Talk:University of Waterloo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

---

This article is part of WikiProject Education in Canada, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Education in Canada. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

This article is a frequent source of heated debate. Please try to keep a cool head when commenting here.

See also /archive1, earlier discussions from this page

Hey guys, for those who are from the university and damn proud of it, use the following UserBox. Thanks! {{User Waterloo}}

--AlphaTwo 21:29, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Please, when leaving messages, always sign it properly by typing four tildes (~~~~) after your message. Thanks. -- Rediahs 01:32, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Contents 1 Federation of Students and its clubs 2 my rewrite 3 Math and CS Department Page 4 University of Waterloo Template 5 Photographs 6 famous people 7 Separate dicussion 8 Removed attrition for CS 9 ES paragraph in reputation section 10 Proposed merged back into Main Page 11 Weasel words 12 RIM as a spin-off 13 Bill Gates photo 14 Proportion of Asian Students (POV-Dispute) 15 Professional Development for Engineering Students 16 RIM as a company started by an alumnus 17 Tie Guard 18 Fraternity and Sorority Awareness

[edit] Federation of Students and its clubs

I made a post in the talks page over here a while back, but no response. Should Fedclubs get a seperate page that links to Feds, which would then link to here?--AlphaTwo 17:22, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] my rewrite

... or at least what it pretends to be.

I very intentionally left out the faculty ratings. This page now has rankings and reputation of university as a whole. Feel free to add more, positive or negative, as long as you quote a reliable source (ie, not someone's blog). Do not add faculty rankings/reputations/other crap here. There are redlinks at the bottom of the page waiting for that.

I regretfully inform that questionable edits without an edit summary or follow-up (better yet, pre-edit) discussion on this talk page may be reverted without prior warning. If you're an anonymous user and feel this page exhibits excessive amounts of bias/POV, please register yourself an account - it's psychologically much easier to discuss issues with a user than with a number. I have archived the previous discussions since the page was getting far too messy.

Now, a bit about more specific of my edits:

• The History section utilises a lot of stuff written by 67.185.234.150 - thanks a lot, made my life a lot easier. Also moved some stuff from Future Plans to History as time flow warrantied.

    - no problem, I really thought a history section for UW was necessary. -67.185.234.150 (pajaro)

• The Reputation section is currently a bit Maclean's heavy - if someone wanted to add some more stuff to balance it out, that'd be appreciated. I think we should keep it at approximately 1.5*current length, though, after that that'll just get excessive.
• I removed the MPs from famous alumni -- IMVHO being one of 300 people elected across the country isn't enough of a notability claim, and that list looks a bit long anyway. Feel free to argue me wrong. I'd love to cut out some other marginally notable people from that list, but I don't know enough about them, so I'll refrain
• Cut out some stuff from the Traditions and Pecularities. The Pink Tie stuff is included in the Tie Guard. I'd keep the "Sydney, Australia; California; Florence; Munich, Germany and in Butchart Gardens, Victoria, B.C.", but without a precise location in California it'd look silly.

That'll be all. Thanks for your co-operation; I look forward to watching this article grow. In a good way. --Qviri (talk) 04:13, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Math and CS Department Page

Info that can be added in the section:

• The Tie used to be a frequent victim of abuse from other faculties' students, which led to the formation of the Tie Guard 1994.
• The Log was showcased on the 3rd floor of the Math and Computer building (MC) until it was stolen in late 2005 by the engineers. It has been returned since.

OR, we could talk about stuff people actually care about, like the programs, departments, reputation, famous grads.

