Talk:Australian Research Council
Appearance
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Criticism
[edit]I moved this paragraph here
- Many Australian researchers and academics are critical of the ARC for what they perceive as its overly bureaucratic processes. Other critics, primarily those in the humanities, are critical of the ARC's emphasis on scientific projects, although the downgrading of humanities research funding appears to be a worldwide trend. There is broad support for the organisation on the basis that it has improved the public profile and accountability of research in Australia.
because it is completely unsourced. I went looking for a few news articles criticizing the ARC to back it up but I found pretty much nothing. If it is indeed the case that "Many Australian researchers" are critical of the ARC's processes it should be easy to find a source for that no?Amaher (talk) 03:13, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
Reliance on primary sources
[edit]Large sections of this article appear to be copy-pasted from the ARC website. It would be good to summarize (and perhaps shorten) to focus on the most important information, and to source more of the information from secondary sources.Mjsupina (talk) 09:23, 4 May 2020 (UTC)