Jump to content

Talk:University of British Columbia/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

ranking

I'm not tech savy enough to do this, I've tried and the coding is too confusing, but someone maybe interested in updating the rankings section with U.S. world NEws and Reports rankings, since those rankings are more visible. UBC Ranks at 44 according to US World News and Reports, with its strengths in Arts and Humanities at 31, Engineering 30, Life Sciences/Bio Medical at 20, Physical Sciences at 18, Social Sciences at 18.

http://www.usnews.com/articles/education/worlds-best-universities/2010/09/21/worlds-best-universities-life-sciences-and-biomedicine-.html

98.71.96.185 (talk) 20:17, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Marine Residence

Hey, I'm a student at UBC living in the marine res. I noticed the article said that building 4 in the marine drive residence won't open until 2008. It actually opened Septemeber 1st. It's still kinda incomplete, but we're living here. Does anyone know where the information came from or where I can get credible plans for the marine drive res? 128.189.176.37 09:07, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

If you want credible plans for the res, you might want to start by asking UBC Housing and Conferences, since they build and operate it. If you want to know where the present information in Wikipedia came from, you should be able to find out by consulting the reliable sources which are cited throughout the article. However, sometimes editors don't cite their sources. And sometimes, the information was wrong to begin with, or is overtaken by new events. In either case, you can help: be bold, and make corrections. --Jdlh | Talk 20:37, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Just change it yourself. Geez you tower 4 people are like a bunch of kindergartnersMcAlcibiades (talk) 06:07, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Wreck Beach

Is this the University that has a nude beach on campus. No joke. I was woundering if it was this one or BCU. Hmoleman00

There is no such thing as BCU, and yes there are a series of nude beaches (Wreck being the best known but Tower and Acadia are also "clothing optional" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.189.194.249 (talk) 23:25, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Wreck Beach, euphemistically described as "clothing optional" is in the parklands surrounding the UBC campus, yes. -- GWO

It's not a euphemism. It is clothing optional. Exploding Boy 18:06, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC) There are actually parks signs that say "clothing is optional beyons this point" and Wreck is onle of several that is clothing optional, they all are (Tower, etc.) 128.189.135.87 (talk) 05:18, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

UBC Crest

File:UBC Coat of Arms.gif
UBC Coat of Arms

Image:UBC-Crest.png The UBC crest image was originally uploaded onto Wikimedia Commons, but as a logo, it is copyrighted and thus not usable there. I have thus moved the image to Wikipedia.

Kelvinc 11:08, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I have uploaded the current UBC logo to Image:UBC-Crest.png. It is a little more practical to use than the old Coat of Arms, and according to http://www.publicaffairs.ubc.ca/ubclogo/guidelines.html, the old Coat of Arms is used only for ceremonial purposes. --Greenmind 07:07, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

The crest displyed on this article is improper. The Blazon is "Argent three Bars wavy Azure issuant from the base a demi Sun in splendour proper on a Chief of the second an open Book also proper edged strapped and buckled Or inscribed with the words "TUUM EST"" per http://www.library.ubc.ca/archives/coat.html

The version displayed does not say TUUM EST but CUUM EST, as registered in the Canadian Trademarks Office. The proper arms also lack the gold edging around the azure bars. Scirefacias (talk) 17:08, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Hmm it seems to me we should be showing the commonly used crest (such as found at ubc.ca) and not an old, rarely seen version. Are there any objections to this? TastyCakes (talk) 17:16, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Here is a closeup of the crest I think should be on there. TastyCakes (talk) 17:18, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
There's no warrant for the use of that thing. At the University the arms are proper on the doorknobs in the Chemistry building, so perhaps a picture of that could be taken and used. Further, the trademark with "UBC" in chief, as it were, is not properly expanded to The University of British Columbia but University of British Columbia, which sounds rather different, at least to my ear.
72.53.43.54 (talk) 18:29, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Martha Piper

Martha Piper recently announced that she will be stepping down in 2006. [[User:Consequencefree|Ardent†∈]] 22:51, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)


Instructors

Wasn't Daniel Kahneman, noble laureate in economics, a professor at UBC? Should he be included in the list of famous instructors? Coleca 00:04, 21 December 2005 (UTC)


Alumni

Beverley McLachlin was not a UBC student as stated on this page, though she did teach at UBC. Her official biography can be found at: http://www.scc-csc.gc.ca/aboutcourt/judges/mclachlin/index_e.asp

Location

Just want some opinions here: in the infobox, would "Vancouver, British Columbia" be more accurate, or would "University Endowment Lands, British Columbia" work better? It's just that it's a little misleading to say UBC is in Vancouver when, technically, it does not fall under Vancouver city limits. --Buchanan-Hermit™..CONTRIBS..SPEAK! 06:23, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

I think that UBC is within Vancouver city limits, except for a small region which is the Musqueum (sp?) reserve. All campus addresses are "Vancouver, BC". I have never heard of the endowment lands being referred to as anything but a part of Vancouver, and I think it's pretty confusing to do so here. Where did you hear that UBC isn't technically in Vancouver? TastyCakes 00:45, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
I just read the article on the endowment lands, I didn't realize it was technically outside of Vancouver proper. I do think we should leave the infobox as Vancouver, people want an overview of the University and if they read "University Endowment Lands" they have no idea where it is. TastyCakes 00:49, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
UBC is not within Vancouver city limits. There is a distinction between the UEL and Vancouver -- the UEL is governed by the GVRD, not Vancouver. Check out [1]. This was also mentioned previously at Archive1 of the Vancouver discussion pages. The City of Vancouver website also exludes the UEL in its community pages [2] as it is not considered part of Vancouver. I know this might be confusing (like how people think Vancouver International Airport is in Vancouver). This deals with technical facts more than anything. I do think there should be a distinction between Vancouver and the UEL somewhere in the userbox because there is a tendancy for people to look for UBC within the city limits of Vancouver (and not finding it, obviously). I think something like "University Endowment Lands of Vancouver" would sound more accurate and less misleading. --Buchanan-Hermit™..CONTRIBS..SPEAK! 01:04, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
For the simplicity of the info box I still think Vancouver is better, and readers can get the details of UBC's exact status (if they care, which I somewhat doubt) in the article. I don't really care one way or the other though. TastyCakes 04:05, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Alright. I still think it's misleading and incorrect, but I'll settle for it since the reasons behind it are noble. I did modify the opening sentence though, to make the distinction between Vancouver and the UEL a bit clearer: "The University of British Columbia (UBC) is a public university with its main campus located at Point Grey, in the University Endowment Lands adjacent to Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada..." Hope there aren't any objections. --Buchanan-Hermit™..CONTRIBS..SPEAK! 07:18, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Another point to consider is that the mailing address for all of the UEL uses Vancouver. As another option, we could add a footnote --Usgnus 19:14, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

