Talk:List of universities in the United Kingdom

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.
List This article has been rated as List-Class on the quality scale.


Contents

[edit] Earliest possible date of foundation

I think this list would benefit from an additional column citing earliest date of foundation/teaching, as in many institutions these preceed charters by 150 years. Any objections. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 2008universities (talk • contribs) 10:53, 16 March 2008 (UTC)


Original data taken from http://www.scit.wlv.ac.uk/ukinfo/alpha.html, and http://www.niss.ac.uk/sites/he-cis.html

---

Three points:

1) I feel institutions be removed when they no longer exist (e.g. University of North London and London Guildhall)

2) Non-university institutions could be included, but they should they be listed seperately from the universities

3) There be a seperate sub-section for London, as for Wales and Scotland - there is certainly the number of institutions to support this.

Robminchin 12:27, 13 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Can I suggest that the University of London have a specific heading - there are many instutions within it and it would be logical to group them all together.

[edit] Bit of an overhaul

I've made a few changes, which make this page a lot more useful:

  • The divisions between England, London, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland has been removed; this is a list ordered by name, not location (if someone knows that there is a university called Robert Gordon, but only know that it is somewhere in the UK, it is a lot easier to search one list, not five)
  • The abbreviations have been removed; they were of no use and only made the page messy
  • The rule that locations are only given when it is not obvious from the title is now much more consistantly applied
  • The list of colleges that may/may not have been parts of the University of London and no-one's sure if they still are (or if they even exist) has been removed; they can be added back when someone clears up their status
I wonder if there's any value in having both systems - i.e. have a short list or another page highlighting the Scottish ones? There are some fundamental differences in their constitutions and (more relevant) in their funding structures and people might want to search just among SHEFC-funded institutions for example? [Last paragraph added by Kierant 14:09, 13 November 2005 (UTC) ]