Yes, of course that's what will go in. My list was just a list of items that was removed from the main page that can go into the Math /CS page. This is just a mere backup of what's was removed.--AlphaTwo 14:32, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] University of Waterloo Template

Here's a template I've made to quickly link all the UW pages together. {{University of Waterloo}}

Some of you may noticed that the University Colleges are not listed, nor any of the Center of .... As I've explained in the discussion, I can't think of a good place to put it without making it awkward. If you have a better suggestion, please feel free to make the changes.--AlphaTwo 02:20, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Photographs

Since using stock photos from the University violates most Copyrights, is there anyone on campus who's willing to go out and get some photos for our use?--AlphaTwo 16:56, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Sure, if you don't mind it taking a while for them to appear. I have a serviceable digital camera and I work on campus, so I don't mind taking a few minutes to get some pix. Any preferences? Should we avoid the classic "DC at night" and "DPL from the ground" shots? Kraigus 16:16, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

• Nothing much came from that, huh. Either way. I'm on campus now to do some photo work if need be. Any suggestions on what I should snap for?--AlphaTwo 21:10, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

• • Every time I have time, I left my damn camera at home. Every time I remember to bring it, I'm either busy all day or forget I have it by the time I get in. Mind like a steel sieve. I was going to go for some pictures unlike those you usually see on the university website (DC or DPL at night gets boring). It's still goose season - maybe geese down by the stream, near the bridge behind NH? Construction on the new building by DC? PAS doesn't seem to get much photographic love either, I think it's an interesting looking building, and even if it's not the most attractive, it's representative. I've been doing the "remember camera in morning, forget I have it til it's time to go home" trick the last few days, but with Monday off my wife and I are considering taking a walking tour of campus to get some shots. Kraigus 04:03, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] famous people

seems like the list is growing a bit long...the article is now 1/4 famous people...seems like a lot, like everyone is putting there favourite person. Maybe this could be a separate page, or shortened? JamieJones ^talk 12:54, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Let's wait for a few more replies first before moving it though.--AlphaTwo 14:37, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Thirded. I was getting annoyed by that list a while ago, but I already have a reputation as a Science hater so I didn't want to piss anyone off by deleting their favourite alumni. I think that pruning everyone with a redlink would be a good start; if they're famous, they likely have a Wikipedia page.

Done. New page created. University of Waterloo, Famous alumni and faculty JamieJones ^talk 23:34, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Separate dicussion

Incidentally, while reading around Java programming language I found no proof of this: Jim Mitchell - Java software language inventor. --Qviri (talk) 21:14, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

"Dr. Mitchell has been working with computers since 1962 at the University of Waterloo where he and three other undergraduates developed the first WATFOR compiler." - From numerous websites, both UWaterloo based and Sun based. However, that's the only reference in regards to Waterloo. He did move on to be heavily involved with Java, but I guess that's often confused with his "creation" of Java.-AlphaTwo Sometime on March 1 (forgot to tage it.)

I wasn't questioning his Waterloo connection - his involvement with WATFOR is unquestionable. I was just wondering about the Java thing. Thanks, Qviri (talk) 16:10, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Then I guess the stright answer would be no, unless his involvement was uncredited somehow. He was never mentioned in Sun's article on the history of Java, which is what Java programming language used as a reference for their history.--AlphaTwo 16:19, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Removed attrition for CS

*The Computer Science program is currently experiencing attrition problems and has established a group to investigate the reasons for students switching out of the CS program. This group is headed by a former UW grad.

This was the case as long as five years ago; it doesn't seem like much like a relevant fact or figure, and hence it was removed. JamieJones ^talk 12:32, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

I think it's relevent because of the huge feedback that the department got when it asked it's current and pass students regarding the attrition rate. It's a problem that the department has yet to resolve, and it's bringing the quality of the degree down. Consider that the average admission rate has dropped from high 80s-low 90s to it's current range of low 80s (anything above 78 will do), and consider the fact that the amount of material that is being covered in each course is getting a significant reduction (partly because of the Double Cohort). The fact that the department has recently increased the amount of possible fails while maintaining the honours degree is a demonstration of the scope of the problem.--AlphaTwo 13:36, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Considering that every student in Computer Science at the university was asked to complete a very extensive survey about the problem and significant funds from the mathematics endowment fund were directed toward the survey I feel that this is also a very relevant fact.