"The University Endowment Lands community (also known as University Hill) is situated adjacent to the campus to the east," http://www.ubc.ca/about/campus.html -- Therefore UBC isn't in the endowment lands. The UEL is a separate entity with no power over the affairs of the university's lands.

You are confusing the meaning of the sentence. It is talking about the University Endowment Lands COMMUNITY, not the University Endowment Lands. The campus is the property of UBC which is within the UEL, much like how a part of Burnaby Mountain belongs to SFU, which is within Burnaby. -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 10:42, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

It currently says the university is in Vancouver. I think this in inaccurate, we usually talk about the Point Grey Campus, not the Vancouver campus. I live in the UEL and it is usually described as adjacent to Vancouver, west of Vancouver, etc. but we aren't part of the city (and are thankful for it every time Vancouver has a garbage strike!). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.189.135.87 (talk) 17:08, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

There are a few external links that link to clubs, etc. which, in my opinion, are not necessary nor appropriate for an encyclopedic article. Also, I'd like to use wikipedias referencing system instead of having in-line links. I will clean this up so that it meets wikipedia standards. Andrewjuren (talk) 22:42, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

I've taken a quick wack at cleaning up this article a bit. It still needs: removal of unneccessary external links (e.g. an article about The Ubyssey already exists, so why have an external link? Wikipedia is not a soap box!) Also, more references would help, some claims could use substantiation. Andrewjuren (talk) 23:15, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Black Hand

What is the deal with black hand? It looks like soap boxing to me? have they actaully done anything that matters?

Ya really why are they important when the engineers have actually done some things that are creative (Golden Gate Bridge) and gained international attention.

Yeah, I'm regretting voting to merge. It doesn't really fit here.. Is there any chance of opening up the discussion on deleting it again? TastyCakes 08:13, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
How's this for a deal? Undelete the separate The Black Hand (UBC) page and it won't get in the way of the main UBC page. I would support that, as well as starting pages about UBC engineers and their stunts. By the way, Engineering Undergraduate Society of the University of British Columbia already has a page on Wikipedia, and it is notable.--Nick Dillinger 08:25, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Well, that's because the engineering guys have more than a small paragraph about their society... Buchanan-Hermit™..CONTRIBS..SPEAK! 08:41, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
The Black Hands was longer than one paragraph. I have saved it, and will present it in this talk page. It also included 3 pictures of multiple pranks, with links to multiple other past pranks:


The Black Hand (UBC) (Whose full name is reportedly Not The Sinister Icy Black Hand Of Death Enforcement Faction And Donut Sale Division Of The Science Undergraduate Society Of The University Of British Coumbia) is a mysterious organization of pranksters which operates primarily on the Point Grey campus [3] of the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, BC, Canada. The secretive group which, ironically, claims not to exist, has carried out a number of reported pranks over the years. These pranks are often elaborate and highly visible and have attracted attention from the University's official student-run newspaper, The Ubyssey [4], on several occasions.

The most recent prank attributed to the Black Hand was discovered on 27 February 2006: a castle or fortress built of bricks and mortar inside the office of the University of British Columbia Alma Mater Society President, wrapping around the President's desk, ostensibly to welcome incoming President Kevin Keystone to his first day on the job. This prank has also been jointly attributed to the members of the Engineering Undergraduate Society - UBC as a small red ‘E’, the symbol of the UBC Engineers, was painted on the castle wall beside a large painted black hand.

Previous pranks include ‘drawing’ an enormous hand on Koerner Library [5] and laying a lawn of real grass in the UBC Arts Undergraduate Society [6] office.

The black hand has no place on a UBC article as it is not an official part of the university and unless wikipedia wants to include pranks by all groups and individuals on campus such as the routine vandalism of the Cairn, they should be seperated from the UBC article at a minimum. If not, all groups on campus that have participated in pranks should add themselves in a fashion such as the black hand, this will include just about every club and residence floor on campus which will definatly increase the UBC content.
I say, allow them all to have articles. Having the ability to have extra content is good, and won't have to get in the way of the major articles. Include the other groups into Wikipedia as well. --Nick Dillinger 09:14, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
I'm against the Black Hand having articles because I don't think there is anything yet that makes them notable. This is one of the pillars for all Wikipedia articles. A reference in a student news paper and pictures in a couple personal blogs hardly makes a group notable. In one years time will any one except this groups own members even remember that is existed? I'm doubt full --Nootka 09:27, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Whether the Black Hand gets an article or not doesn't matter per se, it just doesn't belong here. deadkid_dk 11:20, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
I would like to personally congratulate all of those member of the Black Hand Group for their pranks; however, I think they need to realize their pranks are trivial and have no place on UBC's official encyclopedia entry. If someone who does not attend UBC is reading this article and sees this information about the Black Hand I think it tarnishes the University's prestigious stance in the academic world. The name "Black Hand: may also be interpretted by some as Racism as well and UBC is a University known to embrace diversity.
I'm removing it for now, it can be moved into its own article if it gets to have one. deadkid_dk 08:13, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

--Nick Dillinger 08:47, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

endowment

Corrected endowment fund http://www.publicaffairs.ubc.ca/ubcfacts/index.html is 633.8 million CDN

