Talk:University of Dundee/Archive 1

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

Early comments

this was bigger last time I saw it?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.93.33.14 (talk • contribs) 22:41, 7 December 2004 (UTC).

Sorry to mention it again, but Dundee is not and will never be an Ancient University—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.252.192.12 (talk • contribs) 09:55, 10 May 2005 (UTC).

Well it would be eventually... so will Glasgow Caledonian given enough time. And yes, it's definitely changed.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 134.36.4.220 (talk • contribs) 19:31, 14 May 2005 (UTC).
Eventually probably does not mean in our lifetime, so sorry for changing it again!—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.252.192.12 (talk • contribs) 20:46, 22 May 2005 (UTC).
Sorry, but I would have to disagree, just because the university only got a charter in 67 doesn't mean its not

regarded as an ancient university, Dundee was a founding member of the ANCIENTS now known as c.h.e.s.s. not to mention the fact that the other ancient universties in scotland, edinburgh, st andrews and glasgow regard dundee as an ancient—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.41.96.102 (talk • contribs) 20:31, 23 May 2005 (UTC).

I'm going to change the entry back unless anyone has any further input to add on the matter—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 134.36.35.101 (talk • contribs) 15:39, 17 June 2005 (UTC).

Anything to prove that Dundee is regarded as an ancient by Edinburgh, Glasgow and St Andy's other than by membership of the Scottish Ancients? At that time, I'm guessing the Open University and Strathclyde weren't members... I don't think Aberdeen was either, which is most certainly an ancient.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.92.194.15 (talk • contribs) 06:52, 9 July 2005 (UTC).

from a quick google I can provide at least one reference that refers to dundee as an ancient: http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Rector —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 134.36.34.208 (talk • contribs) 07:32, 28 July 2005 (UTC).
That site is a wikipedia mirror, and you were the person who added the reference to that article — so I'm afraid you're citing yourself. Doops | talk 18:09, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
Hehe. --Breadandcheese 11:57, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
Aberdeen was not a member at the time because it was and still is a member of the NUS, strathclyde wasnt a member at the time because it too stayed in the NUS—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 134.36.34.208 (talk • contribs) 07:44, 28 July 2005 (UTC).
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/618514.stm —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 134.36.34.208 (talk • contribs) 07:51, 28 July 2005 (UTC).
Edinburgh thinks there are four: [1]. Doops | talk 18:13, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
So does former rector Paul Henderson Scott: I have always valued the institution in the four ancient universities and in Dundee of Rectors, elected by the students, as something more than a picturesque mediaeval survival. It gives an elected representative of the students a voice on the University Court, which is the governing body of the University. [2] Doops | talk 18:17, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
Although it only became an independent university in 1967, Dundee University shares an organizational structure akin to Scotland's other four ancient universities, and so for most purposes Dundee is regarded as an "ancient".
I had previously marked the above sentence as requiring a citation, which has been removed. In particular, it is the last clause of the above sentence which is problematic. In accordance with WP:V, there is a need for material to be verifiable. This last clause has not been verified; indeed evidence has been provided to the contrary. I have removed the last clause. If anyone can find a reliable and reputable source indicating that Dundee University is regarded as ancient then please cite it and make comment to that effect. Otherwise it must stay out. Greenshed 22:46, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
I'm happy with your edit. --Breadandcheese 06:16, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

What about the fact that Dundee was once part of St Andrews' which definitely is an ancient - doesn't that have any bearing?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Magic Pickle (talk • contribs) 00:10, 7 January 2006 (UTC).

Skateboarding Edit

Who the bloody hell put the nonsense in about the QMB? Is it really particularly relevant that they banned skateboarding there? They banned smoking immediately outside all the buildings, but no one puts that in... --Breadandcheese 08:13, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Awww, no sense of humour, eh?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 134.36.36.149 (talk • contribs) 20:23, 7 December 2005 (UTC).
..Sense of humour? The banning was made official by the Uni. admins!—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 134.36.36.167 (talk • contribs) 00:59, 8 December 2005 (UTC).
Just to add my tuppence worth, I would have thought that someone who was capable of going to university should realise that Skateboarding in one of the building's isn't acceptable...—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Marks87 (talk • contribs) 23:29, 12 December 2005 (UTC).
... I just worry about anyone who is of uni age and still skateboards. Anyway, it's hardly the sort of thing that'll go down in history 'Dundee uni - the first in Britain to officially ban skateboarding in its nice new buildings... in every other uni it was just common sense'. But hey, what do I know... at least we're challenging those long-established traditions and questioning their significance to the modern day. --Breadandcheese 08:09, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Latin Name

Does anyone know the Latin name of Dundee? Googling it would seem to suggest 'Universitas Dundeensis,' but the latter part is taken from the name of a Catholic diocese in South Africa by the name of Dundee. I can't say I've ever seen either the Uni or the city council use Latin outside of their mottos.

