Talk:University of Wollongong/Archive 1

Archive 1

Advert

I had to add Template:Advert because it does read like an advert. It reads like a copy and paste from their prospectus - X201 13:55, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I have added the advert tag now. The introduction is complete puff and not from a neutral point of view. The whole article has no sources outside the University's web site. It does read like an advert. It needs cleaning up. I am sure it can be done. Eewrite the intro, add some sources and make sure nothing is copied from the university prospectus or reads as if it is. --Bduke 11:46, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi, there. I'm currently working as the publications writer at UOW. I noticed our Wikipedia entry and brought it to the attention of my managers; there's some embarrassment here at the low quality of the article and apparent prior attempts to use Wikipedia promotionally. I've generated some genuine interest in seeing the UOW entry rebuilt from NPOV (including salient historical information etc.). I was wondering if my involvement in this would be considered a conflict of interest, or is my working for the Uni irrelevant if my contributions are impartial? I'd like to hear your thoughts. JVPurvis 05:02, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Year of founding

I'm not sure that 1975 (year of incorporation) is more correct for "year of founding" in the infobox. I think the first VC was installed in 73, and major changes to what the University was actually doing (pursuant to incorporation) don't appear to have started until the late seventies/early eighties. 1951 gets my vote for year of founding, perhaps with an acknowledgement of its original name/status (see UNSW's infobox for example). EDIT: my session timed out, didn't sign properly. JVPurvis 03:24, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:UOW crest.gif

Image:UOW crest.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:31, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Dr Karl

Whoever deleted Dr Karl from the alumni list: he is in fact an alumnus of UOW. I'll raise the point on the Dr Karl article's discussion page. EDIT: If he studied at UOW before incorporation, he would have been awarded a UNSW testamur. However, I believe this would satisfy the definition for 'alumnus', since the institution was at that time distinct from the other UNSW campus(es)JVPurvis 06:16, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Alumni & Alumnae

I think if "Tim Polok/Timme Pollock/etc" or "Charles Berry/Chuck Berry" are going to appear as alumni of UOW, they should go at least part way to satisfying the criteria of Wikipedia's notability guidelines. At the very least, the authors could provide references confirming the existence of these people. JVPurvis 04:18, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Deleted Rianna Ponting as a 'notable alumni'

I mean seriously... And if Rhianna Ponting is a notable alumnus, why not Shane Cubis? This page still needs a lot of work and also a better logo. PS, sorry if the large header image isn't allowed (I wasn't sure). Treelovinhippie 04:47, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Treelovinhippie: I think that use of that picture from the UOW website's header is probably improper, not to mention that it is so small that it doesn't really do much for the article. Also it should not be tagged as a logo. Why not wander around campus with a camera during O-Week or first week and get some new pics. You'll look just like a fresher :) Bilious 03:08, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree with the removal of Rianna Ponting. I've removed it again. It was also removed by User:Michellecrisp here. More discussion (above) is needed about what notability yardstick is applicable in this context (ie. the notable alumni list) and/or whether it should be the same as the notability guideline for assessing whether individuals are sufficiently noteworthy to warrant a Wiki biography about them. --Brendan Lloyd [ contribs ] 12:02, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Rock, Paper

Congrats, the article is a big improvement on earlier incarnations which made me but I think that it now suffers from being slightly lop-sided in that it specifically emphasises the initiatives of the Arts/Creative Arts faculties (ie. Tide, Paperrock) whereas there is very little content regarding the Sciences, Engineering, Medical Sciences etc. I don't that it is quite as representative or as impartial as other university wiki articles - Dave —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.130.37.12 (talk) 05:35, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I maintain it's misleading to mention "the journalism faculty" at UOW--no such faculty exists. The Faculty of Creative Arts contains the School of Journalism and Creative Writing. If the word 'faculty' is meant to indicate teaching staff, it contradicts information found in the external link. In any event, invoking Stephen Tanner as a source doesn't satisfy Wikipedia's verifiability guidelines JVPurvis 23:03, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Tidecover06.gif

Image:Tidecover06.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:17, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Labels

Can someone tell me what the hell is up with the name? Its pretty unusual. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.63.78.78 (talk) 02:15, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Other issues

Should the university's vision really be quoted right near the very start of an encyclopedia article? Isn't that more like an advertisement?

