Talk:University of Leeds

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.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Yorkshire
Portal
University of Leeds is within the scope of WikiProject Yorkshire, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Yorkshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project, see a list of open tasks, and join in discussions on the project's talk page.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's assessment scale.
See comments for details.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-Priority on the Project's priority scale.

Contents

[edit] Category?

Wondering if there is a need for Category:University of Leeds? --Salix alba (talk) 09:54, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

There is Category:University of Leeds alumni for graduates. —Whouk (talk) 10:23, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
Category:University of Leeds now exists. --Salix alba (talk) 11:23, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Saint marks residences

This article should be cleaned up and merged here. Hall articles have to be well written to be saved from deletion. They have to show notability. --Bduke 01:37, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

  • The clock is ticking, 83 hours before delation (unless someone removes the prod tag). Not convinced its even notable enough to be listed on main page. --Salix alba (talk) 02:20, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
    • I don't see any reason why this article should be merged into the main University of Leeds article. And if it is, every major residence should be mentioned alongside it. At the moment only Bodington (the largest) is mentioned. If that and Saint Marks were mentioned, the residences would be unfairly represented. So no merge unless you can detail all the major residences also. Mushintalk 12:55, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
Yes - there may be a case for listing the major halls of residence in this article but probably not in any great detail, and the separate article is certainly unwarranted. —Whouk (talk) 13:00, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Who

I think something about "Live at Leeds" should be mentioned in the article. I mean, the university was the place where, arguably, the greatest live rock album ever was produced.

[edit] Cognition

Might someone give me a lead for names of researchers in the Engineering departments at Leeds? In the 1980s, Electronic Engineering Times published an article about un-named researcher(s) who hypothesised that Cognition is a form of compression. I believe that enough time has passed to merit recognition for the researcher who had this insight. --Ancheta Wis 10:44, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Location

I've deleted the first four paragraphs of the location part of the article as they were just about Leeds and had nothing to do with the University Dupont Circle 20:53, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] University ratings

(I'm posting this to all articles on UK universities as so far discussion hasn't really taken off on Wikipedia:WikiProject Universities.)

There needs to be a broader convention about which university rankings to include in articles. Currently it seems most pages are listing primarily those that show the institution at its best (or worst in a few cases). See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Universities#University ratings. Timrollpickering 23:44, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

You're right that it would improve Wikipedia to have some consistency about this. I suspect it may be difficult to get editors to stop listing others as well though - the nature of volunteer editing makes it much more likely that you'll get partisans editing articles, and there are legitimate reasons for quoting rankings where a university stands out for good or bad. Perhaps picking a few rankings that get quoted on all the UK university articles and then encourage editors to also quote rankings that show something remarkable (any "top ten" or "bottom three" position in a reasonably well heard of guide perhaps?). Not all the universities are trying to do the same thing, and highest and lowest positions in more specialized rankings aren't necessarily unimportant just because the ranking isn't important for all universities. The Times Higher Education Supplement rankings would seem to be a must use. Quoting for within the UK for all universities and world rankings for those in, say, the top 250 worldwide. Not sure which other rankings would be appropriate UK wide. -- Siobhan Hansa 03:37, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] People split

I think it would be a good idea to split off the notable people section as the list is becoming a bit big for the article, and I'm sure there are other people who could be added to the list. This has occurred in other articles so it wouldn't be unusual. I'll go through with it unless anyone has any objections. Cheers, mattbr30 00:39, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

I think that's a great idea. -- Siobhan Hansa 15:18, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Not so sure, you search in Leeds uni for alumni, splitting it is unnecessary complication, each of the people have their own articles anyway. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.22.71.52 (talk) 20:17, 13 January 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Muslim prayer room

Sorry if I am being dim - what's the importance? --129.11.77.197 16:55, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I think it's notable for the amount of money that was wasted on it... 81.97.207.151 16:16, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Logo

I have replaced the logo in the article, to accurately reflect the design guidelines of the university. Specifically, the logo must not appear in its own bounding box, and should instead appear directly on top of the page background. I have therefore changed it to a black vector logo with a transparent background, instead of the beige box it used previously. I have also added a fair use rationale to the image. Thanks Papa November (talk) 10:37, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merge of University of Leeds Conference Auditorium

I see this has been proposed and I strongly support it. This article is not notable as a stand-alone article. --Bduke (talk) 22:17, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

  • merge: I agree that the conference auditorium is probably not notable in its own right. As far as I'm aware, it hasn't been the subject of multiple non-trivial independent publications. Papa November (talk) 22:27, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Personally I dont think there even needs to be any mention of it. ~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.11.80.229 (talk) 23:01, 20 May 2008 (UTC)