Talk:Oxford Union
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Oxford, which collaborates on articles related to the University of Oxford. | |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale. | |
| High | This article is on a subject of high importance within University of Oxford. | |
|
Comments:
|
||
Contents |
[edit] DSC
Why is the Debates Selection Committee the only committee that is not listed in the governance section? It is listed in the Standing Orders as a Committee of the Union, and indeed, its Chairman now attends Standing Committee, with a section for his business, on the same basis as the CCC and RO, i.e. without a vote...
The CCC is a member of Standing Committee, which the CDSC is not, so it really isn't the same basis. Furthermore, DSC does not play any role in the governance of the Society; it selects individual members to represent us at external debating competitions. This is a fairly modern offshoot of the Society, and is essentially a group of those members interested in debating self regulating their activities (admittedly with constant infighting).
[edit] The Queen and the Union
I removed Queen Elizabeth II from the list of speakers in this article, because I'm 99% sure she has never been involved in a debate at the Union. It's possible that she has, at one time or another, been present at a function held in the building, and maybe even made a speech, but that is quite a different thing. However, if anyone can quote chapter and verse of when and under what circumstances she appeared, I'll be happy to eat my words. Deb 22:57 Feb 11, 2003 (UTC)
- I agree, Deb. It is highly unlikely that the Queen would ever become involved in any university debate. At most, she might have attended a function, or maybe delivered a speech, but not in a debate setting. I'd say you'd have as much chance of Her Maj taking part in a debate as you would have the Pope or Saddam Hussein. JTD 23:08 Feb 11, 2003 (UTC)
-
- Hmm...I don't think either of them has been invited to speak at the Union yet.Deb 19:02 Feb 12, 2003 (UTC)
- Deb & JTD: I am not sure if there was a previous list of debators to which you are referring in your exchange, but if the Queen was simply listed as a speaker in the article's existing sentence, "the famous debating chamber, which has played host to such figures as the Dalai Lama..." then this was entirely correct.
Broadly, the Union has two primary speaking sessions: debates and the speaker series,.
In the debates, students are joined by famous individuals for an adversarial discussion on a given subject (e.g., the infamous 1930s debate about not fighting for King and Country); I am sure that you are right that the Queen would never participate in a debate.
However, the most famous speakers at the Union (including those listed in the article, such as the Dalai Lama and Kermit the Frog) do not attend to participate in debates, which are high-risk ventures filled with students eager to make a name for themselves. They come instead as part of the speakers' series, in which they address the Union's members for 15 to 30 minutes, and sometimes take questions. The Queen has spoken at the Union in the speakers' series on several occasions (but never takes questions). As the article says, speakers (in both debates and in the speakers' series) address the Union's members in the debate chamber. Automaton 00:50 11 July 2003
-
- Her Majesty has never adressed the Union - she attended a debate when William Waldegrave was President (not sure of date), and the Chamber had to be re-arranged so that she could sit on the cross-benches so as not to indicate any personal preferences. Hackloon 04:02, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Images
This is the ugliest image layout I have ever seen! Mark Richards 22:27, 17 May 2004 (UTC)
- Truly horrible. I've been bold and cut two of them. Markalexander100 02:10, 18 May 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Lord Dufferin
An anon user cut Lord Dufferin from the list of past presidents. I have rolled back this edit. Please provide the reason on the talk page if you wish to make such a redaction. Fawcett5 00:18, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
That was me. Lord Dufferin may be a past president but he's hardly famous. His greatest achievement? Becoming a mediocre Viceroy of India. I'm sorry, you may have a particular interest in his life or his times or whatever, but how can you possibly argue that he's as worthy of inclusion as William Hague. He's not famous and, given the list of past presidents the Union boasts, he's decidedly second-rate. To quote the ex-President, New College, he's distinctly budget. 82.44.213.192 18:30, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
-
- Only an ignoramus would assert that Dufferin is not famous — quite aside from being Viceroy of India (!), he was the Governor General of Canada and played a very significant role in the history of Canada — you can't spit in some parts of that country without hitting something named for him. His place in history is secure, unlike Hague, who has faded permanently to the backbenches and will soon be forgotten. Besides, Dufferin's article is a featured article and well worth linking. Fawcett5 23:45, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
