Talk:University of Illinois system

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Illinois This article is part of WikiProject Illinois, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Illinois on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.


I'm going to delete the redirects of the individual campus links. They deserve individual articles, like the UCs. --Jiang 22:25, 2 Oct 2003 (UTC)

This article should be at University of Illinois System. University of Illinois should be about the school in Urbana-Champaign. john k 00:35, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The University of Illinois is a system. The Chicago campus information is bare.User:chriscarlos

  • If you feel strongly about this, then move it. I've minor misgivings about doing so and won't do it myself but won't act adversely if the move occurs. Chief among my misgivings is that when I've mentioned "I went to the University of Illinois" its about 50:50 whether I'm asked if it was the Chicago campus or not. Typically when I've wanted to be clear I use the semi-official "University of Illinois at Champaign/Urbana" versus "University of Illinois at Chicago" (the other campuses never seem to come up in conversation .. I'm not even sure what they are). So my thinking is that this page should not be moved but that pages with the aforementioned names be created and material moved to them if, in fact, there is enough material to warrant a split at this time. Of course, the more technically correct version would be to move this to "University of Illinois System" and leave "University of Illinois" as a redirect to that .. I think that would be the best of the solutions. Courtland 23:42, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
  • I would have to agree with Courtland's opinion. The University of Illinois is not just one campus, so having this page redirect to the Urbana-Champaign page would not be appropriate. Thesquire 04:32, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
  • I also agree with the opinion that it shouldn't be used. People here (UIUC) do talk about ourselves as "Illinois" and "The U of I", but "UIUC" is equally common, and if someone asked me what school I attended I would not answer "The University of Illinois", I would more likely say UIUC. Agriculture 06:20, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
  • I agree that it should be moved. Three or four times, I've come across mentions of "university of Illinois" in articles, and it has always meant to refer to the Urbana campus but is redirected to the system article. The Chicago and Springfield campuses are not nearly as involved in research, etc. as Champaign is, and I have never seen a mention of either of those two campuses anywhere. The article "University of Illinois" should refer to the Champaign campus.
* No campus-specific information should be here, IMHO. As for your assertions and justifications: You do realize that UIC includes the large majority of the U of I medical school, don't you? Thus a claim of 'not nearly as involved in research' is false. And while UIS is intended to be a liberal arts college (a la U of Minnesota - Morris), that doesn't mean it deserves to be forgotten or smothered under some inaccurate semantic blanket. UIUC, UIC, and UIS -- with med college extensions at Peoria and Rockford and a nursing college extension at Quad Cities -- comprise a system. Our purpose here is to stick to the facts as they are, not as we prefer them to be. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.135.149.54 (talk) 15:29, 12 March 2008 (UTC)


Contents

[edit] So that's all?!? CERTAINLY NOT!!!

Is there not any controversy on campus? Do we not have issues with our mascot? Do we not make lots of engineers which help create weapons of mass destruction as well as ones that are researching hydrogen technology? I feel our 'knowledge' about the university which we present ourselves to the world is limited and must be improved! (Note the above comment is from 69.214.224.60)

User at IP:69.214.224.60, POV additions are not part of what Wikipedia is about, take your political diatribe elsewhere. Agriculture 20:26, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Cushing Vandal?

There has been a persistent vandal over the past few weeks that has twice now removed the Tim Cushing entry under Notable Alumni, and also blanked the entire Cushing page. I have no clue who Cushing is, but the fact that his individual entry was vandalized both times says these edits were abusive. Just something to keep an eye out for. eaolson 15:42, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

  • The Tim Cushing page appears to have been a hoax. Perhaps this is why it kept getting removed from the page. (This is why you should fill out the Edit Summary, people!). The Cushing page has since been deleted. See Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Tim_Cushing. I have no objection to this entire talk section being deleted. eaolson 03:31, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
  • There is also a persistant vandal, 68.77.29.155, who likes to blank large sections of text and replace it with all-caps lines like "OWNED" and references to bodily functions. Checking the page frequently to keep him from altering the page terribly much would not be out of line. Thesquire 13:07, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
As a note, this vandal has recently started posting under 68.77.159.55. Thesquire 18:36, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Also, there is a large section of text missing from the UIUC section of the article. Was this removed for a reason, or should it be considered yet another instance of vandalism and be restored? Thesquire 13:07, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
That segment got lost a few edits ago, when someone cleaned up after the vandal. It's back now. eaolson 18:07, 20 August 2005 (UTC)


[edit] The Chief

I do not know many details on this, but as of now, the chief is gone. -Masterkilla

He's not gone, unfortunately. Please see the Chief Illiniwek article for more information. Oh, and please sign your posts properly with four tildes (~~~~). -- Thesquire (talk - contribs) 23:10, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

</nowiki>

I'm pretty sure he is, I read the article on the Daily Illini (U of I newspaper) a week or so ago. Thanks for the tip on signing my writings. The Grim Reaper 22:23, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
He's not, the BoT has done nothing in response to the NCAA's ban - what you were reading about in the Daily Illini was merely the effects of the ban on the Tennis team. -- Thesquire (talk - contribs) 22:59, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
If he was not gone before, he is gone now. An unnamed university official has confirmed that Chief Illiniwek will be dropped after the end of this academic year. Chiwara 21:44, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
Recent statements by the university say that they have not made any decisions yet - as noted in the Chief Illiniwek article. Until you can cite your sources, you can't back it up, so your claim won't go in the article. -- Thesquire (talk - contribs) 22:17, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't feel like changing it myself, but UIUC is NOT the birth place of the first LED. Nick Holonyak, Jr., currently a professor at UIUC, invented that in 1962 at General Electric. Also, it is most proper to note that he created the first *visible* LED; three people independently arrived at the LED at around the same time. While the others were slightly earlier than Holonyak's, they were all infra-red. Nick was my undergrad advisor, but I think a simple google search will confirm all of this.

Holonyak has been credited with inventing the LED-- check his own article for many sources for this: Nick Holonyak. While it's true that he wasn't at UIUC when he did it, he was there before (as a doctoral student of John Bardeen's and after, as a professor. It's understandable where the confusion stems from.--Gloriamarie 21:37, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:University of Illinois.jpg

Image:University of Illinois.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:04, 26 November 2007 (UTC)