To current UW students, I'm sure it seems relevant. However, in the past the same sort of discussions were had. In 1996, I knew someone who got into the program with a 78% average. That was ten years ago. In 2000/2001, their were surveys about attrition. There were all kinds of proposals an initiatives. I'm not saying that what you're claiming is untrue, i'm saying it's an ongoing problem, and that while it might very pertinent to current students, I don't think it has a place among a wikipedia article. I don't think it's NPOV, just as I wouldn't want to get into the scandals revolving around where money disappeared to from several well-known scandals at UW - sure they are "facts", but they are hard to present neutrally and really irrelevant for what most people probably want from a wikipedia "encyclopedic" point of view.JamieJones ^talk 17:06, 25 March 2006 (UTC) (please sign your comments)"

As another example, check out these budget cuts. Again, relevant to UW but not important for a wikipedia article. JamieJones ^talk 17:18, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

So, becuase it's an issue that's been around, and not deemed "important", then we should leave it off? The fact that it's an ongoing problem, and it's hard to stay POV does not mean that it should be removed. --AlphaTwo 18:13, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

AlphaTwo.. I'm questioning what your sources are for "anything about 78% will do". I'm on the CS recruitment commitee, and from what I remember, this year, applications have gone up significantly. Also, I don't see the connection between a high attrition rate and lowering the "quality" of the degree, for example, the high attrition rate might be due to high academic standards, resulting in less but higher quality students. I guess none of this matters. However, you seem to put as many negative comments about CS as possible, as justification that that the sentence should be in the article, when most of the stuff you are saying is not relavent.

You are right, I don't have a source. It's purely anecdotal evidence, which is the reason I'm leaving a message here instead of putting stuff right on the main page. Since you mentioned that you are on the CS recruitment commitee, that must mean there are some hard facts that can back your point. Would it be a problem if you can point out your source of information?

You seemed to be confused as to my point of starting a topic here, because if I was justifying that sentence to be placed on the page, I would have done so already. I'm just raising a point in questioning what's the general concensus on whether it's a noteworthy information or not, and if so, did the sentence need rewording to fit what is happening. --AlphaTwo 15:31, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ES paragraph in reputation section

Why is this here? Why mention environmental studies specifically, rather than other faculties or research areas?

• Yea, maybe it should be in the ES section?--Shion Uzuki 04:43, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm unfarmiliar with ES, but we do have a Red Linked page for it on the UW Template if you feel like moving the stuff there.: University of Waterloo Faculty of Environmental Studies.--AlphaTwo 05:00, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I was about to say that ES kids are probably too lazy to create their own article from the redlink provided. Then I realised that thanks to a verifiability paranoia, IP users can no longer create articles, just expand them. Perhaps we should create stubs for all the faculties and let IPs expand it, cleaning it up periodically if necessary? --Qviri (talk) 15:15, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Oh. Is that so? When did this all happen? Either way. Stubs ahoy! --AlphaTwo 18:14, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I couldn't find a link to the precise announcement, but it was sometime around December 5th, 2005. (See WP:AFC.) Apparently we were getting too much new-page vandalism from anons. Personally I do not agree with the decision, but what are you going to do. --Qviri (talk) 18:47, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

It was after highly reported incidents of Congress staff changing Wiki entries for other Senators and their bosses to change NPV. Also, there was a joke edit saying John Seigenthaler Sr. was a suspect in te JFK assassination. So Wales said IP users can't make new pages. --[Chris.]

Which doesn't make sense, since none of these incidents involved creating new pages, but nevermind... --Qviri (talk) 13:27, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, the Seigenthaler incident did actually involve the creation of a new page. That alone doesn't necessarily justify the change in policy, but there are plenty of other good reasons. Of course, this isn't really the right place to discuss this, but whatever. :) —smably 18:20, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Should this be moved to the ES page now?