Didn't it start as part of UNSW not UTS?

Yeah it did, and UOW (then still part of UNSW) was responsible for creation of a then-major version of Unix (UNSW 01) which appears on the Unix timeline elsewhere in Wikipedia, perhaps it should get a menion. Also I find it odd that Apple gets a mention but UOW's connections with SLUG is missing, there are way more Linux labs than Mac. Quolnok 16:11, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

The UOW main page should have an additional contents number ' 9. Student Organisations', where the the SRC/WUSA/UniCentre and their functions/buldings can be discussed. '10. Campus Life' where the UniBar/DuckPond lawn articles can be added.

Perhaps a section on 'Student Representation' rather than 'Organisations'. There are also student reps on the University Council and the Academic Senate.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 210.49.28.81 (talk) 17:49, 12 May 2007 (UTC).

Hey eople its an advertisement. And somebody has the net connection speed offered by the Univ.

"+many more" <--- What the hell? This is an encyclopaedia article, not a bloody advertisement.

Yeah, I zapped that one. Frankly, that kind of vaguery wouldn't even make it into an ad. JVPurvis 06:43, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Should we mention the generous allotment of 490 megabytes of internet quota per session? It should be enough for anyone —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.233.9.168 (talk) 08:38, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Photos added

I have added a couple of photos to the article, and will endeavour to add more if I get a chance to take some. I didn't want to remove the photoreq tag because I'm unsure of if that requires admin oversight from a particular group or not. Can anyone advise on the correct steps to removing this tag? JVPurvis (talk) 04:08, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Lists of notable people

Per comments below and the article's edit history, there seems to be differing views as to what constitutes notability in the context of "notable alumni". Do we take Wikipedia notability to be the applicable standard (such that alumni warranting a Wiki biography are also notable for the purpose of this section and vice-versa)? I would say yes, otherwise the article starts to resemble several flavours of what Wikipedia is not. --Brendan Lloyd [ contribs ] 12:02, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

The University of Sydney article lists its notable people on a separate standalone article: List of University of Sydney staff and alumni. This may be a useful approach to adopt here. --Brendan Lloyd [ contribs ] 12:42, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

An interesting suggestion, but I wonder if it would be long enough to not eventually get tagged for merging anyway. JVPurvis 07:04, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

I have taken this approach to cleaning up the main University of Wollongong article, it seems to be commonly used amongst other Australian and International universities on Wikipedia. In regards to Wikipedia notability, for the page I think it is fine to simply list people who are notable Aeonx (talk) 05:55, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

As there were two separate lists of identical information, I've removed the lists from this main article and left the link to the separate List of University of Wollongong people article. That way there's only one article to edit and the lists don't get out of sync.HollywoodCowboy (talk) 17:53, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Reducing Article Size

As of this comment, the current article is over 53kb in size, with a very long and complicated table of contents. Per Wikipedia:Article size, I recommend that some sections be rewritten to take up less space or spun off into their own articles. The Campuses section seems like a good candidate to be spun off into its own article. HollywoodCowboy (talk) 17:18, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Proposed merge of Illawarra Health & Medical Research Institute into University of Wollongong

No indication that this institute has independent notability. Note apparent COI editing. PamD 07:59, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Oppose merge on the grounds that while the institute is affiliated with the university, it is formally recognized by the Australian government as being independent of it. Klbrain (talk) 17:45, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Closing, somewhat boldly, as my objection has not been contested over the course of a week and there has been no support from anyone other than the proposer (over the course of more than a year). Any editor can feel free to re-proposed a merge should they wish to. Klbrain (talk) 10:24, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

References