Jump to content

Talk:University of St Andrews/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

University rankings...

Just a quick question. Why aren't previous year rankings listed, as is the case for all other universities in the UK?

-- (A.szczep) 17:29, 13 September 2009 (UTC)


Wikiproject WikiProject Fife

Description

This article would cover all Fife-related articles such as places, famous people, museums, football and rugby clubs and churches to name a few. Examples would be: Kirkcaldy, Andrew Carnegie, Adam Smith, Dunfermline Abbey, Dunfermline Athletic, The Old Course and Kirkcaldy Museum and Art Gallery. This could also help support articles that really do need a lot of work while keeping general maintenance. Examples would be: Methil, Dunfermline, Cupar and a lot of the smaller towns such as Kennoway and Lower Largo. Please see the discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals#Wikiproject_WikiProject_Fife. Kilnburn (talk) 16:26, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Colours

The Bute colours on the main page are wrong. It's dark red, not orange. Has anyone seen anyone wearing orange scarves? No. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.99.105.126 (talk) 10:25, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

That is a red, not an orange. Are you saying it should be a darkened red, more akin to the red in the St Leonard's scarf? --Breadandcheese (talk) 11:38, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Miscellaneous

Why do people constantly delete the Saint from the newspapers section? There is no argument that it is the biggest and most widely read newspaper in the entire town, as well as the longest-lasting and best-known. Opinions of its quality are often part of St Andrews politics, and as such have no place her on Wikipedia. I will rewrite the Saint section, try to be NPOV, and anyone who deletes or vandalises it is being petty, partisan, and also not following Wikipedia guidelines.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.251.224.236 (talk • contribs)

So what about the other section of the below question? The Liberty Club? You might as well have a long section on the Real Ale Society or the James Bond Club. How about a section about the debating society, the oldest one in the world (I believe) and certainly something worth mentioning.

Why are The Mitre and The Liberty Club given sections over longer-established and better-known entites which are completely ignored?

Agree. These are largely vanity posts and should be deleted or hived off into separate pages. --Iceaxejuggler 15:24, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Updated: I've reorganized these sections into one and hived off the Library club into its own page. There was some interesting info there and I didn't want it lost, but felt it was vanity in place. Also updated some of the outdated info. If anyone wants to add their own socs. this might be the way to do it. Or just link to a central uni page if there's one up-to-date? I think the new Student Union site has such a page. Cheers. --Inexplicable

Request: If anyone here is a current student and lives closer to town (not out at DRH like me) could you get a picture of the classics building and replace the photo on the page for the town of St. Andrews. The photo of the classics building on that page was taken while the building had the huge red splotch on it. That stupid ugly splotch is finally gone, so it would be great if we could stop using that old photo. --||bass 16:39, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)

I changed the phrase "strong ties with America" to "strong ties with the United States". The link pointed to the United States anyway. It's probably not a very well known fact, but there are small groups of people in North America (mostly in Mexico) that dislike the use of the word "America" to refer to only the United States and not the continent as a whole. --||bass 06:31, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)


What should replace them? Student newspapers don't play that much of a role up here (The Mitre's circulation is swamped by The Saint's and to be honest most people don't read either), although a section on student socs in general could be quite interesting. --md25

OK, it seems there's a lot of bickering about newspapers here. Wouldn't it be better just to combine all three of them into one "Student Newspapers" section? --md25

Agreed. --Iceaxejuggler 23:15, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I just collected all the newspapers into one group there; I put The Mitre first because M comes before S in the alphabet and if I didn't someone else would anyway. --md25

Why is the university motto in latin? I thought it was in Greek?


I'm awful using Wikipedia, but someone should add that St Andrews was just ranked 5th in the UK overall by the Times Good University Guide 2008. The Guardian and Times now both put it in the top 5, validating its incredible surge in recent years and establishing it as one of the pre eminent institutions of higher learning in the world.

University Coat of Arms:

Can you please change the university coat of arms? You can find it on their website. Or you can contact me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.123.146.55 (talk) 21:34, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Rents, halls of residence

Quote: "Today the university is growing rapidly and in sound financial health, perhaps helped by what some students have argued are the highest hall of residence rents in the UK outside of London."

???