[edit] Proposed merged back into Main Page

I've created new pages for each red link. Hopefully someone can add in the details.--Shion Uzuki 03:37, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Mmm, details didn't get through so well. (Science was proposed to be merged back...) I've sent an email to Chris of studentlifecentre.com, asking him to post a follow-up of sorts to [1] with a request for data about AHS, Arts, ES and Science. We'll see if and how that goes. --Qviri (talk) 15:32, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

And we're in: [2]. Some of the results can be already seen, for example here. --Qviri (talk) 17:05, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

I think that the poster who suggested merging the page jumped the gun and was too bold in suggesting the merge without backing up their reasoning. Either way, I've slapped a quick one-liner onto the page, hopefully that's a start.--AlphaTwo 05:27, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Weasel words

"The University of Waterloo is famous for being the groundbreaking proponent of co-operative education in Canada and currently maintains the largest such program in the world." plus the entire Reputation section. Ardenn 04:36, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

I guess I didn't get the memo. That particular sentence seems pretty factual (and accurate) to me. All it needs is a cite. Parudox 05:03, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

It's much more productive to bring up particular issues here. Most of what you deemed to be non-neutral or "weasel words" seems to be verifiable fact. Parudox 05:11, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

It was suggested to me I should fix it rather than slapping tags on. I've put the tag back. There's no cited source for that quote. Ardenn 05:36, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Good job, you've reminded me why I stopped editing this page. Back to the sweet oblivion it is. (Are you sure there aren't any Ottawa pages that need to be updated or something?) --Qviri (talk) 12:30, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RIM as a spin-off

(moved from above by User:Qviri)

• Shouldn't the list of spinoff companies include RIM? --colchar 10April 2006 12:36 (18:36 GMT)

• • Technically speaking, no. See the discussion at Talk:University of Waterloo/archive1#Research In Motion. Of course, it's a spin-off in spirit, but how dare we put that on wikipedia... --Qviri (talk) 16:49, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

• • It should be included as a company that "has roots in" UW, since that's not disputed as far as I can tell. Parudox 17:55, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
    • I think that "has roots" part was chopped off as we hit the "degrees of seperation" problem. Too many small to mid size companies have their roots in UW, does including RIM justify having all?--AlphaTwo 01:16, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
      • I'm not finding any other companies (not RIM and not in the list) that are notable enough to have their own Wikipedia article, with that article mentioning UW. Parudox 12:28, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

• • • • The arguments against including RIM are specious at best. He was a student at UW. He was attending the school when he invented the technology. Others who worked with/for him at the time were UW students. He situated his company at the northeast corner of campus. Seriously...any arguments that RIM is not a spinoff are specious and should be disregarded. We can argue semantics all we want here but RIM should go into the article. colchar 11:49, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

• • • • • The university looks at spin-offs as including companies in any of three categories (Transfer of Technology, Transfer of Knowledge through people, Transfer of Knowledge through research) [3]. These categories referred to in the 2001 PwC study are similar to those in the 1994 Spin-off profiles. I think RIM is listed in that document. Anyway if you consider transfer of knowledge through people as fitting in with spin-offs, then RIM would fit. If you require that the company be started with university technology, university research, or university employees, then it probably would not. rmachenw 12 April 2006

• • • • • • The only thing is that I'd be wary of using the term spin-off for something other than a research group project that becomes a separate company. Parudox 05:05, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bill Gates photo

Currently, we have this photo in the article, claimed as Wikipedia:Fair use:

Image:Billgtourwaterloo.jpg

While browsing around on flickr, I have discovered this photo, which even includes a kick-ass full-size version. Now if we can convince the owner to allow us to upload this to Wikipedia, or better yet the Commons, with something like {{No rights reserved}} or {{PD-self}}, that would be very nice ^_^ --Qviri (talk) 03:03, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Just replaced with Image:Gates Bill talking05 14338.jpg. Arniep 20:45, 17

That picture isn't from his talk at Waterloo, there wasn't even a chalkboard, unless I've gone mad...

You are right. The photo of Gates had an image tag of October 12, 2005. A simple google search landed this: Bill Gates surprises students as "stand in" professor, which was Gates at a "UW" - University of Wisconsin, where suprisingly enough, that exact image showed up. --AlphaTwo 06:46, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

If I recall in the past there was a photo with Gates in front of a screen that says UW on it in the past in this article. Here it is [4]. I'm not sure how to check copyrights and get approval, but it is their media website, so possibly someone could replace it? Jeff 11:21, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I fixed description Image:Gates Bill talking05 14338.jpg to say "University of Wisconsin" rather than "University of Waterloo" -- Canwolf 17:37, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proportion of Asian Students (POV-Dispute)

