A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on December 9, 2008, December 9, 2009, and December 9, 2010. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
Right now, we have two pages Katholieke Universiteit Leuven and Université catholique de Louvain writing about a common history, the split, common 'notable alumni', etc... Perhaps it is a good idea to split the entire subject into three pages:
Then, as is common on wikipedia, these articles can have first lines such as:
-- Lenthe 09:50, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
I agree with Uppland-- Teal6 14:42, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
I strongly oppose the merge as suggested a few days ago (without even an edit summary!). Per the above reasoning, this article is about the unified University. Linking it to the French one (or to the Flemish one) would exclude half of its descendants, and duplicating the info would be overkill. What's wrong with the current situation? Fram 12:58, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
I equally stringly oppose the second merge proposal, and you can hardly merge the same article into two other ones (since you can only redirect it to one of them). Anyway, if you want either merge, please explain here why. Fram 21:12, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
Hi everyone. When I stumbled upon this merge proposal, I checked out what was the situation on the french Wikipedia.
Even though some articles are still stubs in other languages, I think Lenthe's suggestion should be adapted in this fashion:
I believe the Dutch Wikipedia currently has only two pages:
Following this example, I believe the four pages suggestion should provide the best interwiki template to preserve neutrality.
So this is my take on the question. Hope it helps : )
Stéphane Thibault
01:32, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Talk
Shouldn't this article be called the Pontifical University of Leuven?
I added Antoni Baranowski to the alumni list, and beacuse of the initials noticed that Aster Berkhof was second in the list, although the list was supposed to be chronological. Whoever added that one without a birth date (I think Aster is still alive) has made us face the problem that people have been adding additional alumni without specifying dates of birth and death. I do not really feel like solving all this mess on my own, but anyone adding his pet author or scientist should specify these dates, and put him or her in the chronological order according to birth. Undated alumni should just remain at the end of the list.
I will delete any alumnus/a added without these dates. Since this University no longer exists de facto if not de jure, any non-Belgian alumnus/a added should be notable already, and have a Wikipedia article on them. I will delete any alumnus/a who is not notable.-- Pan Gerwazy 08:44, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
This article needs sections about student life, like in TCD and Harvard
Bogger
20:06, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
I've cleaned up and slightly extended this as the pre-1968 article and edited Université catholique de Louvain and Katholieke Universiteit Leuven as post-1968 (hiving off the pre-1968 history and the alumni they claim, for instance, with a reference to here as the article on the historical university).
Help sorting out the links would be nice :) I've done most of them already, but there are still 100+ linking to University of Leuven (which has become a disambiguation page instead of a misleading redirect to Katholieke Universiteit Leuven).
"University of Louvain" now redirects to the disambiguation page (there are still about a dozen links to there that need sorting out)
Leuven University and Louvain University have also become redirects to the disambiguation page; they each still have one link (both alumni I can't place).
I've rewritten the 1968 split and I'd appreciate a check for NPOV: I work at the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven but can't stand the place (I do have happy memories of being a guest lecturer in the Université catholique). I don't know if that cancels out of not ... -- Paularblaster 00:19, 13 November 2007 (UTC) -- Paularblaster ( talk) 01:23, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Since this is supposed to be the historic English name, shouldn't it be the Catholic University of Louvain? I've always seen the French name of the town in historical sources. Accounts of the burning of the library in WWI, for example, use "Louvain". The Dutch name doesn't seem to have become common until after WWII. kwami ( talk) 17:36, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Why is that phrase annotated as being French, when it's not... AnonMoos ( talk) 10:54, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
It is very important not to make a confusion between the three different Universities who are founded at Louvain and who dont have any historical connexion one with the other. This article making a confusion between those three institutions is historicaly without ground. There ware at Louvain:
This article is concerning the Catholic University of Leuven founded in 1834, but it makes a confusion with the two others Universities established in Louvain: the Old University of Louvain (1425-abolished in 1797) and the State University of Louvain (founded in 1817 and abolished in 1835). The list of notable alumni makes also a confusion between the students of those three universities! This article should be amended in accordance with the historical reality. -- Bruxellensis ( talk) 12:58, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Someone recently went over the existing three articles and added a fourth "Old University" one, arguing (in broken English) that the existing universities were founded in 1834 as imposter successors to the 1425 institution. This hardly seems like an NPOV reading of history, and is at best gives the wrong impression about how KULeuven and UCL understand themserves, as the big "1425" on the university seal makes clear. Besides grammar fixing I think that the articles should present the universities as they are generally viewed first and then confine any criticism of this common understanding to a "criticism" section.
