Talk:Students' representative council

Scottish page

Previously this page had content based entirely on Scottish SRCs. I have moved that to Students' Representative Council (Scotland) and included a stub in its place. This is more appropriate if you look at what links here, many of which are international rather than Scottish articles. Zaian 21:36, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But lots of which are Scottish articles. Are you planning to go through them and change the links to the new SRC (Scotland) page? [ ;-) ] – Kieran T ^{(talk | contribs)} 22:49, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I suppose the move has just replaced one sort of untidiness with another. Sorry about that. I did think of having a single "Students' Representative Council" page with a subsection on Scotland, but that approach encourages lots of subsections and the article ends up sounding like a telephone book. Before I go and change all the links in the Scottish pages, do you have any other ideas for how to do this? Zaian 23:25, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, my first thought was to find out just how many other countries actually do call their SU/SA/student representation bodies "SRC"s. I had understood it to be a term coined by the British law referred to in the original article. However, upon Googling, I see they exist in (at least) South Africa, Australia, and Botswana. So your point about a "telephone directory" seems like a very fair one. I guess the relatively minor effort of changing the Scottish articles will resolve the untidiness. I've tried to do all the relevant ones. – Kieran T ^{(talk | contribs)} 23:53, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. I also found a few links in England([1] and several others), Canada [2], Lesotho, and even in the US [3]. Zaian 00:31, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merger

I realise that these two articles were originally one but it's far more common to have them exist on the same page with the scottish content existing as a subsection on the main page. The only time that regional variations should be spun off in to their own artcles should be when they become too big to be inlcuded in the main page, given that both articles are very short I don't think this will be a problem. If the incoming links are a problem then it shouldn't be that difficult to have them link to the specfic section of the article that they refer to. Ydam 10:57, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This seems to have had more than enough time for discussion and so far no one has objected so I'm going to be WP:BOLD and go ahead merge them Ydam 16:14, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It would appear you've not merged them. But I am very much against such a merge. SRCs are not students' unions, nor are they any sort of regional variant of them. They are quite different and separate bodies, and indeed higher in standing than unions. --Breadandcheese (talk) 21:08, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I completely oppose this merger. The two are different things; indeed some places have (or historically have had) both an SRC and a Union. – Kieran T ^(talk) 03:03, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am the Vice President of the SRC at my High School here in Australia. Personally I think that the two topics shou7ld remain seperate as we dont see ourselfvs as a union. We work as a council not a Union.

The consensus here seems to be that the articles should remain separate, so I am removing the merge header. Johnhousefriday (talk) 12:28, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Options

This article continues to be an unsourced OR mess. I have looked for sources and whilst the 1889 formation in Scotland can be well sourced much of the rest of the article looks tough to source.

Even if the article can be sourced there would be undue weight on Scotland. The choices seem to be:

aggressively stub leaving only the core information and the formation in Scotland. Or,
accept the reality and move the page to Students' representative councils in Scotland.

Views, please. The Whispering Wind (talk) 14:20, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]