I suppose it is entirely possible that it doesn't have a Latin name - from what I understand, the Roman presence in the area was camped on the south bank of the River Tay and Dundee wasn't much to speak of at the time. But even then, you'd expect at least a developed translation of the name to have come about. I've heard that the idea Dundee is actually from the Latin for Gift of God is most likely incorrect, so I've ruled this out at the moment.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Breadandcheese (talk • contribs) 01:43, 17 January 2006 (UTC).

My Slight Overhaul

Anyone have any problems with it?

Oh, point for debate, what's the general consensus on the term 'Dundee University'? It's not technically correct, I don't think it's necessary, could be a point of confusion and is not widely used IMO. --Breadandcheese 17:27, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Ancienthood Revisited

It seems that a non-signed in source has edited the page again regarding Dundee's ancient or otherwise status. I believe he was accurate in replacing 'akin to' with 'with' when describing Dundee's organisational structure - the structure of the university is certainly identical to that of an ancient university of Scotland.

However going as far as to effectively say it is an ancient is wrong - it derived from an ancient (and this is from a student at the university itself, so one can hardly accuse me of bias). While we should shy away, I believe, from saying outright that it is not an ancient, I believe the facts speak for themselves - Dundee is often considered alongside ancients - true, and it is often included amongst them - but it was chartered in 1967 and was briefly at its birth as the University-College separate from St Andrews, which shows a level of independence in formation from the outset.

As such, I shall be replacing the edit with the following statement:

"Although it only became an independent university in 1967, Dundee shares an organisational structure with the ancient universities of Scotland due to its status as a former college of St Andrews and as a result is considered alongside them for a number of matters - although there is some debate as to how close this relationship can be seen to extend and to what degree the university can be placed under the same umbrella as the other four. "

If you wish to edit this further then I would like to see written and supported objections on this talk page and some sort of arbitration process according to wikipedia guidelines. --Breadandcheese 11:24, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Breadandcheese. Thanks for your efforts on keeping this page encyclopedic.

... as a result is considered alongside them for a number of matters ...

I am not aware that there is any significant point of view (outwith this page) which argues for Dundee being considered alongside the ancient universities of Scotland for a number of matters. I am happy to be proved wrong and I think that it would help the tenor of this page to state the details of these matters. Otherwise, I fear, that the whole article appears somewhat degraded by this section. I'm very happy to discuss further and don't want to make any unilateral edits. Greenshed 09:34, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

This was a rough paraphrase of the earlier version of this article. As said above, Dundee was one of the (founding?) members of the Scottish Ancients group which evolved into CHESS. When people mention the Ancient Universities, as a result of the structure, Dundee is often included - you only need to look to the page on the ancients of Scotland on here to realise that.
I think we need to make the article reflective of the situation: both informing the reader why it could be grouped with the ancients and yet making it clear that it was only chartered in '67 - in my edit I tried to use as neutral language as possible.--Breadandcheese 15:58, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Well the university seem to consider themselves an ancient. See this press release from dundee's press office where they refer to the FIVE ancients. [[3]] There's also the whole CHESS membership thing mentioned prior. and theres this link [[4]] which contains an excert from the hearald 21/01/06 which again refers to five. The American scottish foundation also thinks there are five [[5]] where under the 2001 section it states "symposium at Columbia University featuring academics from Scotland's five ancient" The former rector of Aberdeen Clarissa Dickson Wright thinks there are five too [[6]]

I am Rector of Aberdeen University - let me explain. At Aberdeen, one of the five ancient universities of Scotland, the students have the right to vote in a rector who will serve as the voice of the students to the faculty, and chair the University Court.

134.36.37.173 12:00, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the above; I stand corrected - some people count the University of Dundee as a Scottish ancient. However, I think the text needs a little more work. The Google test below yields signicant results:

Search String = "five ancient universities" scot* => 296 results

Search String = "four ancient universities" scot* => 978 results

Although this is something of a crude measure, it certainlly shows that many people consider that there are four, not five ancients.

Also, it's still not clear to me that for those who do count Dundee as ancient, that they only consider it as such for a number of matters. What are these matters? Perhaps they consider it to be ancient for all matters. I propose the following amendments:

