Talk:Keble College, Oxford

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A mortarboard This article is part of WikiProject Universities, an attempt to standardise coverage of universities and colleges. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this notice, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
WikiProject University of Oxford This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Oxford, which collaborates on articles related to the University of Oxford.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
Top This article is on a subject of top importance within University of Oxford.
Comments:

Contents

[edit] College templates

I have created a series of templates for former students of Oxford's various colleges. There are still plenty to do, but if you want to add one of the templates to your user page then feel free. See Wikipedia:Userboxes/Education/United Kingdom/University of Oxford for complete list. Please contact me if you would like another college fast-tracked... Image:Anglo-indian.jpg Deano 18:17, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Timmy Mallett

Why has Timmy Mallett been removed from the list of famous former students?

For exactly the reasons given when you asked this question on my Talk page, and which is being discussed at User talk:Njd123. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 22:29, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
AAARRGGH!!!! He never went there! Robsteadman 07:21, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

As a Keble alumnus I logged onto the Keble almnus website and did a search. TM appears nowhere. He did NOT attend Keble. Robsteadman 19:31, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Monty Python/cultural references

It may simply because I am of a different generation, but I do not understand why Mel Etitis would choose to remove the fact that Keble is mentioned in a Monty Python sketch, but not in a John Betjeman poem. This is simply a value judgment that the television comedy of Monty Python is of less cultural importance than poetry by Sir John. This is not justified. The reputation of Monty Python needs no explanation - it is of such importance in modern popular culture that "Pythonesque" is a recognised term (I wouldn't be surprised if it had made it into the OED). Both Python and Betjeman are well established in the upper reaches of the canons of their respective fields. In fact, I think it is highly likely that the Travel Agent sketch has been seen or heard and enjoyed by more alive in the world than the poem concerned.

Removing the reference to a monumentally important television comedy series, but not to a Betjeman poem, perpetuates the culturally conservative view that "good poetry" is more deserving of artistic merit than "good television". This is not what Wikipedia is all about - the Wikipedia project is about the move away from the staid approach of dusty old Encyclopaedia Brittanias to a knowledge base that reflects what is important to the people.

As a compromise, I have moved the references to a new section entitled "Keble and the arts". If this is not satisfactory, then perhaps both references should be removed.

--Gianniv45 22:22, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

As a short addendum, try searching for "Myfanwy at Oxford" in Google. 81 hits. Contrast +"Monty Python" +"Travel Agent". 24,800 hits. This is of course a very crude measure (albeit one often cited in AFD discussions), but surely this puts the issue to rest?

--Gianniv45 22:33, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

It's nothing to do with generations (I am precisely of the Monty Python generation, in fact); it's because the Betjeman refernce is to a poem that mentions the college, while the Python sketch merely uses the name because it begins with the correct letters. The former is relevant, the latter isn't. The relative importance of Betjeman and Python isn't the point — it's the nature of the reference; a poem by a minor poet would be relevant, whereas an irrelevant use of the name by the most prestigious person you can think of wouldn't belong here. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 08:29, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
With respect, I simply don't agree with the distinction you are making. I think a prominent mention in an important work should be recognised irrespective of the reason for its inclusion. And even if I were to accept the distinction, the reference in the poem is fleeting, coming in the last of the six verses:

Her Myfanwy? My Myfanwy.

Bicycle bells in a Boar's Hill Pine,

Stedman Triple from All Saints' steeple,

Tom and his hundred and one at nine,

Bells of Butterfield, caught in Keble,

Sally and backstroke answer ["] Mine! ["]

Arguably, Keble is only included because it almost-rhymes with "steeple" and so is hardly different from being chosen because it has the "correct letters". He probably just liked the sound of the word.
Note that the Wikipedia page for St Hilda's (which is also mentioned), does not have a reference. As I said, in any event I cannot agree with your reasoning. I will be removing the reference to the Betjeman poem. If anyone puts it back in I would ask them to also include the Python reference.

--Gianniv45 10:19, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Again, it's about Keble, in the context of Oxford; it's not the mere use of the name in order to play with the letter. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 13:07, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
I'm sorry if you think I have been uncivil or not followed the correct procedures. I have tried to make my point simply and clearly.
Ultimately - the Betjeman reference is trivium. The Python reference is trivium. Many established wikipedia pages contain interesting trivia alongside more "important" information (there is clearly a distinction between a page about a trivial subject, and trivia contained on a page which is not about a trivial subject). I think the information about Betjeman and Python will be interesting to potential students, alumni like myself (ourselves?) and anyone who takes interest in the college. Doubtless there are many other artistic works referring to Keble in some shape or form and I would be all for those references being included.
I am happy to submit this to arbitration but I would much rather resolve this issue between us amicably. It has to be both or nothing - unless you can suggest another compromise. I favour including both, in a separate section. It shouldn't be in the main section in any event.
I won't amend the page at this stage from your latest revert as I don't want to irritate further, but I would appreciate it if you would consider the above and respond.

