after inspecting several more articles, I have augmented the grade of this page to 'B'. There are two outstanding features of the article. The first is its breadth or exhaustive summation of academic activities available at the uni, i.e. what can be done there from first studies up through doctorate work and work among the research centres. The article is significantly above average in this area. The second outstanding feature is the article's uniformity of script, format and attention given to its headings. This article has an inner-continuity or content parallelism that is truly beyond all but a few university pages within the entirety of Wikipedia. That said, and as mentioned before, the 'B' for this page is at the bottom of that grade. The academic information on the page is good and should mostly be left alone except where new data is discerned. The continuity of the page should be endeavoured to be kept as well. It is exemplary and should be contained in the criteria for all pages. But the page now desperately requires interesting or distinctive facts about the Uni and its individual schools. This is just about all it requires, but it requires a good bit of it if it is to rise from the grade of 'B'; perhaps 100 or more distinctives. In this area the page is woefully behind. Rectifying this needs to be the path this article takes in the near future. Pictures of the new refurbished Kedleston site would be nice….
It seems in 2006 this article was marked as POV and somebody tried to fix it. The entire opening statement s shocking for this - no ref in sight. Maybe a rollback is in order? Marmouse999 (talk) 11:25, 9 April 2011 (UTC)