Sororities/fraternities

Should this section be here? Should it be shortened? What do others think? TastyCakes 04:09, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't mind it being there, but it doesn't deserve a huge section. I mean, is there something that makes the sororities/frats at UBC unique? What's being written can pretty much be said for most sororities/frats in other institutions. In other words, a paragraph would be great, but it doesn't deserve a huge section like that. Buchanan-Hermit™..CONTRIBS..SPEAK! 04:59, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
It's got its own page now.. TastyCakes 05:04, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
I have a feeling it will be deleted though... Buchanan-Hermit™..CONTRIBS..SPEAK! 05:21, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
Possible.. hehe. I think it makes more sense as a short little article on its own than a big plug on the main page though. TastyCakes 05:22, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
Yep, got nominated for deletion, as "club-cruft." Not surprised. There's a lot of stuff but it's mostly self-promotional material (club promoting itself through Wikipedia). The stuff about frats and sororities should be shortened into one paragraph, maximum. Buchanan-Hermit™..CONTRIBS..SPEAK! 05:23, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Tha part on sororities and fraternities is too long. A pretty small portion of campus is involved. It shouldn't be more than a paragraph. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.138.5.20 (talk) 10:33, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

i dont know about it being all self promotional. i mean its talking about them at UBC not just in general. sure there will be alittle bit of bias but you can find that on any wikipedia page. I've taken it down a little bit. I think its mostly the sorority part thats a little lengthy.--216.232.27.184 05:27, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I think that it's still going into too much detail. I think simply saying something like "There is a frat/sor system at UBC which has existed since 19xx. At present, it consists of approximately xx members and have connections to so-and-so frats/sors in some-other-university. The system has produced many notable people and celebrities, such as John Doe, John Smith, John Smithson, etc. The frats/sors are located mostly along Wesbrook Mall south of the main campus." would work just fine. It won't go into too much unnecessary detail and it doesn't sound promotional. Buchanan-Hermit™..CONTRIBS..SPEAK! 05:37, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

After consulting the Wikipedia policies, I had to delete the entire sororities section because it is a copyright violation from [7]. As a CopyVio, it is eligible to be speedily deleted, which I had to do here for that particular section. Buchanan-Hermit™..CONTRIBS..SPEAK! 07:20, 6 April 2006 (UTC) I feel the Greek section is inappropriate given that they play such a minor part of campus life, it seems weird to allocate them the same amount of space as all clubs and associations. 128.189.135.87 (talk) 05:20, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

This section of the article claims that the first fraternity was on campus in 1832. That is clearly ridiculous since in 1832 Vancouver was hardly a city and clearly there was no UBC. Is this meant to say that the oldest greek organization that has a chapter at UBC was founded in 1832? Seems odd anyway. Metzgerhau (talk) 22:44, 13 May 2009 (UTC)


This section is too long - sororities and fraternities and very peripheral to campus life and should get a line or two at most —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.68.102.56 (talk) 16:04, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

This section is MUCH too long, clubs gets only one line and clubs and societies are a far more major feature than sororities and fraternities which involve a pretty small group of people and unknown by the general campus population. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.183.70.15 (talk) 00:31, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Who needs paragraphs?

I'd like to comment that the current "article" about UBC seems to start of with a few good paragraphs (about history, university today) but deteriorates into many lists (libraries, faculties and schools, alumni, sites of interest, student services and residences, sports and recreation, student media, chancellors and presidents, etc.). I'd like to propose that the lists be split into seperate list articles (as appropriate) and that the main article be re-written in a form more appropriate for an encyclopedia. Comments? Andrewjuren(talk) 07:52, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree, everything past a certain point seems to be bullets. TastyCakes 05:02, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

I've reworked the Library section so that only the less significant libraries are in list form. Exploding Boy 05:09, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps this will help: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Education_in_Canada#Universities_and_colleges. In addition, I think there's enough info to create a UBC Library article. Usgnus 06:10, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Weasel words

"The University of British Columbia consistently ranks as a top Canadian university by both national and international rankings, as well as a top 30 world university in related rankings." --Ardenn 04:31, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Do you have a point? Exploding Boy 04:34, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
Weasel words don't really give a neutral point of view; they just spread hearsay, or couch personal opinion in vague, indirect syntax. It is better to put a name and a face on an opinion than to assign an opinion to an anonymous source. Ardenn 04:40, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
There's nothing to say they're true. Ardenn 04:46, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
I think that for a statement about rankings it should explicitly say which rankings put UBC high up. The fact that the two sources for this are RE$EARCH INFO SOURCE and Shanghai Jiao Tong University, neither of which I've ever heard of before, do make me, as a casual reader, less impressed. TastyCakes 04:55, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
Although I disagree with Ardenn's method of listing many Canadian University articles with {{weasel}}, I do agree that the wording can be adjusted slightly. I've made the change, let me know if it's good enough. I have to agree with TastyCakes, that neither of these two sources seems particularily reliable. Andrewjuren(talk) 05:06, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, but I honestly don't know what you're tlaking about. First of all, which words are the "weasel words" you're talking about? Second, the claim is referenced. What more do you want, exactly? Exploding Boy 05:08, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't know if I'd use "weasel words" to describe the problem as I see it. To me the biggest thing was the article said "ranked high in international and national rankings" which sounds pretty good but if you take the effort to follow the number and the link it leads to you get to some university in China and some Canadian ranking company I've never heard of. How does UBC do in better known international rankings, like the Wall Street Journal, the princeton review and so on? TastyCakes 05:50, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Your comments lead me to believe you are infact an american, since most of the publications you suggest to begin with only Rank American Universities. Wall Street Journal and Princeton Review have never ranked an international University. Most ranking sources that Americans find credible have either never ranked International Universities, or very recently began such. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.71.96.185 (talk) 20:13, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Too Long

Why is this article listed as being too long? By what criteria is that determined? TastyCakes 04:44, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

It tells you when you edit the article that it's too long. Ardenn 04:46, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
Generally speaking, wikipedia recommends that articles should be about 30KB long. This article is about 32KB long, thereby exceeding the recommended length by a bit. Personally, I think this article needs some serious re-writing and the movement of some content to subarticles. I'll work on this when I have some time (likely AFTER exams). Andrewjuren(talk) 04:51, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
See my comment above about "who needs paragraphs?" Andrewjuren(talk) 04:52, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Fixed 02:48, 16 April 2006 by User:NeoThe1 [8] . Andrewjuren(talk) 16:58, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Reorganization and cleanup

Having looked at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Education_in_Canada#Universities_and_colleges I think we could really clean up this article. I agree with the user above that the UBC Library could have its own article, to which we can move the bulk of the information given here.