"Although it only became an independent university in 1967, Dundee shares an organisational structure with the ancient universities of Scotland due to its status as a former college of St Andrews and as a result is considered by some to be an ancient Scottish university. However, many others do not regard Dundee as ancient." Greenshed 23:25, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Tack on the words "...as a result of its age." to the end of that statement (not for any particularly grand reasons, just that the statement sounds a bit unbalanced and it doesn't seem to link back to the first statement in the paragraph) and I will support the edit entirely. For the record, I don't hold Dundee to be ancient myself - but I do consider it to be born of that stock so to speak - a sort of child of an ancient, but that's all a bit airy-fairy and almost disgustingly poetic for inclusion. --Breadandcheese 14:42, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Also, the University of Dundee's own web site mentions the four ancient universities [[7]] Greenshed 23:36, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't think those google results should necessarily be taken to show that the majority consider dundee to not be an ancient. See WP:GOOGLE for some drawbacks of this kind of verification. Specfically I feel there is a bias in favour of any facts that are currently in wikipedia. Any fact that is on wikipedia gets replicated all over the internet and the article can be self confiming if we become reliant on google tests. For instance in the first page of the google search for "four ancient universities" scot* there are matches for seven unique sites. Of these 2 of them are either wikipedia mirrors or simple cut and paste's of wikipedias text of the Masters degree article and another one specfically refers to an issue of which Dundee was not a part. I'm sure if we were to look at more of the results further on it would show similar trends.


Dundee shares an organisational structure with the ancient universities of Scotland due to its status as a former college of St Andrews If I may comment on this line for a moment while it is true I feel it would be more accurate to say the reason for the shared organisational structure is the fact that it is goverened under the universities (scotland) act. It is this act which actually lays out the governing structure for these (and only these) universities. Dundee could have easily have been a former part of st andrews and gone on to be governed like any other oridinary modern university not under the auspisces of the act.

I believe that we must be wary of using weasel words when we decide on this sentance. To claim that it is commonly referred to as either one or the other is obviously going to be hard to prove especially in the lack of one single authority on what defines an ancient. It has been in my personal experiance (as well as, it would appear, the experiance of the original author of this article Big Jim Fae Scotland that most regard it as an ancient. Obviously Breadandcheese and other editors have had a different experiance. I believe we must therefore detail the fact that there are two different schools of thought on the subject without pushing one interpretation over the other. WP:AWW suggests we avoid such terms as 'commonly thought of' and 'most regard it as' and back up any claims with appropiate references so perhaps something along the lines of.

"Many authorities, including the university itself, regard Dundee to be one of the five Scottish ancients{various footnotes/cites that support this} on account of the fact that it is governed under the universities (Scotland) act and therefore shares all the unique features that typically exemplify ancient Scottish universities. However there are many who do not regard it as such{various footnotes/cites that support this} due to the relatively recent founding of the university in 1967 and consider there only to be four Scottish ancients."

I look forward to any comments on this suggestion.

134.36.37.173 20:27, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Would I be correct in saying we now have two sources, each from the University itself, that contradict - one effectively including it amongst the ancients and one considering it alongside them?
To be honest, I don't think the University know any better than we do on the issue and that would really depend on which member of the staff is making an announcement. In fact, I don't believe any of the sources offered give a particularly considered position - there's never been a discussion about it, but it has only been alluded to in passing. I think we should consider fact rather than what is the most common use in this case and the essential fact is that, although carrying on the tradition and so forth, Dundee is a young university and not 'ancient' in foundation. --Breadandcheese 18:40, 10 May 2006 (UTC)


I don't believe the two dundee uni pages do actually contradict the uni's position on the matter. The cited page that says four is in the form of a quotation from a third party, not the university itself. I do agree that I don't think there has been a discussion on the matter before. It is after all mearly a trivial matter of semantic convention. When people refer to Dundee as an ancient I don't believe it is because anyone is mistaken as to it's actual age but rather a different semantic interpretation of what the definition of 'ancient' is in the context of scottish universities. In the same way that 'red brick university' doesn't imply that a university is literally built of red bricks. I believe we must include both interpretations and the reasons why these are.
62.30.169.85 20:22, 10 May 2006 (UTC) Previously 134.36.37.173
I get the feeling that we're making progress towards an agreed form of words but there's still some way to go. I've picked out some key issues following.

Anecdotal Evidence

Whilst I would in no way dispute that the Anon user above and Big Jim Fae Scotland have had experience of UofD being described as ancient, that has not been my experience, or I think Breadandcheese's. As all this is unlikly to be verifiable, I dosen't get us anywhere.

The Google Test and What People Think

Whilst Google tests are crude, they don't tell us nothing. If we look at the unique results and exclude the wikipedia mirrors and direct copies and pastes from Wikipedia then (I've gone through this as quickly as possible - so I might have made one or two errors - please feel free to correct me):

"five ancient universities" scot* gives only one non-wikipedia result - headed Sialkot

(And, of course we have the four references given some way above.)

"four ancient universities" scot* gives at least 27 non-wikipedia results: [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] [34]

After going through the first seven (of 16) pages I gave up, as I think my point is proved. Note the range and calibre of the web addresses (eg Scottish Parliament, Aberdeen University, Scottish Executive, The Scotsman, The Guardian etc).

My conclusion from this is that it is standard to consider there to be only four ancient Scottish universities and exceptional to consider there to be five.

