Jump to content

Talk:Open University

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Open university)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:22, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The

[edit]

I was prompted to open this discussion thread by the recent edits of ZeroAlpha87 at Chris Whitty, here and here. Looking at the "Alma mater" in the info boxes for those people listed at Category:Alumni of the Open University, there seems to be a rather random split between those which use Open University (as per the current title here) and those which use The Open University (as per the opening line here). Which is correct? Should this article be moved to The Open University? Do we need a WP:RM to do so? I see this subject was very briefly raised, in the thread at the top of this page, in 2018. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:10, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a look back in the archives, this is a perennial and sometimes "vigorous" debate. So yes, it would certainly need a formal RM.
FWIW, the formal name of the institution, per its charter, is "The Open University" (1    There shall be and is hereby constituted and founded a University with the name and style of "The Open University".) --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 11:20, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There is in fact an official guideline that appears to cover this point. See WP:THE, especially under the sub-head, "Names of groups, sports teams and companies". On that basis, it would seem to be correct to include the "The". Mike Marchmont (talk) 11:51, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, we also have The Times and The New York Times (although also just Daily Mail and Daily Mirror). The logo for The Open University, which appears in the infobox, is also a bit of a giveaway? Martinevans123 (talk) 12:45, 24 December 2023 (UTC) p.s. I looked at List of universities in the United Kingdom and this would be the only one beginning with "The"? But not sure that matters.[reply]
Regarding The Times, this is specifically covered in Hart's Rules: Names of periodicals: apparent inconsistency is often caused by the prefix The ... As a rule, print the definite article in Roman lower case, as the Daily Telegraph, the Daily Express. The Times and The Economist are exceptions, as those publications prefer to have it so. This is not completely relevant to The Open University, but is worth noting. Mike Marchmont (talk) 13:32, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Or even The Daily Telegraph? lol. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:43, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [reply]
Within the article 'List of universities in the United Kingdom', there is also 'University of Manchester', despite its, too, having 'The' in its logo. I tried to request a move, but it would not let me. There might well be others, some of which are harder to determine without visiting the institutions' websites to see how they style themselves. I studied at the University of Birmingham, which, until the year before I enrolled, had been 'The University of Birmingham'; in other words, some organisations do purposefully remove 'The' from their official names, but it looks as though The Open University and The University of Manchester have not (so far). ZeroAlpha87 (talk) 13:59, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for those details. I had no idea. Maybe there are others? Martinevans123 (talk) 14:26, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As you say, there may also be a case for moving to The University of Manchester, although their logo is quite a fancy one. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:41, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In speech, I have never heard anyone say "graduated from Open University", it is invariably "graduated from The Open University". Of course one can't tell the capitalisation from speech but the "the" is always there. Perhaps it is because Open is not a geographical descriptor. I think it should have "The" added. Philafrenzy (talk) 10:09, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Philafrenzy is correct, but it does not get us very far. People would also say "graduated from the University of Oxford", and our article is entitled University of Oxford. And people would say "has an Open University degree". No one would say "has a the Open University degree". As a slightly relevant aside, Ohio State University appears to want to be called "The Ohio State University", yet so renaming our article has not happened, per Talk:Ohio State University/Archive 1. Edwardx (talk) 12:06, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, but as a native English speaker on seeing the article it just strikes me as wrong without the The. I suspect you agree. That is a good test. Philafrenzy (talk) 12:09, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. For what it's worth, their current radio advertising ends with the slogan or strapline "The Open University: The future's open". Philafrenzy (talk) 12:20, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I don't have a strong view either way on this. Edwardx (talk) 13:45, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Now listed at WP:RM. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:04, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 27 December 2023