For convenience, here's the suggested template from the Education project:

Universities and colleges The article should start with a good introduction, giving the full complete official name of the college/university, detail about location (in suburb, downtown, where?), founder and founding name, and affilation with any larger university system, if applicable. Give other names for which the university may be known (e.g. Cal, and bold them, too). Also, add a few facts about the college/university that make it unique.

Next, there is a table about the college/university. A template for the table can be found at the bottom of this page.

Sections of the article:

  • Campus -- Describe the overall shape and size of the campus. Mention any famous buildings and their architects. However, it's best not to go into such detail that only a student/staff member would be interested in, or know what's being talk about. For some smaller colleges the "campus" might be one simple building, and may not warrant its own section.
  • Organization -- Mention the administration, including leading officials. If this college/university has a special organizational structure, such as a residential college system, then it should be mentioned here. Then, in bullet point form, list the schools, colleges, etc. of this university. If appropriate, also list the faculties and departments at the university. If there is a special course system or requisits for enrollment, mention them here, too. If the university is part of a larger system (as in University of California), mention this connection and provide requisite links.
  • Students and faculty -- State the number (and any other useful statistics) of the students. Distinguish between undergraduate, graduate and postgraduate students; also state the number of faculty members. Distinguish between tenure/nontenured, full- and part-time (if possible).
  • Sports, clubs, and traditions -- Mention the sports team(s) of the college/university and what is notable about them. Here is also a good place to mention specific traditions of the college/university, like students' union activities, a student newspaper, fraternities, regular activities, etc. The heading may be changed accordingly in regard to the importance of sports, clubs, traditions, students' unions etc. For example, alternative headings could be Students' Union, Sports and Traditions or Students' Union Activities.
  • History -- Describe the history of the college/university, including noteworthy milestones in its development.
  • Notable alumni -- Bullet list of Alumni that are notable/famous. Mention the graduation date and degree and give a short description why they are famous.
  • Notable -- Bullet list of active and former members of faculty that are notable. If they are alumni/alumnae, mention them here in parenthesis, including the degree and graduation date. For all give a short description why they are famous.
  • References - List articles and other sources (online and/or offline) that independently confirm information in the article. Information should not be based solely on what the relevant institution shows.
  • External links -- Give a link to the website of the college/university, preferable in English language.

Exploding Boy 06:56, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Someone has also suggested that the Honorary Degree section be expanded. Here is a link if anyone is interested in doing so. [9]. Skyezx (talk) 08:35, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Carl Wieman

Is there a reason Carl Wieman is in the introductory paragraph rather than in the famous instructors or elsewhere? I mean I'm sure he's great and all but... TastyCakes 20:11, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Please, be bold. Andrewjuren(talk) 07:46, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Pictures

frats

The article Fraternities and Sororities at the University of British Columbia was deleted a few weeks ago because it was copyvio. It looks like it may not exist in the forseeable future, so I've removed it from the opening paragraph. But left it in the "See also" section because I think that an article on the Fraternities and Sororities at UBC will eventually exist. Andrewjuren(talk) 16:55, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Criticisms

I've removed the "Criticisms" section and placed it here for discussion. This is most definitely not an attempt to whitewash the University, or to squelch negative comments. However, as is most other Wikipedia articles which have "Criticism" sections, they quickly become repositories for any negative comments people wish to make against the subject, often without any references or attempts at context. The text I've removed today is as follows:

  • Construction around the campus, some of it related to the 2010 Winter Olympics, has progressed slowly, creating long detours for vehicles and inconveniences for pedestrians. The construction has focused primarily on academic buildings, parking lots and private housing, while student social spaces such as the Abdul Ladha Science Student Centre have been delayed by over two years.‹The template Talkfact is being considered for merging.› [citation needed]
  • As the cost of living in Vancouver continues to rise, reasonable affordable housing close to campus is increasingly difficult to find and students must often commute for an hour each way to reach campus. Meanwhile, on campus housing for students is low on the list of priorities for the institution.
  • Tuition fees for UBC have risen drastically in the last decade and there are few scholarship or bursary opportunities available for students unable to keep up with the fee increases.

As I've indicated, I have no problem with incorporating balanced, referenced text that is of a critical nature. However, I'd like to propose that the editors of this page vet entries for such a section here, on the talk page, before they "go live" in the article. That way, we can ensure that material in the article is well-supported, rather than continually having to maintain something that is little more than a "rumour mill". Thoughts? --Ckatzchatspy 03:18, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Featured Article status

Thoughts? Vranak

How about trying to achieve Good Article status! This article is not so great at the moment. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 03:59, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Endowment

People, for the love of God stop assuming astronomical financial endowment figures. UBC's reported endowment is C$700M as reported by the treasury: http://www.treasury.ubc.ca/invest.html This number may not be up to date, but it's the best figure we have. In the past month, the figure was edited 4 times. Please refrain from changing it because this entails A LOT of cross referencing. The figure is cited in at least 6 other articles. I'll leave it 875M as it is but I implore you; please change it back or cite a proper source and do the necessary cross check. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ahm2307 (talk • contribs) 20:59, 4 March 2007 (UTC).

No way UBC's endowment is higher than McGills. You people have so much pride makes me sick.
1) I'm a UBC alumnus.

2) It's not a competition. 3) Endowment has nothing to do with academic reputation or excellence.

blah blah blah alumnus —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.218.216.166 (talk) 07:24, 15 March 2007 (UTC).