As it stands now it looks a bit like it would if someone went over all the pages on British monarchs and re-wrote the intros from a Jacobite viewpoint.
-- 194.98.58.121 ( talk) 13:54, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
This sentence is incorrect:
Indeed the founders of the State University have never claimed to be the successors or refounder of the Old University, you dont have the right to accuse him to have make this untruthfulness, they have declared that this new university was founded in 1817.
The old University was not an episcopal University but as Oxford and the other medieval Universities, not a "catholic university" but an "university in a Catholic world". It was abolished in 1797 and nobody hat the right to say that it was converted into the Catholic University of Leuven in 1835": that's an exemple of an historical construction... The introduction has to be modified so:
The Catholic University of Mechlin, which then becomes the Catholic University of Louvain (in Latin, la:Universitas Catholica Lovaniensis, in Dutch, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven ) is a Belgian university, founded in Mechlin November 8, 1834 by the bisshops of Belgium and formally installed on 1 December 1835 in Leuven [1].
Thank you four our attention .-- Bruxellensis ( talk) 14:05, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
Good morning, you write that it is a majority (a consensus) against the modifications of the historicals errors of this article! But history is not a lottery! You have to read the French, Dutch and Latin articles and you wil see that this version of the english Wikipedia is an "historical hoax". You make a confusion between the three Universities who have had her seat at Louvain. The public hat the right to now the true history of the tree differents Universities of Louvain. It is also absurd to see the names of old students of the State University of Louvain with names of students of the Catholic University.-- Bruxellensis ( talk) 07:01, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
( â†) First of all Bruxellensis, while we welcome contributors to the English Wikipedia where English is not their first language, it is important to understand exactly what is being said before you object to it. The phrase "A is identified with B" does not mean the same thing as "A is identical to B". The former means something like "A is seen to be connected with B", and the latter "A and B are the same thing." That at least two of the "universities" are identified with each other is true, shown by the very existence of reliable sources that do so.
Second, you really need to understand that what the Court of Cassation ruled was that the institutions are not legally the same (which is all a court can do), which is not what is at issue here. Modern Greece is not legally the successor state of Ancient Greece, but they are universally identified with one another, and you'll notice that the history section of the Greece article doesn't start in 1821. While we can state the technical legal status in one line in the article, it is demonstrably conventional to identify these institutions with one another, and that is why this article will not be broken up. Oreo Priest talk 20:02, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved per request. Uncontroversial, or so I hope. Favonian ( talk) 20:30, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Catholic University of Leuven (1834-1968) → Catholic University of Leuven (1834–1968) – An en dash, rather than a hyphen, should be part of the page's name (see WP:DASH). Toccata quarta ( talk) 06:09, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Catholic University of Leuven (1834–1968). 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:21, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
Consensus would be needed for any major change to the lead. Undiscussed pointy edits are not helpful, especially when they have poor syntax. -- Andreas Philopater ( talk) 15:52, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
History does not depend on a vote or a consensus, but on the evidence of the facts. The current introduction was introduced recently on (cur | prev) 20:36, 4 January 2019 Huguespotter (talk | contribs). . (24.166 bytes) (+164). . (undo | thank). This text deceives the reader because it makes believe that the Catholic University of Louvain was founded in 1425. This is an example of protochronism and distortion of history. In the name of historical truth it is necessary to put back the old introduction. Example of errors of the preface: It is wrong to write that "The Catholic University of Leuven was founded in 1425", since it was founded in 1834. It was not founded as University of Leuven, closed by the French Republic in 1797. It was not transferred to Mechelen at the Catholic University of Mechelen, but was founded in Mechelen in 1834. It did not "return" to Leuven in 1835 but was established in Leuven in 1835.-- Viator ( talk) 07:35, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Bruxellensis ( talk • contribs) 07:03, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
Please stop pasting the entire judgement of 1844 again on this page.