When I was at St. Andrews (1995-1998), it was said to have the cheapest university-owned accommodation in the UK (e.g.: under £1000 a year for self-catering). Has this changed significantly? 217.155.20.163 00:24, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Yeah, the rents are ridiculous now, something like £3k a year for catered. Also the Uni has a £30m liability which they're selling Hamilton Hall off for to pay.

Rent's are bad and getting worse. I paid £130 a week for a studio flat in DRH. Rates aren't much better for the regular rooms either. Prices are going to be even higher next year (2005-2006) since the construction at DRH will be essentially finished at that point. --||bass 16:37, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)

Interesting claim. Edinburgh University Students' Association at the end of last semester was claiming that Edinburgh actually have the highest in the UK (including London). I've changed the line to read one of the. -- KTC 20:08, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
Did they say what their rates were? --||bass 23:06, May 4, 2005 (UTC)
Well, in this case, it's not they as I'm a student there and was until the election at the end of last semester an elected rep. on SRC. So I better get all this right else the President might bite my head off. ;-D
Okay, I couldn't actually remember whether the claim was the proposed rate increase at the end of last semester by Accommodation Services would have made our first year accom. on average the most expensive, or it is anyway. (def. one of the highest anyhow like St. And.) Just gone on A.S. website and it seems to me, the claim was that the orginial proposed increase would have made us the most expensive. (It was on average 9.7%, managed to get self-catered and non-en-suite catered increase down to around 3.8%, catered en-suite not sure.)
On comparing the 2 university's prices on their website for next year, Ed salf-catered, Ed catered, St. And, it seems Ed. in general have slightly more expensive but at the top end St. And have more expensive. So, all in all, it's just another play on word and statistics to get an reaction that benfits the speaker (i.e. reduce rent increase), typical politics! <_< -- KTC 02:06, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
Those DRA rates are slightly misleading... I paid more then that this past year, and rates are going UP... Those rates are only for the singles that share a kitchen with 4 other singles. The ones that have the private kitchens, like mine, cost closer to £4000 for the year.
Well, if you're going to want a private kitchen, what else was you expecting?? :-P My previous comment suggested that there's a few accom. that's available at St And. that's not at Edi. Those that's are similiar enough to be comparable seems to suggest Edi is slightly more expensive. Either way tho., it's just stupid how expensive it is at both places! -- KTC 12:06, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
I think the DRA rates are extortion. I'm paying FAR less next year for a lovely, fully furnished place smack-bang in the middle of town, not a brisk 25 minute walk to lectures/shops/everything execpt the gym. Add the shoddy bus 'service' and I can't wait to get out. St Andrews uni needs to stop viewing students as a quick way out of their 30 odd million of debt.
The rates are doubly extortionate right now considering the cut-back bus schedule (due to road work on the most important roundabout in town.) For less then what I'm paying this year (£4000 as I mentioned earlier), I could (assuming 1 flatmate) get a flat on -SOUTH STREET-. How does that make any sence? --||bass 03:09, May 18, 2005 (UTC)

When was the university founded?

So the first line of this page says "founded between 1410 and 1413", and the history section says "founded 1410", and the infobox says "Established 1413". Is there some doubt as to the exact year? If so it should be mentioned in the History section. Also Ancient university says founded 1411, whereas Ancient universities of Scotland says founded 1413. I notice the university's history page says "Founded in 1413" [1] -- Vclaw 11:27, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

There are differing views on the date of founding as Scotland, along with the Anti-Pope at the time, were using the older Julian Calendar, which placed them at a slightly different year to everyone else. It was my understanding it was founded 1411 on the new calendar and 1410 on the old calendar. Davidkinnen 16:03, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
There is also debate as to what actually constitutes the founding of the university (i.e. when it reached a level suitable to be called a uni, when the pope was asked to ratify, when the pope ratified it, when that ratification reached the univeristy...) Things didn't go so fast in the beginning of the 15th century... I feel we should stick to what the university itself claims. Usrnme h8er 15:40, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
The University's advice to people asking for a date for the foundation university is (roughly) to pick one at random between 1410 and 1413. Fluoronaut 14:34, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