POV dispute is this: Does a majority of one culture still constitute as multiculturism? Several comments in the page are spun in such a way as to disguise the fact that the majority of foreign students are Chinese. Someone reading this page could get the wrong impression that UW is multicultural. Let's stick to the facts. 72.57.4.87 03:22, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it is still multicultural. Ardenn 03:26, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Good to see you explained yourself. I ask you again to stop vandalizing this page, namely removing the image above. 72.57.4.87 03:29, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Same could be said for you. Ardenn 03:31, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

"The large number of students of Asian descent contributes to the university's unique and multicultural atmosphere." This is quite biased, namely towards multiculturism being defined as uniculturism. Most Universities have strict policies to encourage an equal distribution of foreign students, where as the University of Waterloo goes out of it's way to recruit as many Chinese nationals as possible, as is evident by all of the recent exchange contracts signed by the University and the People's Republic of China. 72.57.4.87 03:34, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

By law, the University has to take so many domestic students. Thus, it is still multicultural. Ardenn 03:35, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

My comment was totally unrelated to the number of domestic students, but rather to the number of foreign students. I'm also not familiar with the statement you have just made, do you have a reference? 72.57.4.87 03:41, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

You have to take into account the domenstic students, which come from a variety of backgrounds. Waterloo is a publically funded university, and as such, is required to admit (I believe it's 3/4) from Ontario. Ardenn 05:28, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: The University of Waterloo has the largest proportion of students of Asian descent out of all of the universities in Canada. This was reported in the May 2005 issue of Feng Hua Yuan magazine Feng Hua. The large number of students of Asian descent contributes to the university's unique and multicultural atmosphere.

This should be removed. Is it just me, or is there obvious bias in that? Last time I checked UW was a Canadian university, not a Chinese one. I don't think the large number of foreign students who don't bother to learn English contribute to a unique multicultural atmosphere. If you want multiculture, look at Stanford, Berkeley or Oxford -- a little bit of everything. When a University is 50% Chinese, that is not multiculturism-- that's called uniculturism. 70.29.1.62 11:02, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Note:

Asian descent != Chinese

Asian descent != foreign

Foreign students != students who don't bother to learn English

50% Chinese: Really? Do you have a reference?

--Mucus 22:46, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Why does it matter that the school has a large proportion of Asian students. This should not be in the facts and figures. University of Western Ontario's page does not state that they have a large proportion of good looking white students.

...because a proportion is commonly represented as a number, also known as a Figure? If you could find a citation for your assertion about Western, feel free to add it there. --Mucus 00:49, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Note:

The website address of the magainze in question, Feng Hua Yuan, is http://www.fhy.net/. It is quite clear it is a Cantonese Chinese magazine, and was quite clearly referring to the number of Chinese students from China at the University of Waterloo. In regards to your first two inequalities, they are incorrect. They are Chinese. They are foreign. And, they do not speak English (as is evident by any attempt made to communicate with them). More evidence of their inability to speak English is evident from the ELPE charts, where over 95% of them fail. In particular, Feng Hua Yuan made a point of how convenient it was for Chinese students to go to UW because they're not required to speak fluent English. So, I disagree with every single point you have made.

50%? Not quite. But close. If you would take the time to go to this page, these are statistics kindly provided by the University: http://www.analysis.uwaterloo.ca/stats/SelfServe/IntlPrCount.php. As you can see, the # of Chinese students is increasing at an alarming rate. In the year 2002 there were 1821 students from China. In the year 2003 there were 2627. In 2004 there were 3048. In the year 2005 there were 3413. In reality, this number is much greater, if you factor in UK, Hong Kong, Taiwan, etc. This is excluding students from Taiwan, Hong Kong, Korea, Malaysia, etc. Please note that a majority of UK citizens at the University of Waterloo are actually Chinese residents who resided there prior to UK seceding control of Hong Kong to China. In summary,

Year | # of Chinese students

2002 1821 2003 2627 2004 3048 2005 3413

Cumulative growth rate: 17%/year.