By the way, I've only just noticed that this article only starts in 1835, leaving the 1834 university in Mechlin to a seperate page. This is helpful for clarification and I think makes the current introduction (or the one proposed above) relevant and meaningful. Please stop quoting that tribunal thing from 1844 everywhere.
PCC7500 (
talk)
21:12, 21 August 2019 (UTC)A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on December 9, 2008, December 9, 2009, and December 9, 2010. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Right now, we have two pages Katholieke Universiteit Leuven and Université catholique de Louvain writing about a common history, the split, common 'notable alumni', etc... Perhaps it is a good idea to split the entire subject into three pages:
Then, as is common on wikipedia, these articles can have first lines such as:
-- Lenthe 09:50, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
I agree with Uppland-- Teal6 14:42, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
I strongly oppose the merge as suggested a few days ago (without even an edit summary!). Per the above reasoning, this article is about the unified University. Linking it to the French one (or to the Flemish one) would exclude half of its descendants, and duplicating the info would be overkill. What's wrong with the current situation? Fram 12:58, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
I equally stringly oppose the second merge proposal, and you can hardly merge the same article into two other ones (since you can only redirect it to one of them). Anyway, if you want either merge, please explain here why. Fram 21:12, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
Hi everyone. When I stumbled upon this merge proposal, I checked out what was the situation on the french Wikipedia.
Even though some articles are still stubs in other languages, I think Lenthe's suggestion should be adapted in this fashion:
I believe the Dutch Wikipedia currently has only two pages:
Following this example, I believe the four pages suggestion should provide the best interwiki template to preserve neutrality.
So this is my take on the question. Hope it helps : )
Stéphane Thibault
01:32, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Talk
Shouldn't this article be called the Pontifical University of Leuven?
I added Antoni Baranowski to the alumni list, and beacuse of the initials noticed that Aster Berkhof was second in the list, although the list was supposed to be chronological. Whoever added that one without a birth date (I think Aster is still alive) has made us face the problem that people have been adding additional alumni without specifying dates of birth and death. I do not really feel like solving all this mess on my own, but anyone adding his pet author or scientist should specify these dates, and put him or her in the chronological order according to birth. Undated alumni should just remain at the end of the list.
I will delete any alumnus/a added without these dates. Since this University no longer exists de facto if not de jure, any non-Belgian alumnus/a added should be notable already, and have a Wikipedia article on them. I will delete any alumnus/a who is not notable.-- Pan Gerwazy 08:44, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
This article needs sections about student life, like in TCD and Harvard
Bogger
20:06, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
I've cleaned up and slightly extended this as the pre-1968 article and edited Université catholique de Louvain and Katholieke Universiteit Leuven as post-1968 (hiving off the pre-1968 history and the alumni they claim, for instance, with a reference to here as the article on the historical university).
Help sorting out the links would be nice :) I've done most of them already, but there are still 100+ linking to University of Leuven (which has become a disambiguation page instead of a misleading redirect to Katholieke Universiteit Leuven).
"University of Louvain" now redirects to the disambiguation page (there are still about a dozen links to there that need sorting out)
Leuven University and Louvain University have also become redirects to the disambiguation page; they each still have one link (both alumni I can't place).