There were scholars teaching and learning at St Andrews well before 1411. The foundation is just the formal recognition as a University by the popes in Rome and Avignon. Graemedavis 21:39, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Well here's the test - when is the University celebrating its 600th anniversary? Timrollpickering 20:23, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
From 2010 to 2013, kind of like a rolling anniversary. But the celebrations kick off in 2010 with quite an opening. The final celebrations are said to be something too. Back to square one. M0RHI | Talk to me 00:56, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Raisin Weekend

I noticed that 'academic incest' has a red link to Raisin Weekend. Does anyone feel like filling that page? -Icecradle 18:13, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Ancient universities of Scotland

Why has the infobox for the ancient universities of Scotland been deleted? Benson85 20:46, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

With regards to St Andrews fellow Scottish Universities, I'm surprised no one had changed the "The University is widely regarded as the best in Scotland" statement until now. It came up third in the most recent survey. Iowasf 04:02, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Good point! We need to ensure NPOV too - that entire paragraph looked a bit like University propaganda, and the intact bits still do (with no references, either). However, I might add that the bit you have changed looks almost like it might fail NPOV the other way... - rather than "fall behind", one could just use "after" (with suitable rewording). Rlfb 13:56, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
On a wider point 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 for a discussion that so far has refused to take off. Timrollpickering 14:32, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
UK
2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993
Times Good University Guide 5th[1] 5th[2] 20th[3] 7th 9th[4] 11th 10th 10th 7th= 7th= 10th 10th 9th 4th= 15th= 16th= 19th=
Guardian University Guide 5th[5] 4th[6] 42nd< 43rd[7] 11th[8] 14th[9] 11th=
Sunday Times University Guide 5th[10] 6th[11] 14th[12] 14th[13] 10th[13] 9th[13] 6th[13] 16th[13] 7th[13] 12th[13] 12th[13]
The Independent 7th[14] 5th
Daily Telegraph 5th[15] 25th
FT 19th 19th 21st 20th 26th

Shouldn't this set of rankings be used? I agree that the current selection only shows the institution at its very best and worst.


That was a fair point, Rlfb, I changed it according to your suggestion. With regards to which ranking systems should be used, the time is the major one, certainly in britain, so I don't see any problem with adding that. I will cite my claim as soon as I find the list online, and I'm also going to have a look at the discussion Tim mentioned. Iowasf 00:04, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, some discussion has now taken place - there are some interesting links there too, which should show you where to find the THES world rankings (there is a link to it on League tables of British universities). Rlfb 00:07, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

The World Rankings are horrendously flawed, putting universities like the University of Massachusetts (a middle of the road public university in the U.S.) up there with the elite. Going through the list one can find oneself scratching his head as some unfamiliar or unexpected names show up with the Ivy's and other esteemed international institutions. A horrible idea to include those rankings in this article - the Times and Guardian should be used. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.70.248.208 (talk) 20:05, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

"St Andrews University" in article titles

A lot of the articles in Category:University of St Andrews are using "St Andrews University" in the article title even when the article itself uses "University of St Andrews" (e.g. History of St Andrews University).

I'm inclined to move almost everything to a "University of St Andrews" form in two days time except where individual moves are objected to or where it's clear that "St Andrews University" is the form used in the formal title/current branding of the article's subject.

Articles identified include:

Also the following doesn't use "University" at all in the title:

Which of these are currently at the correct location? Timrollpickering 20:11, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree. The current stylistical format is University of St Andrews, and thus I see this as OK. Regarding the Independent Student Groups in St Andrews, I consider this as fine. By virtue of the fact they are independent, they are not connected to the University. The only thing they have in common is that all (or most) members of the group are also members of the University. M0RHI | Talk to me 16:58, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
Okay I've left that one where it is, although it could use some modification to make it clear that it means St Andrews the town rather than the university. Timrollpickering 00:41, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Scarf colours

I thought that any student of the University was entitled to wear the the blue and white scarf - not just students of the United College? Pgg7 11:31, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

You seem to be correct [2] [3]. I have reverted. — mholland 12:30, 6 April 2007 (UTC)



I was under the impression that the blue and white scarf was for members of the United College but I have no source. I concede I may be wrong on this, however! -devilnomore

The United College Scarf is identical to the Claire Hall scarf, (Black, Gold and Red) but with a blue and white Saltire sewed on each end. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.158.124.34 (talk) 22:16, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