Beauty Queens

The following section was added earlier today:

The university has been famous for it's beauty queens. Many students have competed at the Miss Hong Kong pageant and five of them won the title. They include:

Three other students competed at the Miss Chinese Vancouver pageant and won it. They went on to represent Vancouver at the Miss Chinese International pageant helded in Hong Kong where they won the title. They include:

I've moved it here for discussion. What is the feeling about this information - is it encyclopedic, or relevant to this article? (No slight intended against the competitors, but it would seem there are many people who have gone on to success after attending UBC. Should this be folded into a general section? Thoughts? --Ckatzchatspy 21:55, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

The article currently opens with the mention of being famous for beauty queens. I'm a UBC student, my parents are alumni, I grew up on the campus, and this is the first time I've heard of this. While I suppose it deserves to be in the article, I'd say it has no place in the introduction. UBC is known for being research-intensive, not a source of beauty queens. Iotha 02:46, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for catching that - I didn't even see it when I stripped out the above text. Thanks - it is gone from the lead. --Ckatzchatspy 04:57, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Academic structure needs cleanup in several places

Several places, Wikipedia talks about UBC's academic structure (faculties and schools). I think in most places it needs attention. I'll work on it over time, but I'm noting it here in case others want to pitch in. Comments welcome in each subsection below. The University has about 12 "faculties", a bunch of "Schools", some "colleges" which are faculty organisations, some "colleges" which are residential communities, and some things with other names. The best UBC-published list I've found is at http://www.ubc.ca/academic/fac_schools.html . --Jdlh | Talk 05:08, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Main article

In University of British Columbia#Academics article and section, there is a partial list of schools, colleges, institutes, etc. This list is incomplete, which is probably OK because there is a main article elsewhere. But what is the right summary to put there? I've made a start; it needs work. The UBC-published list should be referenced here. --Jdlh | Talk 05:08, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I think Vancouver School of Theology does not belong in the list of faculties. My understanding is that it's organisationally distinct from UBC, though it has some official ties. That would be worth explaining here, or in the "Faculties and Schools" article. --Jdlh | Talk 05:19, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Faculties and schols article

The article Faculties and Schools of the University of British Columbia needs cleanup. I have a feeling it gets less attention than the main article. The UBC-published list should be referenced here. --Jdlh | Talk 05:08, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

UBC Template

To Fix: The Template:UBC template has a section "Academics", which has a subset of faculties, schools, colleges, etc., and that subset should probably be revised. This will take some thought, but could perhaps benefit from whatever summary list gets created for the main article. --Jdlh | Talk 05:08, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Notable people

Added a "notable alumni" section, which needs far more work and entries. It should probably be split off into a separate page eventually like other university articles. --128.189.171.95 (talk) 07:17, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

We have that separate page already: List of University of British Columbia alumni. Hard to notice, perhaps, because the only link is in the "University of British Columbia" link box at the bottom of the page, and you have to expand it to see the link. What's the best solution to this? For now, I've added a "See also" link under "Notable people". By the way, see also Category:University of British Columbia alumni. --Jdlh | Talk 05:04, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

The image Image:Ubc tbirds.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --00:34, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Mike Holmes honorary degree?

Mr. Holmes' wiki entry mentions BCIT as the source of his honorary degree. This seems more likely.Theinterior (talk) 08:12, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't see an entry for a Holmes under Recipients of honorary degrees. I guess someone removed it. --Jdlh | Talk 05:58, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

student media section

seems rather WP:NOTDIR to me. LibStar (talk) 00:05, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

IMO, this article deserves at least a C-class status

It has a long way of being a FA or even GA class but the article should at least be C-class and I've changed that already, any thoughts? GWST11 (talk) 03:35, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

agreed, it contains too much excessive detail in the current form. LibStar (talk) 03:38, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

TastyCakes

Thanks for improving this article and adding pics of this beautiful university! Keep up the good work. GWST11 (talk) 06:39, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Asian Centre Roof

This and the Nitobe Memorial Garden article both used to claim that the Asian Centre's roof was made from an exhibit from Tokyo Expo. I couldn't find any evidence of that from UBC, but I did find a UBC Library article claiming the structure was built from materials from Expo 70 in Osaka. I made the edits to reflect that. If anyone can find sources for the roof and Tokyo Expo that'd be great too. - Shimei (talk) 00:16, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Admin Section

I've renamed the "The University Today..." section to "Governance and administration" because the former subsection title depends on when "today" is for you (there is also the confusion that results from outdated info). With that change, and inspired by the structure on other university articles that have been Featured, I've added more information that is about the general administrative structure of the university. I think this could be greatly expanded and improved, but it's a start. :) - Shimei (talk) 01:18, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Reorganization and rewriting

Since a large portion of the article was written in bullet/list form, I have decided to rewrite them in prose form to improve the article (the better Wikipedia articles for universities avoid list form). There are some topics that I have minimal knowledge about (e.g. UBC Athletics), so it'd be great if someone could rewrite those sections too. I think the article still needs some major reorganization and content work. For example, the "Features" section is still a list and interrupts the flow of the article. There is also minimal content in the article on research institutions and activities at UBC (compared to other university articles). --Shimei (talk) 08:14, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

UBC's Okanagan campus land acquisition

The Okanagan campus has just doubled in size so this should probably be updated.

http://www.publicaffairs.ubc.ca/2010/08/05/five-years-of-growth-for-okanagan-campus/

24.67.108.140 (talk) 05:51, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Reputation

Leventio is misreading the articles he/she is citing. For example: the Vancouver Sun article states that "now, with the odd exception, they must have an average of at least 86 per cent" (http://www2.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=aa6f577c-92e7-42ad-869c-ad4b8a12d891). The user is reading it as being the average entering grade for first year students and misleadingly posting it as such. There is a very big difference between minimum entering requirements and the average entering grade of students. The average entering grade would be higher than the minimum. The Macleans article says the same thing: "Students entering the two largest faculties, science and arts, will need a minimum high school average of 86 and 85 per cent respectively" (http://oncampus.macleans.ca/education/2010/07/08/your-grades-will-drop/). Nowhere in the either article does it state UBC's average entering grade. It only states the minimum requirement. The article does however list both Queens' and McGill's average entering grades. Leventio is inaccurately comparing UBC's minimum requirements to the average entering grade of Queens and McGill. What he/she is attempting to do is like comparing apples and oranges. Furthermore, in a 2003 National Post article that was ironically about Queens, it was stated that UBC has the highest entrance requirement for undergraduate admissions amongst all Canadian Universities (Queen's University's 'back door' is in England: Easier to gain admission to campus at 15th-century castle, Heather Sokoloff, National Post, June 5, 2003). It does not occur to the user that it is likely that neither article is wrong. He/she is misreading his/her own articles and inferring that the National Post article is wrong based on his/her flawed interpretation. I am not the original poster of the National Post article, but I do disagree with the user deleting it.