- The Viceroys link shows he was one of about 50+ Viceroys/Governor-Generals of India. Big deal. He is a complete nobody compared to the other people mentioned on the list. He stands out like a sore thumb since the majority of readers would never have heard of him. REMOVE 62.254.64.14 01:03, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
- As the ignoramus who claimed that Dufferin isn't famous, I stand by my point. He may be well-known in parts of Canada, but he's certainly not universally famous enough to deserve a place on that list. If you object to Hague replacing him on there (and I disagree but I'm happy to take on board other people's ideas), then I suggest removing Dufferin full stop; there's no need necessarily to replace him with someone else. Nevertheless, I really think he should go (I can't even find a portrait of him in the Union buildings, for goodness sake, whereas any ex-President judged to be notable gets a bust or a portrait). 82.44.215.251 18:21, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
It certainly seems that the above anon editors have a temporally foreshortened and geographically circumscribed notion of who and what is historically significant — what goes on in the "colonies" may well be beneath your notice, but I never suggested that Dufferin replace Hague, they can both stay here. It was someoneelse who originally replaced Dufferin with Hague. And seriously, Hague's most impressive accomplishment was to more-or-less learn to sing the Welsh national anthem. Sheesh. Fawcett5 14:15, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
- I don't understand why Dufferin counts as the next most eminent or well-known president after the ones listed? Why Dufferin in particular? I wouldn't listed have Dufferin as an especially eminent president when better known or more eminent figures such Tariq Ali, Hilaire Belloc, John Buchan, 1st Baron Tweedsmuir (well-known writer and Governor-General of Canada, George Nathaniel Curzon, 1st Marquess Curzon of Kedleston (a particularly eminent Viceroy of India), Quintin Hogg, Baron Hailsham of St Marylebone, Michael Heseltine, Anthony Hope, Henry Edward Cardinal Manning, John Allsebrook Simon, 1st Viscount Simon, F. E. Smith, 1st Earl of Birkenhead, William Temple, Jeremy Thorpe, William Waldegrave and Brian Walden aren't listed. Perhaps we should limit ourselves to famous writers, party leaders, secretaries of state, cardinals and archbishops? Alternatively we should take the approach used for the Cambridge Union Society and have a table of all the Presidents of the Union. Mpntod 15:15, July 28, 2005 (UTC)
I am now in favour of eliminating the list of well-known presidents altogether, since it has become clear that any such listing is going to be hopelessly POV-dependent. I'm in favour of creating a separate list page of the presidents in chronological order to accompany the category. Fawcett5 16:01, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
- I agree that a complete list would be helpful. But I still think it's helpful to have a list of famous presidents - since this clearly illustrates the way in which the Union has acted as a start point for notable careers. Perhaps a list of ex-President Prime Ministers and famous living ex-Presidents, since all these are likely to be recognisable and meaningful names to the bulk of people reading the article. This would leave a list of Herbert Henry Asquith, Benazir Bhutto, William Ewart Gladstone and Edward Heath as the Prime Ministers, and William Hague, Tony Benn and Boris Johnson as living ex-Presidents who are genuinely well-known today. Mpntod 18:28, July 28, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Kevin Brennan as former president
Presumably the British politician not the American comedian? How modest of him not to mention his Union presidencey on his website. Flapdragon 16:06, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Mike Dowling
I note Mike Dowling, who google informs me is the current Treasurer, made it into the article and swiftly out again. I should make it clear, should anyone look at the article history and think otherwise, that I am not he! Dowlingm 04:00, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Inclusion of Officers names
The names of Officers will now be included on the Oxford Union page, which seems entirely sensible and ought to have been instigated a long time ago. Previous attempts to stop this appear motivated by some in-fighting amongst candidates.
I beg to differ - In-fighting aside, looking at the pages of other societies of similar nature (e.g. Cambridge Union), officer names are not to be found anywhere. It is highly unlikely that any of the current officers are notable in any way at this point in their life and as such that information is irrelevant.