I have restored some of the external links which were deleted apparently according to WP:EL#Links normally to be avoided. Among websites that had been removed included the University's official web site and the union website, but yet a site selling university scarves was allowed to stay. Rlfb 09:51, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm adding back the Student Radio and newspaper sites. These are legitimate links for anyone wishing to find out more about the university.--Inexplicable 15:37, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I have added a link to the independent website, "The Sinner". As above, this is a legitmate link for anyone wishing to find out more about the University. It includes a guide to the town written by the students, and a messageboard where prospective students can ask questions of current students. Thackary 11 June 2008 (BST) —Preceding comment was added at 14:13, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Latin name

The full and formal Latin name of the University is "Universitas Sancti Andreae apud Scotus" (Univ. of St Andrews amongst the Scots) - which you will find on formal documents etc, and was the form used on degree certificates not that long ago (I'd assume it hasn't changed). Any objections to an alteration to reflect this?--Breadandcheese 04:07, 28 September 2007 (UTC) (signed very belatedly)

Image - Quad

I think a photograph of St Sal's quad would greatly improve this article. Certainly more worthy of inclusion than a photo of the R&A and a former hall of residence - neither of which have anything to do with the subject at hand. --Breadandcheese 17:58, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

What about this one? There are a few other appropriately-licensed photos on Flickr, but this one is a bit small and this one is a bit silly. Or anything you like from the Geograph project (search grid ref). — mholland (talk) 19:11, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Societies

The current paragraph on societies states that "notable affiliated societies are the Bute Medical Society, University of St Andrews Union Debating Society and the Shinty Club." Does anyone know by which criteria these have been chosen? For neutrality's sake, my recommendation would be to simply state that "the University has over 100 active societies, reportedly the largest number of any Scottish university" (reference) or something along those lines, without naming any, and then link to a separate page which lists all societies. What do other people think? --HAdG (talk) 22:29, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree, also the Shinty Club is a sports club, separate to societies entirely, there should be a section on sport on the page, linking to University of St Andrews Athletic Union--Jamesmcmahon0 (talk) 16:14, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Dispute: Section on affordability of accommodation

Does anybody want to weigh in on this[4] [5][6] dispute?

I feel a section on affordable accommodation is particularly relevant in an article on St Andrews University, especially compared to other Scottish universities (see even the accommodation discussion on this talk page).

User:Deacon of Pndapetzim has a problem with the existence of such a section, and deleted the entire section without discussion. I explain my rationale for the existence of such a section at [7]. In short, the rents at St Andrews are atypically high, and I feel that for balance if the page contains information on where the university ranks well (e.g. league tables), it should also contain information on where the university ranks poorly (e.g. expense of accommodation, and wideness of access). Additionally, the university did make very public committments to affordable accommodation in 2004.

Disclosure: Note that both me and Deacon of Pndapetzim are/were students at St Andrews. Also note that Deacon of Pndapetzim seems to fundamentally oppose the existence of such a section, whereas I have an active involvement in the issue of affordable accommodation at St Andrews. I claim such a section should exist, but accept the section could/should be improved for WP:NPOV compliance.

Perhaps somebody else could write a section on affordable housing, or rework the old one into something suitable. Nicol (talk) 15:37, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Anthropology at St Andrews

I feel this should be turned into a redirect at best - there's nothing worth merging, as everything is either spam or unreferenced. The one useful fact links to a broken ref. Any comments/takers? Ironholds (talk) 19:56, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

The article has been improved now. I would appreciate an effort towards building a better article instead of simply redirecting it without at least incorporating the current text into the St Andrews article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.13.79.161 (talk) 04:46, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Mentioning ranking in the lede