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Bensci54 (talk) 18:00, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Open University → The Open University – this is what it calls itself Martinevans123 (talk) 13:02, 27 December 2023 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (permalink). Martinevans123 (talk) 13:54, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Aren't you the nominator? Nominators do not ordinarily feel the need to express support for their own proposals. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 02:52, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Would you prefer me to remove this section or strike it through? Martinevans123 (talk) 16:49, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Struck through. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 17:11, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I thought I had to do that, as it was my edit? If you think that comment has, or will, unduly influence the outcome of this request, perhaps you'd like me to scrap this one and start afresh? But I guess we'd have to ask all the other contributors first? Martinevans123 (talk) 17:22, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Feel free to do what you want, but at this point, probably no one cares much and no one will be unduly influenced or confused. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 17:37, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks so much for that inspiring vote of confidence in our wonderful processes. But I'd be surprised if absolutely no one here cares. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:48, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You're probably well aware that Wikipedia policies and guidelines disagree with that opinion. (I'm not saying I oppose the move; I'm just saying that this particular rationale is not appropriate – at least not without a major change of Wikipedia policies.) —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 02:50, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I reject your vaguewave attempt at procedural rules to eliminate an argument. Note, as just mentioned below, I mean to distinguish existing proper names from branding. SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:54, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Rationale and alignment with article content

[edit]

What was the rationale for this close decision? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:04, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arguments for Oppose were based in policy, chiefly WP:THE. Arguments for Support were not based in policy i.e."it just looks wrong". Concerns about WP:OFFICALNAME were raised but evidence was provided that the university does not universally refer to itself with the The. Bensci54 (talk) 19:19, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So this page, where it says "You can also search for OpenLearn courses associated with an Open University course... " (and two similar instances) is evidence that it calls itself just "Open University"? Would you really expect it to say, "You can also search for OpenLearn courses associated with an the Open University course... "? All the other seven instances on that page are "The Open University"? That invented reason doesn't look a very strong one to me. And WP:THE says this under "Universities": "A definite article should be applied only if The is used in running text throughout university materials and if that usage has caught on elsewhere." Again, that word "throughout" seems a bit clumsy. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:42, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Classic case of making the wrong decision based on Wikipedia policy. And it still looks wrong. No British person ever called it just Open University, it is always The Open University. Philafrenzy (talk) 23:15, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think you are right. Nobody in the UK would call it "Open University" (or if they did, you'd assume they'd just been reading Wikipedia). Martinevans123 (talk) 08:20, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No British person ever called it just Open University. Patently ridiculous argument. You could say that about any university (or pretty much any other institution) in the world. I studied at University of Sheffield. No, I didn't. I studied at the University of Sheffield. I worked at BBC. No I didn't, I worked at the BBC. I served in British Army. No, I didn't. I served in the British Army. Are you suggesting we add the definite article to every single one? Because it "looks wrong"? -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:22, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure this would be the appropriate page for such a request. Quite a lot of separate pages, I suspect. "He studied at the King's College, Cambridge"? Martinevans123 (talk) 14:35, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Reminds me of Captain Tom Moore (common name) which I created and which went through various names based on Wikipedia naming policies before ending up back at Captain Tom Moore. Philafrenzy (talk) 10:13, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Then again we have University of Cambridge. But nobody ever says "He studied at University of Cambridge" (although they might well say "He studied at King's College, Cambridge"). Maybe that's why the article begins with the word "The"? Martinevans123 (talk) 11:42, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We are still left with an inconsistency between "The" in the infobox, the opening sentence, and throughout the article, and no "The" in the article name. So we may continue to see edits like this one. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:09, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We shouldn't need to see edits like that one for very long, because edits like that one shouldn't be reverted. Somebody reverted that one. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 18:38, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Happy reverting! Martinevans123 (talk) 18:44, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We can't get away from the fact that the name in the charter is "The Open University" and mostly the university uses that style in its communications unless it would be awkward to do so. Wikipedia has its own manual of style and isn't bound by any other, but neither should we deliberately give false information. So the Wikipedia article name can omit the The but the infobox and lead should not. It would be illiterate. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 21:00, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:04, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure I understand the comment. Are the two of you suggesting that the article should be written as if its title was "The Open University" even though that isn't the article's title? —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 22:36, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am. And I still think the article's title should have The. I think the outcome of the RM was a mistake. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:48, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, and a self-evident one for anyone familiar with the conventions of British English. Philafrenzy (talk) 23:57, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So do I. There are two distinct issues here and let's not confuse them. First,