View of the University of Dundee Itself

I don't think that we can say that UofD definately considers itself to be ancient. Its Press Office has been inconsistent, and although I agree with Anon above that the four ancients reference is a quote (and another four ancients quote from Dundee is provided in the list above), the University Press Office is clearly content to publish material stating that there are only four ancients. We need more evidence if we want to say that the UofD considers itself to be ancient.

Weasel Words

I agree with Anon that we should try to avoid such terms as 'commonly thought of' and 'most regard it as'. However, Anon's suggestion:

Many authorities, including the university itself, regard Dundee to be one of the five Scottish ancients...

Uses the term regard. As we certainly cannot say that UofD is ancient, WP:AWW seems to indicate that we say nothing at all. What do people think?

Oops - sorry, I forgot to sign Greenshed 22:53, 10 May 2006 (UTC)


How about instead of regard we use the term refer . That is what all these sources are actually doing after all. Maybe take out the including the university itself.
As for the google test I think that the results show different things depending on the search strings;
"five ancient universities" 554 results
"four ancient universities" 411 results
I only took a quick look at results from the first page but they all managed to retain the scottish context.(ie. they still managed to refer to what we're talking about here without the *scot on the end).
A lot of your sources arent entierly fair. The aberdeen one(8) refers to an issue of which Dundee wasn't involved and is therefore semanticaly correct with either interpretation of the number of ancients). The bible literature site (16) is the same as (8) in that it specifically refers to four that were involved in this particular event(ie it doesn't say four plus dundee. it just says four). The princeton page(17) is the same. I just looked at the first few but you get the picture.
I don't believe the google test is that conclusive. Either way I don't beleive the difference is significant enough to warrant refering to one style as being standard or more common. In truth we could continue discussing the number of sources/references and google results and their validity and conclusiveness for ever, but I'm not sure we're going to get anywhere in terms of proving anything with it.
In regard to the uni being content to publish quotes that say there are four. I don't believe factual accuracy to be an issue when it comes to reporting the words of someone else. Sure in argument and when trying to prove a point thats important but when you are reporting what someone said at an event you don't bother with whether it was right or not just so long as their words are accuratly reproduced. (btw that quote mentioned is the same as the one mentioned earlier.
When you say we should say nothing at all I'm not sure what your quite referring too. Nothing about the uni's opinion, the opinion that there are 4 or the whole issue entirely. If it's the first I'm happy with that suggestion.
how about we say something along the lines of "some refer to dundee as an ancient{various cites} because of the whole uni(scotland)act etc... and some refer to it as not being an ancient{various cites} due to its age."
While were here I've just actually remembered that in Edinburgh uni's Teviot building there's a bar. I believe it's called the teviot bar as well, that actually has the crests of the ancients elabaratly carved in to the wood above the bar. There's five including Dundee. (I realise this is just as conclusive as any other source so far but I just thought I'd mention it as it just came to mind, unfortunatly I can't find a picture)
62.30.169.85 10:14, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
I will be away from the wikipedia for a few days and I will repond more fully then. However, in brief, I agree with your suggestion to use the word refer rather than regard (we will, of course, need to agree on a sentence though). On the matter of the results, my point was then when I start digging, there are lots of results for "four ancient universities" and very few for "five ancient universities". You are right to point out that a number of these results, when understood in context, may not actually imply that Dundee is excluded from the category of Scottish ancient universities. I didn't want to spend the time going through every result in detail, believing that a general trend was emerging. What I will do is carefully compile two lists; one for four and one for five. I am confident that, even if we disagree about one or two of the results on either list, we will see that the preponderance lies with four ancient universities.
By the way, the description of the carvings in the Teviot Building did lead me to reflect on one point. I've never doubted that Aberdeen, Dundee, Edinburgh, Glasgow and St Andrews are sometimes grouped together. Perhaps "ancient" is not the right word and maybe what people are thinking of is long-established in the Scottish university sector. Anyway I doubt this verifiable either. Greenshed 23:43, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

I hardly dare to put a toe into the pool of this discussion at this point... but I notice that the page for the city of Dundee itself mentions "the ancient University of Dundee". That's pretty unequivocal and gives no hint at all that the point may be debatable. I'd say that alone makes it unverifiable for now. Personally I feel the word "ancient" should be removed from that page, or qualified, at least until this discussion here is resolved. But I've not been bold enough to do so since it seemed rude to intrude out of the blue into such a deeply discussed issue! ;) – Kieran T (talk | contribs) 01:03, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure that I agree that there are "very few" results for five ancients. I think we might be able to agree that there are a significant number of results for both interpretations. I don't think the matter of whether one is used a little bit more often than the other (or at least comes up in google a bit more) should really have an effect on the final sentance. Not meaning to insult your suggestion but I'm not sure compiling a list you describe is going to bring us much closer to an agreement on a solution. I also think we may be in danger of violating WP:NPOV if we give undue precedence to one interpretation over the other. I believe it is suffcient to mention that there are two interpretations why these are and we should concentrate on how we are going to word the final sentance.
As for the mention in the dundee city page, if it's an issue than I see no reason why it can't be removed entirely. I don't think that article will be affected by the lack of one adjective to describe the university.
134.36.37.173 19:12, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Balance of Views

I fear that using some statement that gives equal precedence to "ancient view" and the "non-ancient view" breaks WP:NPOV. Clearly we mustn't give undue precedence to one interpretation over the other but my central point is that there are very few references to Dundee as ancient compared with many references excluding Dundee from the category of ancient universities of Scotland. See WP:NPOV#Undue weight for the detail of NPOV as it applies to this point.