Hey all,

There seems to be some contention about whether the schools ranking should be included in the lede. I believe it should be, because this info is inline with WP:NOTABLE and WP:LEDE. Additionally, pages for simliar universities (see University_of_Cambridge University of Oxford) include this info in the lede. What are the arguements against? NickCT (talk) 17:43, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Never been a fan of this. These institutions are half a millennium old +. Cherry-picking a high ranking from a number of recent years and sticking in in the lead may satisfy the PR people at such universities, but fails to make this encyclopedia any better; in fact, it brings the 'Pedia down. It's like putting a Lonely Planet rating from 2007 and sticking it in the lead of the Louvre as if this helps anyone learn anything about the Louvre. Rankings such as these tell far more about the ranking systems than the universities they are rating (the devil is in the detail, which you don't have space to outline in the lead). Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 19:04, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Well, to a certain extent I agree. Academic rankings always have to be taken with a pinch of salt. But, what is the solution here? It seems standard practice to mention this material in the lede. Should we go through all university articles and remove it? NickCT (talk) 20:31, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
It's common practice because editors with little stake in the 'Pedia have a strong incentive in placing them on the top of articles (either because of pride or, not doubt in a few cases, professional promotion). I would very much support general measures on the 'Pedia to stop it, but I've never been inclined to press it. If ranking must be in, they should include a balanced sample following WP:NPOV (in this case, St Andrews in ranked 87th in the world, with 15 or so UK universities in front ... c/f Edinburgh, 20th, Glasgow 79th), and placed lower down the article in a relevant section. Some might say that cherry-picking some undergraduate recommendability rating from one English newspaper because it is favourable is anti-encyclopedic, not just misleading. The 'Pedia should not be used for promotional purposes. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 14:07, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
Most rankings mentioned in other university articles are at least recent and provide a much more balanced view (international, national etc.). They is already a not good opinion in respect to the Guardian methodology so it's better to mentioned a more reliable source and group of sources. Also the link to Guide 2010 is dead 188.223.81.158 (talk) 10:52, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I think that the problem is solved now: there is a mentioning that St Andrews is the top UK university in recent rankings and there are references which confirm this fact.188.223.81.158 (talk) 11:14, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Biased information in the lead section

I'm strongly against the second para in the lead. I believe that it's highly biased and doesn't reflect the summary of the whole article

"Academically, St Andrews is considered one of the United Kingdom's best universities (by whom? where is the reference showing that it's considered as one of the best?) Over the past five years, domestic league tables have tended to place it amongst the top five institutions (the statement is wrong: over 5 previous years its rankings were significantly volatile (from 3rd to 20th), even current rankings show that it's only top 10 (not top 5) in the nation and the Times Higher Education (THE) currently show St Andrews as one of the top 20 Arts and Humanities universities in the world (where is the reference? why this particular raking is mentioned by this particular body?) St Andrews has a diverse student body due to a high intake of international students (where is the reference which confirms this statement?) Throughout its more recent history St Andrews has maintained strong links with academic institutions in the United States (with which universities? where are the references?)" --87.194.69.57 (talk) 14:42, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Photographs

I added some photos of the university from what I found on Wikimedia Commons. There is a lot of interesting university architecture that as of yet no one has uploaded so please change pictures if you find better ones later on. I also added some photographs / paintings / statues of famous alumni to spice up the list a bit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gabba55 (talk • contribs) 00:04, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

still part of 1994 group

this page lists membership as 1994 Group - however St Andrews no longer appears on the list of members? Foxdown1 (talk) 15:27, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

museums

There is nothing on this page about any of the university's museums or collections http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/museum/

This might be something useful to add.

Also the structure seems v. perplexing, why are student halls of residence under 'administration and government' ?Xyphoid (talk) 20:30, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Major reconstruction

I have rearranged the sections to make more sense and fit with the style of other high quality articles within wikiproject:unis

However the article still needs a lot of work, a lot of it is unreferenced, or goes into too much setail for a general encyclopedia, some bits could have thier own section like halls of residence and some bits could be removed or have articles created for them like traditions or the long paras on a few departments.

All comments/crit/help welcomeXyphoid (talk) 14:06, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Over the next few weeks I will be working on a major rewrite of this page to adress issues w/r/t unencyclopeadic content, unverifiable content, missing content and structure

All comments welcomeXyphoid (talk) 12:23, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Erm, mostly done and uploaded, still needs to have some work done, would also appreciate any photos people had if they could be added. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xyphoid (talk • contribs) 14:51, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Xyphoid, I've just had a skim-look over the article. Its taking shape, i've only read the lead in detail so far. My main comments for that would be to reference some of the statements. eg. Who says its the third oldest english speaking university? I guess its clear later but its best to reference.
Also, as a comment further up mentions, is there need for a section of the lead to be on the university rankings. I think one sentence would do. Looking over the general structure - it looks appropriate. I'd consider keeping the alumni to the separate list page. You could keep the images in a gallery format and right some prose, see Jesus College, Oxford for some inspiration on that section. Photos wise - have you checked commons? Hope this is constructive Aloneinthewild (talk) 22:33, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Remove list of Alumni

