Talk:UK Research Councils

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom 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.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles

Proposal Re:Merger

Leave the merge in place. Create the article 'Research Funding in the UK', with a section on the UK research councils and redirect the UK Research Councils article there.

This solves any problems, there's no longer any duplicate content and anyone wanting information on the UK Research Councils (used as a collective term) goes directly to more relevant information (not just about the Research Council UK).

Currently writing 'Research Funding in the UK' article, at least getting something presentable. Give me a couple of hours. UserRey 13:38, 29 March 2015 (GMT)

Merger

A merger of this article (UK Research Councils) and Research Councils UK was necessary because the content of the two articles and their purpose was identical.

This article (UK Research Councils) scope was too large and as stated the content and purpose became the same as Research Council UK. Although I question if this article was ever not a duplicate in some sense (continue reading).

Following the argument below this article should be an overview of the activities of the individual UK research councils (although surely the is the job of their individual articles?). It should not describe the activities of the Research Council UK (the organisation), it should describe, provide general information on and link to the individual councils, nothing more otherwise it becomes a duplicate.

If the merger is to be reverted I suggest the scope of this article be reduced significantly. If reverted it should also be careful not to duplicate content of the individual councils articles.UserRey 12:44, 29 March 2015 (GMT)

Pre-merger conversation

This is not a good title. "Research Council" is not a specific name. since in the case there is a good official name, Research Councils UK, I propose changing this. Any objections?DGG 06:16, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion, "Research Council" should be changed to "Research Councils" but definitely not merged with Research Councils UK (RCUK). This is because RCUK is a name to describe the collective work of the UK Research Councils (i.e. the collaboration between Councils on specific projects/programmes etc.), but is not used to describe the Research Councils as a whole. RCUK

I apologise for not being up on UK nomenclature here, but I do not understand your distinction, In any case, if it doesn't have UK in the name in should be added as in Research Council (UK) or Research Councils (UK) because otherwise it's generic. The immediate context was in terms of open access mandates, which as I understand were done by the individual councils as delegated by the body as a whole, and I haven't the least idea where it would fit. I imagine from your WPname you are an official there, and by WP customs you should identify yourself to some extent on your user page, because only individuals edit here. DGG 05:12, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, let me apologise for not being aware of WP customs. We felt that RCUK should be added to WP so have merely joined for that and any related pages for the Research Councils.

I'd like to make you aware of our website which as you will notice makes clear distinction between RCUK and the Research Councils (see the two menu items at the top of every page). I hope this will clear up any confusion. RCUK 16:19, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are very welcome indeed to join in, and wikipedia is certainly eager to obtain accurate information from the most knowledgable sources. But if you are planning to continue--and there are a number of pages such as [[open access] where you could certainly help--please do it as one named individual. It can be a pseudonym. DGG 04:14, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

no merger

As is obvious from the above, the organization s) involved think themselves different, I think that's enough to block the merger. I myself am incapable of giving the distinction as exactly as they do.DGG 04:02, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article structure

The present article structure with this article, Research Council, only concerned about Research Councils in the UK, and other research councils in the article funding body (which does not seem to deal with non-research council funding bodies) is not very satisfactory.

"Funding body" is surely a wider term than just bodies funding research? And within research funding, surely there are other types of bodies, such as foundations, non-profit organizations and corporate research trusts?
"Research council" to me is a general term, not restricted to the UK, but a term primarily used for government/tax payer-funded bodies. Governmental organizations in several countries would typically be translated as XXX Research Council.

So this article should probably become "Research Councils in United Kingdom" (or a similar title), while the present material in Funding body should become Research Council, while Funding body could become a redirect until someone writes an article with a wider scope. Tomas e (talk) 17:05, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]