I hope that editors will accept that I have not tried to be crafty with my Google searching (see above). As it stands I have been able to find many any references excluding Dundee from the category of ancient universities of Scotland and only a handful with refer to Dundee as ancient. I submit that this is no accident - rather it is because most people do not count Dundee as ancient. Given the evidence presented so far on this discussion page I maintain that we should go for something along the lines of:

"Although it only became an independent university in 1967, Dundee shares an organisational structure with the ancient universities of Scotland due to its status as a former college of St Andrews and as a result is sometimes referred to as an ancient Scottish university. {five (or more if known) footnotes/cites to support this} However, many others when referring to the ancient Scottish universities, do not include Dundee on account of its age. {various footnotes/cites to support this}"

If others feel that many people refer to Dundee as an ancient university, all that is needed is to provide the evidence (from anywhere - not just Google searches). Incidentally, I would encourage other editors who have worthwhile contributions to make to get involved. Greenshed 23:29, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Before we get to the case in point ther're some other issues that need addressing as mentioned previously
  • Dundee shares an organisational structure with the ancient universities of Scotland due to its status as a former college of St Andrews If I may comment on this line for a moment while it is true I feel it would be more accurate to say the reason for the shared organisational structure is the fact that it is goverened under the universities (scotland) act. It is this act which actually lays out the governing structure for these (and only these) universities. Dundee could have easily have been a former part of st andrews and gone on to be governed like any other oridinary modern university not under the auspisces of the act.
  • I think you suggestion on involving more editors will be helpfull so with that in mind I'm going to ask previous editors who have edited this particular paragraph for their input on the matter.
now back to the ancients. I was thinking about this line of yours Perhaps "ancient" is not the right word and maybe what people are thinking of is long-established in the Scottish university sector. I would like completly agree that this is what people are thinking of when they refer to the five ancients except I believe that 'ancients' is the correct term just as 'red brick university' means something other than it's literal definition in terms of grouping universities.
I wasn't aware you were under the impression that there were only five references for a claim if five. For that I apologise, I've always tended to shy away from the google test for various reasons and I still don't believe it's a valid mechanism for establishing something as vague as many v's few. However here are a few references for you.
  1. [35] Dundee university Press Release
  2. [36] Excert from the herald newspaper on strathclyde uni's website
  3. [37] American Scotish Foundation
  4. [38] From the Telegraph newspaper quote from former Aberdeen uni rector Clarissa Dickson Wright.
  5. [39] Sialkot
  6. Teviot Bar/Building carvings
  7. Dundee's membership of ANCIENTS. Ancients had to change it's name when non-ancients became members
  8. University Education in Dundee: A Centenary History This book refers to dundee as an ancient, unfortunatly I can't find a copy online and it's been a while since I read it so I don't suppose it's much use but I thought I would mention it.
  9. [40] St-Andrews applying from college brochure. On page five refers to MA after your name as identifying you as having studied at one of the scottish ancients. - Dundee offers MA's too.
  10. [41] Thread on Dundee Unions online forum where students refer to dundee as being one of the ancients.
  11. [42] Article by Aberdeen Principal where he refers to the merger of northern college with dundee and aberdeen as finally incorporating teacher training thoughout scotland into the ancient universties.
  12. [43] universitiesuk Submission to the Lambert Review of Business-University Collaboration This refers to the universities governed by courts as being scottish ancients as opposed to those goverend by councils. Dundee is governed by a court
  13. [44] American association of collegiate registras and admissions officers - Presentation refers to there being five scottish ancients
  14. [45] Article about Murray College from khalid hasan publication

134.36.37.173 15:47, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Here's a thought - why doesn't someone email the Dundee press office and outright ask if the University considers itself an ancient? Magnificat anima mea dominum  ! ! ! Magic Pickle 19:25, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Art School

It would be nice if someone cared to place in more information about the DoJ Art School since it does seem to be quite well respected and a major part of the University. --Breadandcheese 11:33, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Airlie Place

Removed the reference to it being 'mainly for International Students' - I lived there last year and everybody I knew WASN'T an International Student. This year it is barely being used, as it's soon due to be converted into offices.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.19.63.14 (talk • contribs) 17:45, 26 November 2006 (UTC).

Heathfield and Belmont Halls?