I have concerns that Leventio may be attempting what he is accusing me of: WP:BOOST. I would like to suggest that a third party read all three articles and render an unbiased opinion.128.189.198.99 (talk) 04:19, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Regardless of what you and Leventio believe, you both need to stop edit warring. You're both way over the line with your actions. ElKevbo (talk) 04:59, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
Alright, that was a message clearly laid out in the page lock channel, and am willing to making another step in diffusing the situation by no longer reverting the article until a consensus has been reached. However, I ask that the IP user from now on maintains civility WP:CIV and not attempt to engage me through slights, as he appeared to attempt to do in his last edit summaries, although I will address them. First, I never stated these articles are schorlarly, I stated "Macleans and Vancouver Sun are as scholarly as the National Post", which I only stated because you seem to have implied the Post was (though I'll admit may have read that wrong). Also my alma mater is not Queen's, just because it relates to it, doesn't mean I am an alumni from there, and in fact, if you look at one of my first edits in the Queen's article, it was to remove a similar claim they made in which they stated they were the "2nd highest entering average in Canada" (you can see me take it out here [10]. If your basing this off the editing history of Queen's, then by that measure, I'm also an alma mater of almost every U15 university in Eastern Canada.
As for both articles, in response to your accusations, I am not mistaking minimum requirements with the average entering grade. In fact, in the Vancouver Sun, the article states UBC's actual minimum requirements. "Although the published required grade point average is 67 per cent, the actual cut-off is always higher and is determined by the number of applicants and the number of seats" (Vancouver Sun). The article itself gets this minimum average from Okanagan's minimum requirements is 67 percent and can be seen on their official website (UBC Okanagan Admission criteria). The Sun states the average admission average three times:
"And some faculties, like science, require even higher marks than the 86 per cent needed for an A." (Vancouver Sun).
"In 1990, students were admitted to UBC's arts program with an average of just 70 per cent. Ten years ago, they needed an 80-per-cent average. Now, with the odd exception, they must have an average of at least 86 per cent." (Vancouver Sun)
"In 2000, the mean admission average presented to us by a B.C. high school graduate [regardless of whether they were admitted] was 82 per cent; in 2010, it is looking to be around 87 per cent," he said. (Vancouver Sun)
As for the Maclean's quote you stated earlier, while it does not explicitly state that was UBC entering admission average, it also does not state that it is the minimum requirements. The article itself is a discussion on how students should expect their averages (the ones they've had upon entering university, in other words... their average entry admission) to drop once they start university, so it can be seen that, even though it does not explicitly states average entering admission, it is what they were refering to in that quote you used. Also consider that there is no way they are refering to minumum requirements, considering Okanagan's minimum requirement as explored in the last article, and UBC Vancouver's minimum requirements, which with a bit more investigation, reveals Science and Arts requirements are stated at mid to high 70s, and not mid-80s (though some programs are, they are not Science and Art) (UBC Admission criteria). Additionally the article does state the expected entering admission average was expected to rise to 87% this year, hence the 86-87% range.
"At the University of British Columbia average entrance grades across the university are expected to be 87 per cent this year, a two per cent increase from last year, and up from 80 per cent ten years ago, and 70 per cent twenty years ago. Andrew Arida, UBC’s associate director of enrolment says higher entering grades are simply a matter of supply and demand. “Because students are presenting higher grades, we’ve had to raise our admission averages to avoid over-enrolling,” he explains." (Maclean's)
Information from both articles comes from Andrew Arida, UBC's associate director of enrolment. As for the National Post, I only removed the National Post because I considered it outdated in light of more recently published articles (Maclean's and Vancouver Sun were published in 2010 as opposed to 2003). I have never stated it to be wrong, as you seem to have implied, I did question the relevance looking at the title, but regardless, the main facet of my argument has always been it was outdated in comparison to the two newer articles I had presented. This is the case I present, however, I am in agreement with you that a third party editor should read all three articles, and take both of our arguments into account before we reach a consensus.
Also, in a slightly related, but unrelated matter, in the edits I made in the article, I also included an edit regarding the acceptance rate of the University of British Columbia, which was removed. The citation itself came from Moody's Investors Service, and it also explicitly state the acceptance rate I put down (page. 6), and the report itself originates from UBC's treasury ([11]) so I would just like to ask whether or not that was a sweeping reversion in relation to this issue, or just accidental, along with the contested information. Leventio (talk) 17:28, 26 March 2012 (UTC)


The quotes that you're posting all refer to the minimum needed (the actual cut off as opposed to the posted minimum), not the average entering grade.

  • "And some faculties, like science, require even higher marks than the 86 per cent needed for an A." (Vancouver Sun).
  • "In 1990, students were admitted to UBC's arts program with an average of just 70 per cent. Ten years ago, they needed an 80-per-cent average. Now, with the odd exception, they must have an average of at least 86 per cent." (Vancouver Sun)
  • "In 2000, the mean admission average presented to us by a B.C. high school graduate [regardless of whether they were admitted] was 82 per cent; in 2010, it is looking to be around 87 per cent," (Vancouver Sun) -This Quote is clearly referring to B.C. high school students regardless of whether they were admitted.
  • “Because students are presenting higher grades, we’ve had to raise our admission averages to avoid over-enrolling,” (Macleans) - Again, it's referring to a rise in the cut off in order to avoid over-enrolling.

