Jump to content

Talk:List of deemed universities

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Comments

[edit]

Per "Note that in many cases, the same listing by the UGC covers several institutes.", are there many such cases, or just a few? If there are many, maybe add a column to the table listing them? If they're few, maybe add them to the table like the recognition thing has been added now?--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 19:35, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think most of the listings cover more than one institute. Just a random sample [1] [2]. I think I'll just add the listing to the sources column for each entry, it seems like a valuable source. --Muhandes (talk) 19:51, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In cases where the institutes are off-campus (in other cities), shouldn't we list them too (in addition to adding the source)? Institutes in the same campus need not be listed, but I think institutes in other cities should be mentioned, especially if they are notable (or have an article here)--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 12:06, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it should. First and foremost, the list is of deemed universities, which is a well defined concept. Homi Bhabha National Institute is a deemed university, since it was declared as such by the Department of Higher Education following the UGC's recommendation, and it is listed as such by the UGC. The Institute of Mathematical Sciences, which is not even on the same state, was never declared deemed university. They are not allowed by the UGC to add the title "deemed university" to their correspondence or website, and indeed they don't. Why should we list them as such? Secondly, the list has a very clear inclusion criterion right now – if it's in the UGC list, it's included. Complicating the criterion is asking for troubles. I also think it is very hard work, opening each entry, looking up each of the institute's location, checking the campus (assuming we can even defined "campus"). And all this for what benefit? What are we gaining from this complication? --Muhandes (talk) 17:58, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I should've been more clear in my statement. What I meant was not to add those institutes as individual listing (meaning a new row); but to add them to the entry of the parent institute:
either by way of a separate column titled "Included Institutes" (or something along those lines)
or by way of † and a footnote at the bottom of the table.
The former can be done if most entries have institutes (which I doubt), the latter is preferable if few have institutes.
I looked at the first few entries in the UGC database, and barring those which give 404s, have blank columns etc, less than half seem to have institutes listed.--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 22:38, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If you think this is important information I would not stand in your way. Regarding criteria, I still think you are unnecessarily complicating the criteria. Either add all included institutes or none of them. Trying to figure out if some institute is off-campus or on-campus will triple the work required. Regarding where to add this information, another possibility is under the main entry in small, something like this:
University State Location Established Specialization Sources
Homi Bhabha National Institute

Maharashtra Mumbai 2005 Science, technology [1]
Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research Maharashtra Mumbai 1987 (1995) Economics [2]
Whatever you may choose to do, I suggest completing it at some user space and then moving it here. Let me know what you plan as I was planing on trying FL at some point, and I wont until work is finished.--Muhandes (talk) 20:10, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Will do.--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 02:54, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Although I do wish this change is done, seeing that nobody else is interested and I myself do not have time to perform this change anytime soon, I think I'll let the idea rest for now. If anyone finds this idea worth pursuing in the future, they're free to do so. I may or may not come back to implement this.--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 19:49, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Homi Bhabha National Institute – Background". hbni.ac.in. Homi Bhabha National Institute. Retrieved 30 August 2011.
  2. ^ "About Us". igidr.ac.in. Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research. Retrieved 30 August 2011.

Lead section

[edit]

The lead of this article is in urgent need of cleanup. There are about 2 sentences total about what a deemed university actually is and the rest is just general information on universities in India. Pishcal — ♣ 07:53, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on List of deemed universities. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 05:28, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

NAAC certification must for all universities and colleges

[edit]

As per UGC, "NAAC certification must for all universities and colleges". The edit by User:Muhandes stating "rm NAAC grading, it is not up to date, some were falsely listed, and it has no bearing on the subject since NAAC grading is voluntary", is not valid and amounts to vandalism. Before deleting a large amount of info, discuss. Abesam (talk) 00:50, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I left you a response on your talk page regarding the personal content of your message, It does not belong here. What does belong here is that since you object to my change, I will start a new discussion about the page overhaul which I'm planning. Best regards. --Muhandes (talk) 07:07, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

List changes proposal

[edit]

I am proposing the following changes to the list. My aim is for a more uniform look with List of central universities in India, List of state universities in India, List of private universities in India.

  1. Remove the numbers. They make maintenance very difficult and add no data since there is no serialization involved.
  2. Use rowspan for the state column, similar to List of central universities in India, List of state universities in India and List of private universities in India.
  3. Regarding NAAC acccreditation, I personally don't like to list it from two reasons. First, I believe it gives undue weight. If I'm not mistaken, NAAC was made mandatory in 2013 but only to the general stream, not to institutes in the technical and medical streams.[1] By adding it we are saying NAAC is the one and only mark of quality, which does not seem to me to be fair for an accreditation which for many institutes is voluntary. Second, NAAC accreditation is for five yeas (or at most seven year)[2] so every year 15-20% of the list needs updating. I am incapable of keeping track of this, so unless someone says they will keep the list updated, the list will always be misleading.

References

  1. ^ Mohanty, Basant Kumar (5 March 2013). "UGC makes accreditation a must". The Telegraph. Retrieved 12 December 2017.
  2. ^ Kohli, Gauri (14 February 2017). "Good grades will get institutes 2-year NAAC extension". Hindustan Times. Retrieved 12 December 2017.

Please mention in your comments which of these three proposals you support or object to. --Muhandes (talk) 16:44, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I agree with your first 2, but disagree with the 3rd. Over time, NAAC accreditation will only become more relevant. I will try to keep the list updated, and I think many Wikipedians might try to help out too. Many lists in Wikipedia are in the same status, many Universities in the USA, for example, do not have an up to date information on accreditation, but eventually, they do get updated. Abesam (talk) 23:04, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Abesam: First, can you prove your claim that Over time, NAAC accreditation will only become more relevant? Is there some source for it or is it your own speculation? Second, you mentioned lists of universities in the US with the same situation, can you please give some examples so we can see how they handle it? Third, you did not address the issue of undue weight due to the fact that technical and medical institutes are not required to have NAAC accreditation. At the very least they should be marked differently to show that. Finally, you said I will try to keep the list updated, so please prove your point. From random sampling, half the list is now misleading and incorrect, please fix it. --Muhandes (talk) 00:38, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Abesam: Did you lose interest? I made four claims, I think they should be addressed. Most importantly, the last claim needs addressing, the current list is out of date and misleading and you said I will try to keep the list updated (here is a pointer). --Muhandes (talk) 18:45, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Abesam: The fact that a month has passed and the article still has the misleading and out of date information clearly demonstrates the falsity of your claim I will try to keep the list updated, and I think many Wikipedians might try to help out too. I am giving it a week more, but then I'm removing the the NAAC accreditation again as it is out of date, misleading, and no editor is willing to improve it, so we are better of without it. --Muhandes (talk) 12:54, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Done except the rowspan. Going to do that as part of an overhaul of all lists. --Muhandes (talk) 12:28, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 20 external links on List of deemed universities. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 19:42, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_deemed_universities&oldid=1213941079"