I've never heard of Heathfield referred to as "Heathfield Hall", or Belmont as "Belmont Hall". Any reasons for keeping the name "Hall" in the building names? Goldbringer 19:12, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Hmm... I've admittedly never heard of Heathfield being referred to as Heathfield Hall, but Belmont was certainly called 'Belmont Hall' (or perhaps Halls in reference to the Tower and the Flats) in popular usage up until a few years ago. I'm sure there are still signs up to that effect for Belmont, I'll have a look the next time I'm walking by. --Breadandcheese 21:50, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

University ratings

(I'm posting this to all articles on UK universities as so far discussion hasn't really taken off on Wikipedia:WikiProject Universities.)

There needs to be a broader convention about which university rankings to include in articles. Currently it seems most pages are listing primarily those that show the institution at its best (or worst in a few cases). See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Universities#University ratings. Timrollpickering 22:06, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Do you really think that's going to work? After all, no rating system is by any means definitive, nor do many actually reflect common perceptions. I don't think the present system on wikipedia is any great problem, people understand the status of these and they effectively turn into awards which the university has won more than anything more objective. --Breadandcheese 21:51, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Rector-Elect?

Is Craig Murray the Rector before he is installed? The university website seems to think so - http://www.dundee.ac.uk/pressreleases/2007/prfeb07/newrector.html

The Academic Secretary's email to the students leaves it open to both interpretations - "Craig Murray was elected Rector of the University on Friday 16 February 2007 for the usual 3 year term. The vote was: [numbers, signature etc]." --Breadandcheese 11:01, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Edit wars

WP:TEND etc makes it clear that is sort of behaviour is detrimental to the wider community. While I'm sure most of us would rather be doing better things than dealing with petty editing, we equally do not wish to create a consensus on such matters where one does not exist (or indeed, where the contrary seems to be agreed). There appears to be a hardcore of minor editors trawling the pages looking for things like this to change - I remind them that Wikipedia is not their soapbox for Righting Great Wrongs.

If there is another edit on this topic, I shall begin dispute resolution (WP:DR) - however equally I would prefer it left as there seems to be a feeling that this topic needs discussion in the wider scheme of things.--Breadandcheese 13:27, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

You seem to think that you have some sort of moral upper-hand here. However, referring to good faith edits by long-established editors as "vandalism" puts you in a rather poor light I am afraid. I have restore the consensus position. It is unclear what you mean by "negociation" in your last edit summary. Wikipedia is not some kind of trading market. --Mais oui! 20:58, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Kindly indicate where this "consensus" of yours is sourced from - to me, it seems quite straightforward that the United Kingdom is the country that the University of Dundee is in. Scotland is a constituent country and a nation. To deny that the United Kingdom is a country is a blatent disregard of fact and indeed, there seems to be a consensus quite to the contrary in the Scotland talk page at the moment.
You are not adding anything to content, but instead editing perfectly correct information for what I can only assume is a political end. If you really must have the word 'Scotland' included in there, which I suppose is faintly relevant as it is Scotland-wide bodies which allocate funding, then fair enough - however editing simply to the exclusion of what is factually accurate and but you quite simply dislike is not on and, in my opinion, nothing short of vandalism. The longevity of your service is irrelevant, but since you bring it up, it seems you have quite a history of this sort of double standard. --Breadandcheese 01:57, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
As for your "negociation" (sic) - you will find that negotiation with other Wikipedians is the first step in dispute resolution as mentioned in WP:DR, something it must be said that you seem rather hostile to. --Breadandcheese 02:14, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
If anybody is concerned about use of the 'state' tag, it should be noted that it is complete unnecessary and there are free tags in the infobox which could be used to clarify the status in regards Scotland and the UK. --Breadandcheese 19:38, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Agreed! Scotland is part of the UK so what is the problem? User:84.9.228.106
How very, very convenient that the dynamic IP sockpuppet pops up, minutes after its alter-ego leaves a message on its Talk page. This farce has gone on long enough. This blatant WP:POINT sockpuppet campaign must stop. --Mais oui! 22:41, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
I have a dynamic IP address. Not my fault my ISP gives me a new IP addy. User:84.9.228.106
Not to worry, Mais Oui! thinks everything 'must stop.' The rest of us will be assuming good faith as suggested by WP:AGF. However I too echo Mholland's point and suggest getting an account may be the way forward. I must agree with you - I too cannot see the problem, and those who seek to change the position seem to the exclusion of an actual fact and the distortion of the Template seem very scant with justification on that front. I'm just glad to see some movement here. --Breadandcheese 00:29, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Looks like Mais oui! has restarted the edit wars again.
Could I respectfully suggest that you register an account? There are several benefits. — mholland (talk) 22:59, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