[edit] Defunct institutions

This list will need some hard rules because it's not always clear what the difference is between two institutions merging and one institution absorbing another (and often the two terms are used interchangeably throughout the process depending upon one's institution and attitude to it). Does anyone feel brave enough to define the difference, and thus when we should include an institution on the defunct list even if there's a current one using the name (e.g. "University of Manchester")? Timrollpickering 20:40, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I'd say the easiest way is this: if two institutions merge to form an new one with a completely new name (like London Guildhall University and the University of North London merging to form London Metropolitan University) then the two institutions that merged get listed. If two institutions merge and they keep the name of one of the institutions (like Cardiff University and the University of Wales College of Medicine merging with the resulting institution being called Cardiff University) then that counts as Cardiff University absorbing the University of Wales College of Medicine and only the latter should be listed as defunct.
The Manchester issue is a bit unique because the two institutions merging are the Victoria University of Manchester and UMIST to form the University of Manchester. Slightly confusing as the Victoria University of Manchester was commonly known as the University of Manchester, but that fact is made clear in the relevant articles.
Personally, I'm not too sure if this page should list what the defunct are now part of, as this is just an index and the individual articles can do that. That said, I'll fill in the gaps in a minute. - 62.64.202.243 00:59, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Hmm - the thing with Manchester is that the "Victoria" bit of the pre August 2004 University of Manchester was very much a historic title which seems to have only been revived in popular use for the purposes of a) disambiguation and b) helping to make the merger look less like a takeover (the outgoing VC of the (V)UofM once explained to me that the way to do a successful merger is to ensure that nobody thinks their institution is being taken over). There are some other cases where either a new name is used but with not much other discernable change or an institution's name change coincides with further ventures - is the University of Kent a new institution to distinguish it from the pre Medway campus University of Kent at Canterbury?
On the names I think it's worth including the information so at a glance people can tell where an institution is now. Timrollpickering 08:50, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Well the Manchester merger is a special case, but listing Victoria and UMIST in the defunct section with Manchester in the main list seems to work, so it may as well stay like that. I don't know anything about exactly how the merger/takeover is being done, but it is worth remembering that both institutions had the text 'University of Manchester' in their titles. As for Kent, that was just a simple name change and therefore it shouldn't be listed (as stated) though obviously the at Canterbury page should redirect to Kent and the former name should be mentioned on the page (as is the case). While the name change was due to the Medway campus, they had had it for quite a while before they actually changed the name. - 62.64.141.46 13:23, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)
PS - The Manchester merger does not take place until October 1st
Ah mea misinformeda - I thought it was August 1st. The Kent example (taken as the first one I could think of, being a Kent double alumnus) was staggered - at the time the Medway perations were brought in I remember it was always the clear intention to rebrand the University to "University of Kent" and switch from "UKC" to "Kent" as the abbreviation/website URL but this wasn't something they felt they could pull of overnight - but most definitely an example of the University's name changing because of a merger/expansion/takeover.
I also wonder how the various University of London colleges would fare - several seem to be merging/absorbing another institution every second week and changing the name in the other week! Timrollpickering 18:48, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)
The Kent name change was one of several which I understood at the time were part of a (co-ordinated?) attempt to clear up confusions caused by the Polytechnics becoming Unis in 1992 (and some would argue to help the Unis with their marketing, too.) For example, "The University of Sussex" became "The University of Sussex at Brighton" when Brighton Polytechnic became "The University of Brighton" even though The University of Sussex is physically outside Brighton and had a well-established name. This may all just have been conjecture at the time, but I throw it in to see if anybody knows for sure :) Kierant 14:09, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
The University of Kent name was absolutely nothing to do with any 'co-ordinated attempt' (I've never heard of such a thing and Kent has never been anything to do with a polytechnic). As the university was no longer located solely in Canterbury they changed the name from the University of Kent at Canterbury to just the University of Kent. This was done entirely off their own backs and was not part of any other larger effort. - Green Tentacle 19:06, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
I've never claimed it was part of a polytechnic – the point above is about marketing. Do you have any kind of reference (beyond "I've never heard of such a thing") or is this just conjecture? (My point was just conjecture too, I know; but the reason for posting it was to seek facts, not arguments!) – Kieran T (talk | contribs) 19:30, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
And I never claimed you said it was part of a polytechnic! I have no idea if there was any coordinated effort or not, but given how protective universities are over their own branding, I find it unlikely. However, I do know (from my brother who was a student there at the time of the name change) that Kent's name change was entirely their own decision and that they did all the leg work (they had to get an act of parliament through to get the name changed legally). - Green Tentacle 20:35, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
"University of Kent at Canterbury" was originally a product of the campus straddling the boundary between Canterbury (a county borough) and Kent County Council's jurisdiction - hence in the early 1960s both town and county wanted to claim the name, whilst the University of Canterbury didn't want another with the same name in the Commonwealth. But within ten years the local government map was redrawn. Incidentally the "well it's no longer just 'at Canterbury'" reasoning for the name change was a bit strange as there were some local courses taught in Chatham for several years before the Medway campus was set up and people started talking about name changes. Timrollpickering 16:48, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sussex University

Not for the first time, I've reverted the location of Sussex University from "Falmer" to "Falmer, Brighton". The rationale for this takes in several points:

  • "Falmer" is no longer in the official address (so far as official University publications are concerned; they use the "post town", "Brighton") but just putting "Brighton" in this context would imply that the institution is within the town (city) itself, which is a bit misleading
  • Brighton is a better-known (much larger) place and more useful to readers