WP:THE says that the article name must be as it is. No real point in relitigating thae. But the article content is a different issue, and that really does need to match real world where the name of the university is what it is and the article must not pretend otherwise. t on 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 00:05, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A make-weight I know, but see also this road sign,. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 14:33, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The idea that an article should be written in a contrary manner to its title doesn't seem right to me. That's just a passive-aggressive way to continue to oppose the outcome of the RM. If you think the consensus outcome should have been different, you should submit a WP:MRV, or if you think you have a new argument to make or additional information to consider that wasn't previously considered, submit a new WP:RM. I think this affects only three aspects: 1) whether first word of the opening sentence should use boldface formatting for "The", 2) Whether the infobox heading should include "The", and 3) Whether "the" should start with a capital letter in running prose. Actually, I believe the guideline on aspect #3 would apply regardless of whether the title starts with "The" or not. Aspects #1 and #2 affect only two places in the article. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 18:39, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, it is neither passive nor aggressive. It is asserting standard English grammar. So let's get some fundamental points clear:
  1. The RM failed because it did not attract sufficient consensus in favour of a move, so WP:STATUSQUO applies. The process does not make any judgement as to which form is "correct". It is a judgement call on whether the On the other hand... clause of Wikipedia:Naming conventions (definite or indefinite article at beginning of name)#Universities applies. There was insufficient consensus that it does.
  2. WP:THE applies to article titles, it says nothing about article content.
  3. There is no obligation to repeat the article title verbatim (see Wikipedia:Writing better articles#First sentence content). If you want to assert that it should, then you need to open an RFC.
  4. All reliable sources, when referring to the University, a definite or indefinite article is always used but not always capitalised. An article is never omitted. Compare Oxford Univerisity, Dublin University usages.)
As I have said already, Wikipedia's article naming rule applies to the names of Wikipedia articles. It does not attempt to over-rule or second guess the University's Royal Charter, the style used invariably in reliable sources, or simple literate English grammar.
Full disclosure to pre-empt a WP:COI challenge: I am a former employee and student of the University but have no recent, current, or prospective connection with it. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 20:40, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The idea that the title of an article is an entirely separate matter from its content seems more like Wikilawyering than a realistic or defensible interpretation of the policies & guidelines. For example, having a title displayed at the top of the infobox that differs from the title of the article is rather odd. Also, MOS:BOLDTITLE says the title should be what is in boldface, as in the opening sentence of University of Oxford and many other articles about universities. And MOS:THEINST clearly applies in article body text. Wikipedia guidelines say nothing about University Royal Charters (or university royal charters). —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 05:02, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe Wikipedia guidelines ought to say something about University Royal Charters? The universities themselves ought to know what they're talking about. Or are they ruled out as "primary sources"? Martinevans123 (talk) 11:48, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@BarrelProof: It is more a question of ubiquitous usage. With the sole exception of use as an adjective ("an Open University graduate"), all references to the University in reliable sources say "The Open University" (to open a sentence) or "the Open University" (in mid-sentence). Equivalent references to Oxford U or Cambridge U or London U do not (ignoring the recent rebranding as "the University of X"). The article text should reflect that real-world usage. To read that as an idea that the title of an article is an entirely separate matter from its content is really a rather off the wall interpretation: the lead sentence has just a single three-letter word addition to the article title. As for the Wikilawyering allegation, take a look in the mirror. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 20:39, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Martinevans123:, the Charters are ruled out per WP:Official names. My response to BarrelProof relies on standard English orthography and common usage in reliable sources. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 20:39, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see. WP logic in all its glory. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:44, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Acres

[edit]

Re this revert: "The acre ... is a unit of land area used in the British imperial and the United States customary systems." Doesn't this mean that acres should take precedence on UK articles? That's the reason to deviate from the source? (And shouldn't all the contents of the lead section be found (and sourced) in the main body?) Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:02, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No. In US articles, US customary measures are used. In UK articles, both SI and imperial measures are used and we follow the sources unless there is a convincing reason to do otherwise. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 00:08, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see. Many thanks for clarifying. I searched for that advice in at WP:MoS but was unable to find it. I'd be very grateful if you could post a link. I guess anyone might be able to find another equally reliable source that gave the figure in acres. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:32, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The main policy is at MOS:UNIT and MOS:RETAIN. (I don't recall where the "follow the sources" guidance is, but it is widely respected.
Gaming the system would fail WP: advocacy. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 14:26, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Here's one. But I won't look for any more! Martinevans123 (talk) 11:57, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Open_University&oldid=1234723228"