I have signposted this discussion at Wikipedia talk:Scottish Wikipedians' notice board#Consistency across articles. --Mais oui! 09:02, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Well at least that's something and I hope it stimulates some discussion. Consistency is of course required, and this will settle a point which has been raised on almost every Scottish university page, and edited back and forth without either explanation of debate. --Breadandcheese 09:11, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

There is yet another edit war starting, spread to the Dundee University Students' Association page. Obviously the inclination is to revert to the original position and seek protection for the page until this issue is negotiated, as per advice. However I realise that this negotiation is bound to fail as the elements engaging in said edit war have demonstrated themselves unwilling to behave. It's a rather unpleasant position, but as no debate will be had, there's very little else to do but hope that certain people get bored and go away. Breadandcheese 22:22, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

I am unclear as to what you mean by the "original position". I think it may perhaps be unhelpful to point at arbitrary past revisions of an article as some sort of standard. As always I support a solution which has a place for both Scotland and the United Kingdom, but I argue this on its merits, not as a "restoration". — mholland (talk) 23:03, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Well, as far as I recall without looking at the archives, the past point went very much agreed upon for some time before what I consider a bit of an 'incident' - I certainly did not create the position which it appears that you and I support, however I do think if someone seeks to change it, the onus ought to be upon them to present a reasonable position when it seems that the consensus is against them, otherwise a presumption should be in favour of 'restoration'. Feel very free to correct my stance if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policy. I do think it rather ridiculous that this problem has been happening back-and-forth on many Scottish university pages for as long as I've been on Wikipedia and there seems to be nobody willing to discuss it. The consensus seems to be 'sit back, let them fight it out til they get bored and stick with whatever remains thereafter'.
I would prefer to initiate some sort of wider policy review, and hopefully a consensus on the matter which can be applied to other pages, however I am not entirely aware how to go about this. --Breadandcheese 00:29, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Protected

I've protected the page for 48 hours to let you guys discuss further changes. Please don't continue edit warring after the protection expires. Ryan Postlethwaite 12:09, 28 June 2007 (UTC)


If anyone has anything to add to the above, which I of course suggest was complete and utter nonsense, I shall revert back to the original version in due course. I've yet to be enlightened as to the motivations of the "Braveheart editors," which is not a terrific position to be in, but that's no reason to desist from removing pointless and incorrect edits. The point on consistency is well made, and the original Dundee position should hopefully be picked up by the other main university pages in Scotland. --Breadandcheese 21:13, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
I've fully protected the page *again*, for a week this time around. Please try to reach an agreement here. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 01:25, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Translation into Chinese Wikipedia

The 16:07, 2 February 2011 109.175.232.249 version of this article is translated into Chinese Wikipedia to expand a stub there.--Wing (talk) 14:28, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Alumni

I have removed three individuals from the Law and Politics list as they were all dead by the time University College, Dundee was founded and so could not possibly be alumni of any predecessor of the University of Dundee. There also appears to be a lack of references for quite a few names on these lists Dunarc (talk) 08:37, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

European Institute for Security and Justice

The University launched the European Institute for Security and Justice in June 2014. I think this should be added, especially since they are receiving funding from the European Union and I suspect we'll be hearing more from this institute in the future. In the UK are so far no comparable institutions.

Kind regards J.N.

Sources:

http://www.dundee.ac.uk/news/2014/university-launches-new-european-institute-for-security-and-justice.php

http://eisj.eu/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:810D:88BF:F66C:2D81:8C03:6B36:A254 (talk) 00:34, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Removal of Centre for Gene Regulation and Expression section

I've tried to remove the Centre for Gene Regulation and Expression section twice but have been bumped back by Drchriswilliams due to it being "referenced content" I disagree as the reference is a random news article about one grant. In addition this is a small part of the university rather than a full college / school and is written like an advertisement. It appears, given the style, to have been inserted by members of staff from the unit.

It also contains a note about lack of citations and the internal links are pointing at sports stars rather than scientists.

Can we please get rid of this section as it is just silly, we might as well list every tiny department if a single "bit of university gets grant" article is enough to justify it. thanks 77.99.109.71 (talk) 21:35, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

I don't think that this is simply a case of a "bit of university gets grant". This research facility is a centre of excellence. Around £5m in 2008 allowed a significant expansion to occur and before five years had elapsed a further funding package was announced. The description of what the centre does in this article is a bit clunky (and the centre does seem to do some quite specialised work), which is perhaps why you regard it as reading like an advertisement. The wording might need a bit of work, but I don't see justification for removing the content in its entirety. Drchriswilliams (talk) 22:05, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
might we reach a compromise then? Could we keep the reference to the facility however move it under the college of life sciences research school which is where it is located in the organisational structure. I accept your point about it being a centre of excellence however there are many centres of excellence in the university such as the centre of petroleum mentioned further up.
The current structure of the page suggests this small centre is of equal importance to the entirety of Duncan of Jordanstone art school which it is not. If you're OK with this I'd be happy to slightly reduce the detail, move it, and then add some detail about the petroleum centre under its entry. I'd say the same applies for the European Institute for Security and Justice which is a sub-division of the school of humanities. 77.99.109.71 (talk) 17:42, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
I agree with your suggestions. I had been wondering that where this material currently sits is not ideal (and that a separate article for the College of Life Sciences would be a more natural place for such material to be explored in depth). I support relocating the content in this article as you suggest and reducing the details may help this material fit better in the current structure and also make the description more accessible. I agree with your suggestions for other content that could be added to the article. Drchriswilliams (talk) 22:32, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Brilliant. I'll make some changes this evening. I'd suggest avoiding a new page for the College of Life Science for the moment as I believe the University is about to have a restructure so it won't exist in its current form for much longer. Perhaps once the dust settles. 77.99.109.71 (talk) 06:24, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on University of Dundee. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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 22:23, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on University of Dundee. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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 02:52, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Ronald Coase