Considering the fulltime undergraduate population is roughly 20,000, this comprises 20% if you factor in all of the other citizenships of the foreign Chinese students. Note that the statistics per faculty aren't available, but most of the foreign Chinese are in mathematics, with a few in engineering. Almost none are in arts. So when you consider the Math faculty's meager size, it is very likely that foreign non-English speaking Chinese comprise over 50% of the student population. This is very easily evident by a quick stroll through the MC.

If you consider the fact that the enrollment at UW overall only grows at approximately 500 students a year, this is approximately 2% a year. Using this rough approximation, by 2015 UW will be in excess of 50% foreign Chinese. By the year 2025, UW will be 100% Chinese.

Last time I checked, this is Canada, not China.

70.29.1.62 02:37, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

I cannot verify your numbers. For 2005/2006, the link you provided gives 1403 international and permanent residents of Chinese descent across the whole university. Assuming that your figure of 20,000 is correct. That means 7% of the university is comprised of Chinese foreign students. This is a far cry from 50%.

As for your rant about their English skills, I do not see how it is relevant to whether Waterloo is multicultural or not. Also, while it would be amusing to see Waterloo completely taken over by Chinese students by 2025, this is also not relevant to Waterloo in the present day. A reference for the ELPE statistics that you speak of would be interesting, if you could provide them. Thanks for your input. --Mucus 04:31, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

So? Who cares? What's your point? --Ardenn 03:17, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

What was your point again? Please refrain from modifying this page if you have nothing to contribute to the discussion, especially if you do not attend the University of Waterloo. Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.70.47.152 (talk • contribs).

I looked for that paragraph, and I don't see it in the article. Ardenn 03:25, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

One. If you are going to project growth population, please use logarithmic rates. The way you prove things means anything is possible; we are talking about facts, but guestimates. Second. I've seen your continous edits trying to prove your point that UW is Chinese-population heavy, and have gone on repeately to revert other edits to prove your point, where is the going exactly? The fact that we can all sit here debating whether it is true or not means that we don't have enough facts to say one way or another, hence, it's not exactly something you put on the top of the page.--AlphaTwo 14:30, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

This is absurd, yes there are alot of students of asian descent on campus, and a fair amount of them are Chineese, but even if there was the (obviously incredible claim) of 50% chineese foreign students, the fact of the matter is that would not make the Campus any less multicultural. There would still be another 50% of the students from a smattering of cultures, and china itself, home of a billion people has various cultures of it's own. If you start to include areas like taiwan and hong kong in your estimates of chineese student population, this increases the cultural diversity within this supposedly homogonous group. But all of this is besides the point, ethnic make up does not multiculturalism make. Multiculturalism is about policies and practices that are accepting of diversity, not about population make up. A culture that has an overwhelming majority of students from one culture can still be a 'multicultural' institution, so long as it respects/protects the cultures which are in the minority. The discussion you would want to be having is not 'how many chineese students attend UW', or (as the main pay say's currently) 'The University of Waterloo has the lowest proportion of students of European descent out of all of the universities in Canada. The low number of students of European descent takes away from the university's multicultural atmosphere.' but you would want to talk about UW's Policy 33, and how well it is enacted (via the Student Life Office's Diversity Program). There has been historic argument that Policy 33 (most relevent to UW multiculturalism) was lip service, but the diversity campaign is slowly dispatching those arguments (yes, they do more than just give out black wristbands). I won't go into great detail involving the diversity campaign, but I will say that arguments can be made about how effective it is, and how large a problem it is addressing. However, these arguments havn't been made here, so i'm 'being bold' and removing the 'european ancenstry', which I beleive is uncited because it is blatently 'original resarch'. --Bigmacd24 00:42, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

I have attempted to read through your post several times, however I am at a loss when it comes to discerning your thesis. It was a clever attempt to remove the European Ancenstry comment, which is on the same level as the Asian Ancenstry comment; why should one remain while the other is removed? Being bold, which in your case is a not-so-transparent attempt at imposing your view onto others, is no substitute for being objective. 72.57.4.87 16:05, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