And the minimum average of 67 that you're referring to is just a POSTED minimum average. Which is very different than the actual minimum average. Your article even explains this: "Although the published required grade point average is 67 per cent, the actual cut-off is always higher and is determined by the number of applicants and the number of seats." (Vancouver Sun).

Both articles that you are referring to are referring to a cut-off (minimum requirement) as opposed to the average entering grade. I don't see how the National Post article is outdated, especially since the articles that you're posting are referring to the minimum requirement (cut-off). 128.189.166.169 (talk) 21:41, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

I'll withdrawing my current complaint at the moment, but I would wish to see that the National Post article be replaced as soon as possible with something more up to date (perhaps post-2010). I will be re-adding the acceptance rate reference as well as this reference (http://www.publicaffairs.ubc.ca/services-for-media/ubc-facts-figures/) which states the average entering grade for both Okanagan and Vancouver (2009-10 at least). Leventio (talk) 19:25, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Employment Equity

I understand where Brainchild05 is coming from: UBC has an employment policy in place (see: http://www.arts.ubc.ca/faculty-and-staff/academic-postings/ ) but the School of Music proceeds to ignore the statement "Canadians and Permanent Residents will be given priority" by hiring three non-Canadians. Is UBC's School of Music admitting that Faculties of Music in Canada are not capable of educating musicians to a level that would qualify them to fill their own Assistant Professor positions? An interesting conundrum that deserves to be on Wikipedia I think.Musicprol (talk) 12:02, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

This is not a venue to make a point; if you can find adequate reliable sources describing this issue then it might be something to include in this article. Otherwise, it should remain out. ElKevbo (talk) 18:49, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
(e/c) No, sorry, it doesn't "deserve" to be on Wikipedia. You are engaging in original research. If the appointments get some discussion in media outside of your union newsletter, or as the subject of a formal protest, then we can consider inclusion. Beyond that, the fact that universities make specific faculty appointments, some of which draw on a worldwide pool of talent, is hardly encyclopedia-worthy. Franamax (talk) 18:51, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Olympians

Here is a list of 2012 Olympians with UBC affiliations, according to July 16's The Ubyssey. I have added Category:University of British Columbia alumni to the articles that exist, but some don't and some haven't graduated yet, so they're not "alumni". I'll put the list here so they can be added in the future.

Thank you. InverseHypercube (talk) 20:00, 8 August 2012 (UTC)


HESA Ranking

I don't see the reason why the HESA ranking should not be included in the Reputation section of the article. The name of the section is not "Academic Ranking", rather, it is reputation which includes both academic and research reputation. Lets discuss this matter here. In the meantime I have restored the information to its original form. CanadaRed (talk) 05:13, 16 September 2012 (UTC)


Location

This article is about UBC's Vancouver campus. Please direct all Okanagan-specific information to the University of British Columbia Okanagan page.

Historically, the University of British Columbia has been located in the Greater Vancouver Region, first at Fairview then later at Point Grey. UBCO is 8 years old and is not considered to be the 'main' campus of the university. It is confusing to readers unfamiliar with UBC not to indicate that the main UBC campus is located in Vancouver. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tr1plefilter (talk • contribs) 23:00, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Name of a human gene

In Wikipedia, human genes have separate entries. So UBC is the ubiquitin C gene, and this is actually more relevant than the University of British Columbia. If necessary UBS should direct to a disambiguation page with the human gene and the University. Could someone please make this change? Thank you very much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.82.221.201 (talk) 13:54, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:University of British Columbia/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 21:48, 17 June 2015 (UTC)


I'll complete this soon. I wish I could come here. JAGUAR  21:48, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Initial comments

  • "commonly referred to as UBC" - typically this should be shortened and in brackets, per WP:LEAD
  • "UBC's 4.02 km2 (993-acre)" - why is there a hyphen in acre? oh, nevermind. I haven't seen that before
  • WP:LEADCITE states citations are discouraged in the lead unless it's controversial information. There is a overkill on citations in the lead for now
  • At the moment the lead does not summarise the article and could to with restructuring. There isn't enough about history and campus facilities but yet most of the lead consists of statistics!
  • Be careful of WP:OVERLINK in the last paragraph of the lead
  • "In 1877, only six years after British Columbia joined Canada" - how is British Columbia joining Canada six years prior relevant here? "Only" sounds slightly off too
  • "and a board of governors (citizens)" - would be better as "consisting of citizens/members of public"
  • Half of the Foundation and early years section is unreferenced
  • Same goes with Move to Point Grey, most parts do not have references
  • The large quotation in the Move to Point Grey section needs to be formatted correctly so it shows the reader that it is a quotation rather than appearing like another paragraph
  • "Heavy rains and melting snowfall eroded a deep ravine across the north end of the campus, in the Grand Campus Washout of 1935" - this sentence doesn't need a comma. What is the Grand Campus Washout of 1935 too!?
  • "WWII marked the first" - World War II
  • Vancouver section only contains one citation. There is also a "who" tag
  • "In 2010, UBC Okanagan campus doubled in size from 105 ha. to 208.6 ha" - needs convert
  • "UBC has been ranked in the Corporate Knights" - since this is a start of a new section, UBC needs to be written out fully, like before
  • Finances section unreferenced!
  • Residences section vastly unreferenced and shows evidence of WP:JARGON throughout. Do we really need to know every dorm and new addition? Also, there are short paragraphs here to be merged

Close - not listed

I'm so sorry to do this but I'm going to have to stop here. This article doesn't meet the GA criteria now and would require significant work for it to reach it. The GA criteria states that at least every paragraph to be referenced, but most of this article does not have citations to back claims up. There are some evidence of jargon and formatting errors, but I'm sure that they can be fixed given time.

Can you accept me into this university please? JAGUAR  17:40, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

First Sentence

I doubt the first sentence is right. Technically U.B.C. is not part of Vancouver. The land is leased from the Musqueum Native Band.