The text on Ronald Coase seems disproportionate to the article.Dunarc (talk) 16:22, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Changed by shortening the section and moving to the alumni and staff. Aloneinthewild (talk) 11:32, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Boosterism

There is some amazing boosterism of Dundee's prestige on this page (strangely similar to how the university loves boasting it is amazing at life sciences research), I've trimmed it down but I feel there is more to go. If you disagree please comment here. Aloneinthewild (talk) 11:32, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

I removed the following which is unsourced since 2008.

At the same time, the University of St Andrews was, as were the other universities in Scotland at the time, suffering from significant financial problems.[citation needed] Moreover, St Andrews' position, isolation and small size (160 students as opposed to the University of Aberdeen, with a roll of around 700) contributed to a significant decline.

Aloneinthewild (talk) 11:58, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

I suspect the Southgate book mentioned in bibliography is possibly the source for this and a lot of the other uncited material relating to the history here. Dunarc (talk) 18:44, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Thomas Shaw, 1st Baron Craigmyle

There does not seem to be anything to support the claim he was an alumnus of Dundee, so I have removed him from the Law and Politics Alumni list. Dunarc (talk) 18:19, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Use of coat of arms

Just a quick note about the use of the coat of arms: it was established practice before the rebranding to use the coat of arms image first and the university's logo second. The edit altering it suggested that the coat of arms had been changed; it has not. The pre-rebranding approach taken on this page is consistent with the approach taken on the pages for most universities (and certainly the older ones) in Scotland.

Prior to my edit, the primary image used for the university was not the full logo, but rather just the shield element of the new logo (a simplified and dual-colour version of the coat of arms). There is no provision made for this in the design guidelines for the new branding. --Breadandcheese (talk) 03:24, 30 November 2018 (UTC)


I do not believe this is correct. I have asked around with some contacts and the university fully changed their registered arms with the Lord Lyon. All coats of arms have to be registered in Scotland so a change as major as Dundee's (reinterpreting the crown as a series of shapes) would need full sign off. The degree certificates now also use the new shield and I think it is more telling that there is no mention whatsoever of the old shield in the brand guidelines aside from the reference to the "original shield" which is distinctly past tense.

Onitsukatigerfan (talk) 12:03, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

In any case, a decision to make an edit cannot be based on things that violate WP:VERIFYOR and WP:NOR. Referencing conversations with unnamed people certainly doesn't qualify and I have tried to find any evidence to support this suggestion, which I cannot.
What I would say is that this is a logomark, designed by a graphic design firm, Tangent Graphics. There are only two elements that are actually altered: the removal of the jewelling on the Crown (which may, or may not, be part of the blazon) and the colouring. Changes of this level, to simplify or differently present a grant of arms, take place regularly take place without a change to the grant. An example, albeit outside of Scotland, would be Durham University where the practice I am suggesting has been discussed on its talk page and followed - or, within Scotland, the UK Government's simplified use of the Royal Arms which you can see on their Twitter page.
I'd also contest that something being "original" suggests that it is past-tense. --Breadandcheese (talk) 15:45, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
I think we're in a slight quandary here as, although you state there is no evidence to support that it has been changed, there is also no evidence that the multi-colour version remains valid.
That said, you raise Durham has a point of comparison who have a full colour coat of arms but the purple version in the logo. Durham's full colour version remains on its degree certificates whereas Dundee have changed their degree certificates to the new style. I'd suggest that the degree certificate is probably the most formal document produced by the University. Given that both this and court papers are branded this way would suggest the old version has been replaced entirely. Onitsukatigerfan (talk) 20:25, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Wimberley memo

The statement " the "Wimberley Memo" (resulting in the Cooper and Tedder reports of 1952), advocating independence for the College" would seem to be wrong. At the time Principal D. N. Wimberley did not support University College breaking away from St Andrews as David Couper Thomson and others did as the Southgate and Shafe books make clear. Dunarc (talk) 19:04, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:University_of_Dundee/Archive_1&oldid=1137287503"