From the peer review I suggest removing the list of Alumni as all of the information should be covered in the List of alumni of the University of St Andrews. Obviously the first thing is to do is check all of the Alumni on this article are already contained on the list. Jamesmcmahon0 (talk) 19:38, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Agree. Ginger Maine Coon (talk) 03:19, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

University_of_St_Andrews#Links_with_the_United_States - John Witherspoon, Benjamin Franklin honorary degrees?

It seems like we're pushing the point a little to say that the University is linked to US b/c it awarded notable US figures honorary degrees. Universities award honorary degrees to all sorts of people who sometimes have very little direct linkage to the university itself. I suggest we make it clear that Witherspoon and Franklin only received honorary degrees. It might be wise to remove Franklin's image as well, as it seems a little WP:UNDUE. NickCT (talk) 14:20, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on University of St Andrews. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:07, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Make the university infobox narrower

I suggest making the infobox narrower as similar to other universities as it is taking up space in the main introduction section to the university. Captain108 (talk) 15:08, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

University of St Andrews' ranking

Edit in question is this one: [8]

I think in spite of the three sources that say the University of St Andrews is ranked third, it should not be stated as so for the following reasons:

  1. The three most widely-followed university rankings are the ARWU, QS World University Rankings and Times Higher Education World University Rankings. The University of St Andrews is not anywhere near third nationally in these rankings. Looking at the ARWU for example, Cambridge, Oxford, UCL, Imperial, Manchester and Edinburgh are all ranked higher. The situation on the QS ranking is no different. There are 10 UK universities in the top 50, and the University of St Andrews is not listed.
  2. The other problem with this is that it contradicts the current section on "Rankings and Reputation" in this article. ARWU national rankings puts it at 29-33, which is obviously not third. QS national puts it at 12th, THE national puts it at 13th. Only Guardian and The Sunday Times put the university at 3rd.

I think therefore that to claim the university is ranked third is too strong. Certain rankings might, but the major ones do not, and positioning the claim in the lede is inappropriate. Banedon (talk) 02:34, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Where is your source for your first bullet point? The most widely followed rankings NATIONALLY in the UK are arguably The Guardian and The Times and Sunday Times. At no point does the statement lay claim to rank top 3 in the UK in global rankings, only in national rankings. This is a matter of national rankings vs global rankings with many other university pages paying focus to one of only national rankings or global rankings. The only change which needs to be made is emphasising that it is ranked 3rd in national league tables rather than deleting the statement altogether. Kioj156 (talk) 10:12, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
Source for first bullet point: [9]. Note the selective nature of the rankings discussed. There are more rankings out there, e.g. CWTS Leiden Ranking, not discussed. National rankings can be easily interpreted as "among all universities in the country in a global international ranking". Even if the reader is savvy enough to recognize it for what it is used here, as can be seen from Rankings of universities in the United Kingdom, there are at least three national rankings of which only two (?) of the three rankings rank the University of St Andrews third. The statement is too strong. If the statement is to be retained, the University of St Andrews' corresponding rankings in international tables should also be given, and it should say that the university is ranked within the top 5, as opposed to third. Banedon (talk) 14:20, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
From your source, "Shanghai Ranking is less well-known on these shores" and "The simple truth is that there is no such thing as a definitive table", the source does not mention at all that these are the most widely followed league tables. Look at every other wikipedia page for British universities, e.g. Surrey and Exeter, they all make mention of their national league table placing (see national league tables, St Andrews is third again in this table). The statement is not too strong as Times Higher Education has collated the results of the three national league tables and placed it third [10] - this is source number 10 in the wikipedia article. Kioj156 (talk) 15:38, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
I see you're after stronger sources. Consider these two then: [11][12]. The ARWU is the most widely cited international ranking list; the fact that it's "less well-known on these shores" is an argument from ignorance. There is no definitive ranking in the sense that different tables use different methodologies, and therefore yield different results; it is for the user of the tables to decide how relevant the results are to him or her. However it's also because of this lack of objectiveness that giving the absolute statement "this university is ranked third" is too strong. At the very least the statement has to be "this university is ranked third by two of the three major national rankings". I'll further note that the University of Exeter page explicitly states that it is a national league table being discussed (with links), while the University of Surrey page does not mention the university's position in national league tables in the lede.
I'm going to outright revise the lede. If you want to edit the University of Surrey & Exeter pages, feel free. Banedon (talk) 00:53, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
Here's another source on the three major rankings: [13]. I quote, "There are currently three major international rankings that receive widespread commentary: The Academic World Ranking of Universities, the QS World University Rankings and the Times Higher Education Rankings." Wikipedia is not a British encyclopedia. I continue to think the lede should mention the university's ARWU ranking (and THE / QS as well). Banedon (talk) 07:49, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Well we have clearly not gotten anywhere. I suggest informal mediation at DR/N. What do you think? Banedon (talk) 00:41, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