--Gianniv45 17:43, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

One problem is that you're laying down an ultimatum: "It has to be both or nothing". No, it can be one. There is a clear distinction between a reference that is about the College, and one that merely mentions the name. It may well be that the Python reference would be of interest to potential students (though I can't think why); you might, therefore, campaign to get it added to the College website, or to literature aimed at candidates.
That the poet laureate – a man intersted in architecture, and a champion of 19th-century architecture in particular – in a poem about Oxford refers to Keble and to its 19-th century architect is of some interest (not much, but some). To include the Python sketch, on the other hand, makes as much sense as including a reference to the Revd Spooner in the article on Worms, or Taste.
In answer to your implied question, incidentally, my own College is Brasenose, though I teach regularly for Keble. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 20:14, 20 April 2006 (UTC)


OK. I understand what you are saying but I take the more simplistic view that interesting trivia is interesting trivia. Both items are interesting trivia. In applying your policy we might want to remove the reference to the warden being made a Dame - that is not "about the College", it is about herself and her academic achievements.
Since no one else has got involved in this debate, I'm going to ask for this to be mediated. My fear is that the outcome will be that the recommendation is that both items are removed. On the other hand, I really don't see the harm in including both references or indeed, any obvious breach of Wikipedia policy. --Gianniv45 09:44, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
If King's College, Cambridge had been the device in the joke, would you feel it's inclusion in that article appropriate? I also see no reason for an 'either...or' here, I'm certainly in no rush. --Alf melmac 10:07, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
My point was only, "if Betjeman, why not Python". I'm not interested in King's College, Cambridge - I wasn't a student there - but if I was I would object in the same terms to a reference to a poem in which it featured without a reference to Python sketch it featured in. I've decided not to pursue my objection, although I do feel the Betjeman reference should be moved to a "trivia" section on this page.
On another note (and I appreciate this isn't the place to ask), what is the wikipedia word for a self-indulgent entry on a page (as recently appeared for "Steamers", which I have removed)? My wikivocab isn't up to scratch. Mel Etitis, you must know! --Gianniv45 21:36, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Are you sure it was Steamers? I can't find an edit by you in the history. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 13:47, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Ah, I see — you emant a section in this article. I'd call that vanity, or puffery (the former's the more common Wikipedia term). --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 14:32, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Steamers/Octavias

Steamers and Octavias are drinking societies of which only a small fraction of the college are members, so they can hardly be considered to spearhead a vibrant social life. Perhaps a reference to music, open mic nights (if they are still happening), the theatre or just the JCR and MCR would be more suitable, or just cut the section entirely. I've already cut the section once but it has been restored. Perhaps we could come to some kind of consensus on this? -- Jolly Green Giant 20:41, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Keble dinosaurs and lav wall humour

Keble was famous, if only locally, for the dinosaurs painted on its back wall in Blackhall Road, near the junction with Keble Road. In 1974 there was only one, but by 1984, there were two. The 1974 (original?) dinosaur was white and bore the legend “Remember what happened to the dinosaur!”. The second dinosaur was blue and bore the legend “I did, and look what happened to me.”. The message of the first one is clear, though I’ll have to invite others to explain the second one.

I have a photograph of each, taken in August 1984. The copyright is an interesting issue – I’m happy to let my photos into the public domain, but who was the artist who painted the pictures? The white dinosaur bears the initials KPG, so maybe we need this person’s permission to use my photos? The blue dinosaur does not have a signature.

I have no idea of the history of the dinosaurs or what’s happened to them of late.

The dinosaurs are both still there. The story of them that I heard was that the original was removed soon after it was first painted, but had reappeared by the next morning so it was left and became the well-known feature, with the later blue one turning up some time later sjwk 22:41, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

The White Dinosaur

The Blue Dinosaur

Was there or was there not some lavatory wall graffiti to the effect that it’s better “not to think of it as an Oxford college, more as a fair-isle sweater” – a reference to the pattern of the brickwork. JohnGU47 18:31, 10 October 2006 (UTC) 10th October 2006

I think rather than graffiti, it was a quote from a prominent person at the time of building. The only hit I've got while searching is that it was Ruskin who called it a dinosaur in a fair isle sweater. sjwk 21:39, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] College Life/Buildings

I have a bit of an issue with the sentence "This reverses a trend of the early 1990s when the number of rooms on campus was reduced in order to make conversions into en suite rooms, making them more attractive to conference delegates." and am thinking of revising it unless anyone has any objections, and expanding to include more information about the Acland site. Specifically:

  • It (and the previous sentence) probably belong more in the Buildings section than College Life?
  • It seems a bit biased and could probably lose the conference delegates reference (which originally did continue on for another sentence but was removed). I think that converting rooms to en-suite was probably just as beneficial to students who now have private bathrooms rather than have to traipse to a shared toilet. (perhaps there should be a brief section about the College's conference business too, if people do want it highlighted?)
  • Can anyone cite a reference about the reduction of number of rooms? As far as I am aware (and I was there at the time), that's not true - virtually all rooms had a small study sub-room, and this is what became the en-suite bathroom, moving the desk into the larger main room. In fact, because there was no need for the shared bathrooms, these were turned into extra (small) bedrooms and store rooms so the number probably increased by a few.

sjwk 21:39, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I'd have no problem losing it altogether, it gives me no architectural information and has little or no relevance to culture. It's now pretty standard for colleges to make conversions to en-suites, where they can, on a routine basis. The benefits to both are probably a factor, but I'm not sure any of that is worth mentioning.--Alf melmac 21:52, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
I have now removed that bit and added a chunk into Buildings about the purchase of the Acland and the sale of the assorted College-owned houses. sjwk 17:20, 10 May 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Geoffrey Rowell

Geoffrey Rowell did his undergraduate degree at Corpus Christi College, Cambridge. He was a tutor at Keble in the seventies. Does this make him a Keble almnus? Millbanks 10:23, 7 August 2007 (UTC)