First sentence is not correct - UBC is on provincial land called the University Endowment Lands. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.87.103.98 (talk) 20:01, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

The University, while not in the City of Vancouver, has an address that is in Vancouver. If you want to check have a look at any of their listed addresses. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.12.53.117 (talk) 03:37, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

UBC Lands and University Endowment Lands are administered separately. UBC Lands effectively mean the academic campus, including on-campus student housing. These lands are administered by UBC and by the Province. University Endowment Lands have a separate administration.[1][2] Both UBC and University Endowment Lands are located in Greater Vancouver Electoral Area A, an unincorporated area in Metro Vancouver. Neither are part of the City of Vancouver, but remain part of the Greater Vancouver Regional District. UBC is not located in any city, but for the purposes of postal and other services, its address is in Vancouver.--Flurryofcrispycoffee (talk) 22:30, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "UEL Administration". University Endowment Lands. Retrieved 24 October 2014.
  2. ^ "UEL Boundary Map" (PDF). University Endowment Lands. Retrieved 24 October 2014.

Are Universities in BC considered Crown Corporations?

I couldn't figure out whether or not Universities in BC are Crown corporations from the Wiki article. Does anyone know what the official classification is?23.16.152.103 (talk) 06:56, 11 February 2013 (UTC)BeeCier

Its not a crown corporation as it isn't directly owned by the government. Most (if not all) public universities are independently operated. They are only publicly regulated and subsidized, so it is not considered a Crown corporation. The entire list may be found here.Leventio (talk) 15:10, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Leventio, those are federal crown corporations. UBC is a provincial public institution. Universities and colleges are considered separate from crown corporations but are administratively similar. The University Act sets out its own governance parameters but the University is publicly funded by the Province under the Ministry of Advanced Education.[1] Public Sector salaries in BC are posted online and include UBC.[2] The Province also administers Land Use Planning at UBC.[3] Therefore, UBC is not a crown corporation but is a public institution that operates at an "arm's length" from the Province, with provincial government funding.--Flurryofcrispycoffee (talk) 22:30, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Simple answer, though the details above are useful: "No". But note, privately-owned universities like Trinity Western University are not corporations either (that may be the only one, though the Catholic-run Notre Dame University (British Columbia) in Nelson, long since decommissioned and for a while a provincial college (Selkirk College) think had more transferability to regular public universities than TWU does (TWU is evangelical-run); colleges are run by, I think, another piece of legislation, but some such as Malaspina College and Cariboo College have since become Vancouver Island University and Thompson Rivers University. I don't think there are all that many private universities in Canada, at all, in fact. Universite Laval in Montreal used to be Catholic-run, I don't know about now. Saint Mary's in Halifax is still Catholic-run but governed by provincial legislation, same with St Francis Xavier (SFX) in Antigonish.Skookum1 (talk) 08:43, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "University Act". BC Laws. Retrieved 24 October 2014.
  2. ^ "BC Public Sector Salary Database". Vancouver Sun. Retrieved 24 October 2014.
  3. ^ "Service Administration for Electoral Area A". Metro Vancouver. Retrieved 24 October 2014.

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on University of British Columbia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:00, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Greek life Section Too Prominent

Why such a long section for something so peripheral to the campus? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 105.14.196.23 (talk) 17:49, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on University of British Columbia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:54, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on University of British Columbia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:06, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on University of British Columbia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:39, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on University of British Columbia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:00, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

New SUB vs. The Nest

The admittedly few UBC students I talked to said everyone calls it The Nest (not the Sub or the New Sub). The doors say "AMS Student Nest." I didn't want to edit the article because many of the uses refer to facts that I don't know are still true, but thought I'd bring it up. Pbackstrom (talk) 03:25, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on University of British Columbia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:38, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Unceded Territory

Can I remove this? It's irrelevant to the university and adds nothing. Additionally it doesn't say that on other local pages. It seems politically motivated if anything. SailingOn (talk) 04:06, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Agreed, removed.Naraht (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naraht (talk • contribs) 16:04, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Proposed merge of Centre for the Study of Democratic Institutions into University of British Columbia

Insufficient notability on its own merits. Rogermx (talk) 23:36, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Support. It's only a stub at this point and as Roger points out, it is hardly notable. Mgasparin (talk) 04:44, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
Agree As per nom. cc'ing @Rogermx: to complete the merge, as the discussion has been open for over one month with unanimous support. Daylen (talk) 05:42, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 Done Daylen (talk) 06:08, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

"Universtiy of British Columbia" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Universtiy of British Columbia. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 May 10#Universtiy of British Columbia until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC678 22:59, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

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

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

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:37, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

"The"

@CentreLeftRight: Regarding your recent reversion, how do you reconcile it with MOS:BOLDTITLE? 207.161.86.162 (talk) 00:37, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

From MOS:BOLDTITLE: If an article's title is a formal or widely accepted name for the subject, display it in bold as early as possible in the first sentence. CentreLeftRight ✉ 01:06, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
@CentreLeftRight: Right, and "The" isn't part of the article title. So why would it be bolded under that guideline? 207.161.86.162 (talk) 01:28, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
There having been no reply, it appears that 96.49.14.23 has restored conformity with our guidelines. 207.161.86.162 (talk) 07:55, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

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

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

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:11, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 July 2023

Add "UBC is consistently ranked as one of the top 3 universities in Canada <r>https://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/canada</r>" in the introduction 142.103.232.16 (talk) 16:06, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: Information is already included in the Reputation section. Also, source provided does not say anything about "consistently ranked in the top 3", only that it's currently #2 in Canada. Xan747 (talk) 16:36, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 July 2023 (2)

Rankings for QS world and THE 2024 need to be updated for this page, the page still features 2023 data Vancouversir11 (talk) 19:51, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Please change QS World rankings from 47 to 34 Vancouversir11 (talk) 20:15, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
@Vancouversir11  Not done: Please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. And also, the current year is 2023 not 2024, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Vitaium (talk) 11:55, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:University_of_British_Columbia/Archive_1&oldid=1170925345"