In fact I'd prefer it to say "Falmer, East Sussex", for clarity since there is a county of West Sussex, and this is an interesting anomaly in the sense that the University doesn't take it's county name. But the county was removed some time ago after the article cleanup which removed counties from all the listed institutions, so I haven't breached the consensus by returning that, and "Falmer, Brighton" (which implies Falmer, in the post town of Brighton, rather than anything else) seems a reasonable compromise to benefit readers. – Kieran T (talk | contribs) 18:54, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Sadly another user (Green Tentacle) has just reverted again without joining the discussion here. But I don't wish to get into a revert war... So, does anybody else care enough to have a straw poll? I'd suggest there are several possible "right" versions:
  • Falmer – the village adjacent to the University (and often said to be "where the University is")
  • Brighton – the University uses this in its own materials, and it's the post town in the address
  • "Falmer, Brighton" – the proper postal address
  • East Sussex – which covers the "which county is it named for" point
  • Stanmer – not as left-field as it sounds: the campus was built in Stanmer Park, on the Stanmer estate, and not in fact "in" Falmer (in 1961)
Sadly, another user (Kierant) has posted on the talk page to justify his changes without alerting anyone to it in the article's edit history. I made my changes without knowing that the discussion on this page existed (though I did see it after I had made the change). I do not appreciate being accussed of deliberately ignoring a discussion when I did not know it existed. - Green Tentacle 20:35, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Well, looks like we've just had a communications breakdown and I apologise unreservedly for my part in that. I had felt your comments in the edit summaries were somewhat brusque, and combined with your choice not to bring the matter here before reverting, that's what tested my ability to assume good faith. But since it seems I read them wrongly, then again I apologise.
Now, if we can get over that, and back to the point; if you think I'm wrong about the name, which I presume you do given our edits, would you please explain your views and reasons for the reversion? I'd really like us to get to a form of words which is both accurate and helpful. – Kieran T (talk | contribs) 20:44, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Apology accepted. The reason that it should just say 'Falmer' is that it follows the convention of the page: if a university's location is obvious from its title (like the University of Liverpool), then it doesn't need its location adding; if it is not obvious (Robert Gordon University), blatently lies (University of Warwick, which is actually in Coventry) or names an area, rather than a place (University of Sussex) then it needs the location adding. The location should simply be the nearest physical place, be it a city/town/village. The university's wants should be ignored because for every University of Sussex that wants to be in Brighton, there is a Keele University that would hate to be considered to be in Stoke. - Green Tentacle 21:27, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks :-) A good point about a university's "wants". I agree we shouldn't be stating "facts" which are really a marketing campaign. But I'm still not convinced we've got this one right. "Nearest physical place" doesn't narrow down what the scope of "place" needs to be. Since the University itself has stopped saying it's in Falmer (see their address on their website), and since Falmer – though a civil parish in its own right – is a council ward of the city of Brighton and Hove, and since the university campus was built in Stanmer Park (not "Falmer Park") I feel it's only right to continue to try to answer the question: is the University of Sussex really in Falmer at all? I'm not convinced that we've seen any real evidence that it is, yet, beyond the original research inherent in the fact that it's widely regarded as being the case. Obviously, I'm happy to be persuaded when we do get some evidence. – Kieran T (talk | contribs) 14:12, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
List of UK universities by size supports the "Brighton and Hove" version. Whatever the answer, the articles should be consistent with one another. 195.72.130.75 14:39, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Multi-center universities

Several universities, such as University of Wales, have self-contained campuses in multiple towns and cities, each with their own sub-entry in this list. University of the Arts London and University of London have dozens of institutions all in the same (admittedly very large) city. So, why were the four centers of University of Ulster deleted twice? Could we discuss a rules that various editors can apply consistently, please? --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 19:58, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

It's because Ulster's campuses are just that - campuses - and each campus is not listed separately (if they were, the list would be huge). Wales, London and the University of the Arts get multiple entries because each sub-entry is a separate (and autonomous) institution that makes up part a federal university. - Green Tentacle 22:49, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] University College Birmingham

Birmingham College of Food appears to have gained "university status" in the last few days. I'm wary of making changes here in case I infringe some unwritten understanding in these matters. Please advise or enhance. Many thanks Quartic (talk) 20:08, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

I have made the change, but note that "University College Birmingham" is a University College, not a full University. There is already a section for University Colleges in this list, and I have entered UCB there. ThomasL (talk) 21:44, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the lesson in what to do! Kind regards. Quartic (talk) 11:50, 8 January 2008 (UTC)