"The low number of students of European descent takes away from the university's multicultural atmosphere." Clever. Adding an opinion to a fact so that it sneaks in as a fact. Seriously, how can you back that up as a fact? Cite your source, not a "I walked by the MC, hence it must be true"...--AlphaTwo 17:36, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Again, you have failed to comprehend that "The large number of students of Asian descent contributes to the university's unique and multicultural atmosphere." and "The low number of students of European descent takes away from the university's multicultural atmosphere." are saying essentially the same things; the latter being a corollary of the first, or the other way around if you prefer. If you remove one, remove the other. My whole point is the first one is introducing bias into the article. I'm sure even a simple person like yourself can comprehend that bias can either sway towards the positive or negative. If you need sources regarding the European post, ask the original poster, I did not post this. However, note that Feng Shua Yan Ding Dong magazine or whatever it's called was not specifically quoted either. As a matter of fact, citations are needed. 72.57.4.87 18:11, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

I removed the comment from the main page because it was unverifiable according to Wikipedia's verifiablility rules. Furthermore, I was dismayed that many sites have mirrored the U of W page, complete with the comments about multiculturalism. This is not encyclopedic. The author has overlooked a problem with veriability - the University of Waterloo does not gather statistics on the ethnicity (etc) of its students. So, if the sentence is rewritten to refer to international students from Asian countries, that would probable be verifiable. But as no data is gathered by the university of student ethnicity, this comment seems more of a "flame" and at best an impossibly unverifiable comment. JamieJones ^talk 19:38, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Professional Development for Engineering Students

Seeing as how this wonderful program was recently initiated by Waterloo, perhaps we should make a mention of this on the page. Homepage. I see this program as something that will make the university stand out, and I think it deserves mention. It is true that no university in Canada has adopted such a program, and that Waterloo has been on the forefront of innovation in co-operative education. I, for one, hope students will welcome this program into their reasons for joining Waterloo. --70.31.201.8 23:26, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

If anything it should be mentioned under University of Waterloo Faculty of Engineering. I'm in the first class of PDEng and I wouldn't say it's that significant. If you want to add something to the UW page, wait a few months until all the plans for PDMAth, PDSci, etc. are unveiled and then it can be mentioned under co-op as a Professional Development course.

[edit] RIM as a company started by an alumnus

Technically RIM founder Mike Lazaridis is an alumnus by definition [5], since he spent over 4 years at UW (and though he didn't get his B.A.Sc. then, they did give him n honourary degree). Mike Lazaridis therefore is not a graduate of UW.

[edit] Tie Guard

Is this not a disporportionatly large blurb about the Tie Guard for the UW page? It's a once a year event which could be summarized. Would it not be more appropriate to include it in full with University of Waterloo Faculty of Mathematics? Jeff 13:38, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree. It seems that there's too much slant for the Math Dept now that Tie Guard is on the main page. Either we relocate it somewhere else, or we give approximatly the same amount of space for something like the Tool.--AlphaTwo 16:02, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

This should receive no more than a one-sentence mention on this page; same goes for the Tool. Also, I think that each deserves some explanation in their respective faculty pages, but not to the extent that "Tie Guard" is mentioned in the current version of this article. These are of relatively minor importance to the respective faculties as well. Perhaps a separate article about Traditions at the University of Waterloo could be created instead. Mindmatrix 16:28, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

I moved it to the Math Faculty page because the Tie is their mascot. The Pink Tie already is mentioned twice on this page so I see no need to add a mention of Tie Guard. I think I'd prefer putting traditions with their respective faculty instead of creating a separate article as this seems to be more relevant. Kratoz 17:27, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fraternity and Sorority Awareness

I reverted the change that added the FSA link because the FSA is not part of UW. It is a club under the Federation of Students. Another reason is if we allow a club to be added, then the other 200 clubs will be added, which should not be allowed. Also since the University does not recognize the Fraternaties and Sororities, it's inclusion could lead to the impression it does. If people want to open the door to all 200 clubs being added, they can do so on the University of Waterloo Federation of Students Page, though I would oppose this because 200 external links will be cluttering and there is a link to the Feds webpage which has all of them and their websites listed. Kratoz 18:35, 24 August 2006 (UTC)