Talk:Yonsei University
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Korea, a project to build and improve articles related to Korea. We invite you to join the project and contribute to the discussion. | |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the importance scale. | |
 |
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. |
Contents |
[edit] Edit war?
I don't know how "SKY" comes from. Is it Seoul, Korea and Yonsei universities?
Maybe, KU trying to boost his name by using the romancing term of SKY. Yonsei students never use the term SKY by indicating himself as the top universities in Korea. Yonsei pride himself. Although they are number 2, they work hard to cope with SNU.
What I find is KU student continually trying to use the term SKY. Shame on KU. It's because KU lacks the pride herself and hang herself the old Fame in 50s and 60s. In fact, KU is number 6th nowadays, followed by SNU, Yonsei, KAIST, Postech, and SKK in order.
@@@@@@@@@@@ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.117.212.253 (talk) 07:55, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Why do people keep deleting comments about Yonsei being one of the best in Korea? If it's someone from Korea University, I'd like it if you would take your rivalry some place else. --KJ 13:19, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
- And the same goes for people from Yonsei too. Please don't vandalize the Korea University article. --KJ 03:22, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
Cmon folks, wikipedia isn't the place for school pride. Both Yonsei and KU has some serious history and separately unique academic culture. Can somebody write about this? How about a Yonsei-KU rivalry on who has a better wikipedia page, because so far they are both hurting (although Yonsei's got the advantage with a section on some history). I'd really like to learn more about these schools than "this school is awesome, you'd better recognize.". Taco325i 00:38, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
Look up Harvard, MIT, or Caltech. Although they are more widely perceived as being extremely exclusive, articles on them do not start with their being one of the best... this is wikipedia, so let's try to make it look more like an article on it. so i moved yonsei "being the best" to its reputations section. fair enough? :) Sulrim 16:39, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] protests
Perhaps someone more knowledgable on the subject could add something about the 1988 and 1998 protests. [1] [2] Kellen T 20:55, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] history
i'm working on the history section and i wonder if it is becoming too long... maybe i should create yonsei history section separately or push the history part further back in the bottom. any ideas? Thinkinglex 17:29, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] the MOST prestigious?
Can we say that Yonsei is THE MOST prestigious private university in Korea? I mean there's the obvious rival Korea university and I believe PosTech is also private. You must provide some material that backs up this bold assertion, before writing it down as if it is fact. IMHO, I don't think Yonsei being the most prestigious should be at the beginning of this article. It doesn't really relate to what Yonsei really is; Yonsei being a Christian school is should be up there first.
I must say, all this "prestige" that Koreans persistently attrbute to their universities is really quite embarrassing. Let the facts speak for themselves. This isn't a good place for advertisement. Thinkinglex 10:32, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
I second that. Epthorn 20:58, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
The boosterism from various anonymous IP editors is just amazing. I have to agree that this is quite embarrassing. The only thing that this article has that's close to "good" is its history section. --BirdKr (talk) 22:58, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Reputation questionable
Yonsei University set up Underwood International College('UIC'). UIC have a four-year program of all-English-language classes. By providing generous scholarships and high pay, the UIC has attracted top students and faculty members from around the world, making it an academic landmark in Asia.[1]
Although the user has given a general citation of Asian universities in general, the user has not given the specific citation for UIC nor the claim that "it has attracted top students and faculty members from around the world, making it an academic landmark"
I'll try to be a bit conservative until there's actually specific citations for it. At the moment, I'm reading it as some sort of boosterism. --BirdKr (talk) 01:53, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Just I quote that passage from the article of Newsweek International.Tee2008 (talk) 09:04, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
- Citation seems solid, thanks for that link. I didn't think that quote to be actually a title, but more of a statement that was part of that article --BirdKr (talk) 09:52, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] The use of footnotes
Footnotes seems to be prevalent in trying verify or cite claims in this article. However, simply adding another claim/statement in footnotes does not verify or cite the claims or statements that require references or footnotes. Example is from editor User:Exucmember who added a footnote to Yonsei University article:
Many consider Yonsei University to be in the number two spot, above Korea University. Nevertheless, a clever acronym invented in recent years that subtly implies Korea University should have that honor is the English word "SKY", which has the first three letters of each of the top three schools, but in an order than favors Korea University over Yonsei
This is NOT a proper footnote nor is it even a reference. According to Wikipedia:Citing Sources, a footnote is:
A footnote is a note placed in the proper end section of a page to comment on a part of the main text, or to provide a reference (a source) for it. Footnotes are often used to add information that might be helpful to later fact-checkers, such as a quotation that supports your edit.
Wikipedia is not a book where writers/editors can freely add footnotes that is more of additional information than that of a citation/source/authoritative explanation. It's okay to use footnotes to insert comments, but when that comment itself seems to violate Wikipedia's policy/guidelines or require reference/footnotes of its own, we have a problem.
The problem with Exucmember's footnote is that it itself calls for a reference/source or again another footnote. The reader has nowhere to fact-check or verify the original statement and is in the same situation when trying to verify the footnote. Not to mention it reeks of NPOV and original research (who says it's an "invented clever acronym"? who says the ordering of the letters "imply" favorites?).
--BirdKr (talk) 18:45, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Organisation removed (for the moment)
I removed the following information, because such a structure is unacceptable in a Wikipedia article -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 22:54, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Major Korean Language & Literature History Philosophy Library & Information Science Psychology Chinese Language & Literature English Language & Literature German Language & Literature French Language & Literature Russian Language & Literature Major Applied Statistics Economics Major Business Administration Major Mathematics Physics Chemistry Earth System Sciences Astronomy Atmospheric Sciences Major Chemical Engineering Electrical & Electronics Engineering Architectural Engineering Civil & Environmental Engineering Urban Planning & Engineering Mechanical Engineering Metallurgical System Engineering Ceramic Engineering Computer Science Information & Industrial Engineering Major Theology Major Political Science Public Administration Mass Communication Social Welfare Sociology Cultural Anthropology Major Law
Major Church Music Vocal Music Instrumental Music Composition Major Clothing & Textile Foods & Nutrition Human Environment & Design Child & Family Studies Housing & Interior Design
Major Education Physical Education Sport & Leisure Studies Major Medicine Major Dentistry Major Nursing Major Comparative Literature and Culture Economics Political Science and International Relations International Studies Life Science and Technology Minor Korean Studies Information Technology |
|