I've posted a request at DR/N: [14]. Kioj156, your contribution is appreciated. Banedon (talk) 12:25, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
It's not just about ARWU. You're removing the Times Higher Arts & Humanities and Social Sciences placing without giving a valid reason. As I said before, there are plenty of other university wikipedia pages which make mention of only national or the global rankings they perform strongest in (e.g. Durham University). Kioj156 (talk) 13:11, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
A moderator has already responded at DR/N. We should continue the discussion there. Banedon (talk) 13:13, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Third Opinion

A Third Opinion has been requested. Maybe I don't understand the question. The existing statement is that St. Andrews is rated as the third-best in the United Kingdom. There doesn't seem to be disagreement there. That statement doesn't say anything about a world-wide ranking for St. Andrews. I am willing either to leave the current statement alone as substantiated by the sources, or to answer a different question about worldwide ranking. For now, I am removing the Third Opinion as answered based on how I understand it.

See the box in University of St Andrews#Rankings and reputation ... basically (and I freely admit I may be biased here) there are two kinds of university rankings, one national (i.e. only UK universities) and one international (ranking the entire world's universities). The University of St Andrews is ranked third by two of the three widely-followed UK-only league tables; the last of the three ranks it fifth. On international tables however it is ranked much lower (even among UK universities only). For example, the ARWU, an international table, has the University of St Andrews 29-33 on a national basis, and 301-400 on a global basis. The question is whether to keep the statement in the lede given this context.
Thanks for the third opinion! Banedon (talk) 10:37, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on University of St Andrews. 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) 04:58, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on University of St Andrews. 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) 01:27, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on University of St Andrews. 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) 21:04, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

  1. ^ "The Sunday Times Good University Guide League Tables". The Sunday Times. Retrieved 04-09-2008. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)
  2. ^ "The Times Good University Guide 2008". The Times. Retrieved 03-11-2007. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)
  3. ^ "The Times Good University Guide 2007 - Top Universities 2007 League Table". The Times. Retrieved 2007-11-03.
  4. ^ "The Times Top Universities". The Times. Retrieved 2007-11-03.
  5. ^ "University ranking by institution". The Guardian. Retrieved 2007-10-29.
  6. ^ "University ranking by institution". The Guardian. Retrieved 2007-10-29.
  7. ^ "University ranking by institution". The Guardian. Retrieved 2007-10-29.
  8. ^ "University ranking by institution". The Guardian. Retrieved 2007-10-29.
  9. ^ "University ranking by institution 2004". The Guardian. Retrieved 2009-01-19.
  10. ^ "The Sunday Times Good University Guide League Tables 2008/09". The Sunday Times. Retrieved 2008-09-23.
  11. ^ "The Sunday Times Good University Guide League Tables 2007/08". The Sunday Times. Retrieved 03-11-2007. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)
  12. ^ "The Sunday Times University League Table" (PDF). The Sunday Times. Retrieved 2007-11-03.
  13. ^ a b c d e f g h "University ranking based on performance over 10 years" (PDF). Times Online. 2007. Retrieved 2008-04-28.
  14. ^ "The Independent University League Table". The Independent.
  15. ^ "University league table". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 2007-10-29.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:University_of_St_Andrews/Archive_1&oldid=1130192129"