Talk:Oxbridge

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject University of Oxford (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Oxford, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the University of Oxford on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
Note icon
This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
WikiProject University of Cambridge  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of the University of Cambridge Wikiproject, an attempt to improve articles relating to the University of Cambridge, and to standardize and extend the coverage of the University in the encyclopedia. If you would like to participate, you can help us by editing the article attached to this notice, or you could visit the project page, where you can join the project, learn more about it, see what needs to be done, or contribute to the discussion.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 
WikiProject Universities (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Universities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of universities and colleges on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 
Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on March 24, 2008. The result of the discussion was Snowball Keep.

Feedback/improvements[edit]

I've done a series of edits to extend and clean up the article, aiming to include all the essential points that others would otherwise add later, but in the smallest practicable stand-alone form: more crisp and focused than Oxbridge rivalry, for example. Any feedback/improvements would be welcome. Thanks - Pointillist (talk) 10:24, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

  • I favour a terse style too. I have provided some links to sources above which may help. Colonel Warden (talk) 12:33, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
    Thanks—I was going to ask you to take a look. Good call on Varsity match, btw. It balances the sentence well. - Pointillist (talk) 12:45, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Proposal to merge Oxbridge reject[edit]

Yworo (talk · contribs) has PRODed Oxbridge reject and suggested it be merged into this article. I've checked it out and brought across Eric Thomas's "Oxbridge prism" quote. IMO the article doesn't offer anything else that would be useful here. Comments? - Pointillist (talk) 12:03, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Looks good to me. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 13:33, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
i'd be against a merge. The article has just been expanded  Francium12  14:22, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
Doesn't change my view: the Laura Spence Affair is well covered elsewhere. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 14:50, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
I agree with Pointillist and Jonathan A Jones. The term does not seem to be sufficiently significant to justify a separate article. The expansion referred to by Francium12 adds information about particular examples of use of teh concept, but does not add anything about the concept per se. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:23, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
No-one has commented on the merge suggestion for six weeks, so I've removed it. - Pointillist (talk) 14:51, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Portmanteau[edit]

I have justified my revision, you have not provided justification for yours.
I can only assume it is another example of the desire of some on wikipedia to popularise the term, this insistance on using "portmanteau" in every article possible weather it adds to or subtracts from it's value, is little more than vandalism on behalf of those adding it. with this in mind i will revert your edit and will expect you to justify any further changes before you make them. 218.215.128.17 (talk) 15:01, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

You have done nothing to justify your decision. Explaining the portmanteau is important in helping people understand the title, same goes for all of the articles that you have imposed your point of view upon. Stop removing this information from pages. magnius (talk) 15:04, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
i provided an explination within my edit summary, in this article and the others i have edited "portmanteau" adds nothing to the article, It is already explained that it is a composite of the two words and is not necesary to state again so either blend or portmanteau need to be removed for the sake of redability, because it is portmanteau that needs linking to ensure all users understand the meening it is the logical choice to be removed.

you have provided no reason for the need for a redundant description of the word but insist on reverting my edits while claming i am simply removing information.218.215.128.17 (talk) 15:32, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Country[edit]

There didn't seem to be any particular reason for the reference to the constituent nation of England rather than the country of the United Kingdom, whether you read it as the location of the colleges or the place where the term Oxbridge is used, so I've edited to change that. England would be fine if this were a British Encyclopedia but as an international one 'United Kingdom' is the way to go. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cdfbrown (talkcontribs) 22:34, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Oxbridge. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

YesY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:58, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Oxbridge. 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.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:26, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Oxbridge. 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.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:30, 26 July 2017 (UTC)