I've rewritten the 1968 split and I'd appreciate a check for NPOV: I work at the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven but can't stand the place (I do have happy memories of being a guest lecturer in the Université catholique). I don't know if that cancels out of not ... -- Paularblaster 00:19, 13 November 2007 (UTC) -- Paularblaster ( talk) 01:23, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Since this is supposed to be the historic English name, shouldn't it be the Catholic University of Louvain? I've always seen the French name of the town in historical sources. Accounts of the burning of the library in WWI, for example, use "Louvain". The Dutch name doesn't seem to have become common until after WWII. kwami ( talk) 17:36, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Why is that phrase annotated as being French, when it's not... AnonMoos ( talk) 10:54, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
It is very important not to make a confusion between the three different Universities who are founded at Louvain and who dont have any historical connexion one with the other. This article making a confusion between those three institutions is historicaly without ground. There ware at Louvain:
This article is concerning the Catholic University of Leuven founded in 1834, but it makes a confusion with the two others Universities established in Louvain: the Old University of Louvain (1425-abolished in 1797) and the State University of Louvain (founded in 1817 and abolished in 1835). The list of notable alumni makes also a confusion between the students of those three universities! This article should be amended in accordance with the historical reality. -- Bruxellensis ( talk) 12:58, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Someone recently went over the existing three articles and added a fourth "Old University" one, arguing (in broken English) that the existing universities were founded in 1834 as imposter successors to the 1425 institution. This hardly seems like an NPOV reading of history, and is at best gives the wrong impression about how KULeuven and UCL understand themserves, as the big "1425" on the university seal makes clear. Besides grammar fixing I think that the articles should present the universities as they are generally viewed first and then confine any criticism of this common understanding to a "criticism" section.
As it stands now it looks a bit like it would if someone went over all the pages on British monarchs and re-wrote the intros from a Jacobite viewpoint.
-- 194.98.58.121 ( talk) 13:54, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
This sentence is incorrect:
Indeed the founders of the State University have never claimed to be the successors or refounder of the Old University, you dont have the right to accuse him to have make this untruthfulness, they have declared that this new university was founded in 1817.
The old University was not an episcopal University but as Oxford and the other medieval Universities, not a "catholic university" but an "university in a Catholic world". It was abolished in 1797 and nobody hat the right to say that it was converted into the Catholic University of Leuven in 1835": that's an exemple of an historical construction... The introduction has to be modified so:
The Catholic University of Mechlin, which then becomes the Catholic University of Louvain (in Latin, la:Universitas Catholica Lovaniensis, in Dutch, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven ) is a Belgian university, founded in Mechlin November 8, 1834 by the bisshops of Belgium and formally installed on 1 December 1835 in Leuven [1].
Thank you four our attention .-- Bruxellensis ( talk) 14:05, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
Good morning, you write that it is a majority (a consensus) against the modifications of the historicals errors of this article! But history is not a lottery! You have to read the French, Dutch and Latin articles and you wil see that this version of the english Wikipedia is an "historical hoax". You make a confusion between the three Universities who have had her seat at Louvain. The public hat the right to now the true history of the tree differents Universities of Louvain. It is also absurd to see the names of old students of the State University of Louvain with names of students of the Catholic University.-- Bruxellensis ( talk) 07:01, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
( â†) First of all Bruxellensis, while we welcome contributors to the English Wikipedia where English is not their first language, it is important to understand exactly what is being said before you object to it. The phrase "A is identified with B" does not mean the same thing as "A is identical to B". The former means something like "A is seen to be connected with B", and the latter "A and B are the same thing." That at least two of the "universities" are identified with each other is true, shown by the very existence of reliable sources that do so.
Second, you really need to understand that what the Court of Cassation ruled was that the institutions are not legally the same (which is all a court can do), which is not what is at issue here. Modern Greece is not legally the successor state of Ancient Greece, but they are universally identified with one another, and you'll notice that the history section of the Greece article doesn't start in 1821. While we can state the technical legal status in one line in the article, it is demonstrably conventional to identify these institutions with one another, and that is why this article will not be broken up. Oreo Priest talk 20:02, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved per request. Uncontroversial, or so I hope. Favonian ( talk) 20:30, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Catholic University of Leuven (1834-1968) → Catholic University of Leuven (1834–1968) – An en dash, rather than a hyphen, should be part of the page's name (see WP:DASH). Toccata quarta ( talk) 06:09, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Catholic University of Leuven (1834–1968). 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:21, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
Consensus would be needed for any major change to the lead. Undiscussed pointy edits are not helpful, especially when they have poor syntax. -- Andreas Philopater ( talk) 15:52, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
History does not depend on a vote or a consensus, but on the evidence of the facts. The current introduction was introduced recently on (cur | prev) 20:36, 4 January 2019 Huguespotter (talk | contribs). . (24.166 bytes) (+164). . (undo | thank). This text deceives the reader because it makes believe that the Catholic University of Louvain was founded in 1425. This is an example of protochronism and distortion of history. In the name of historical truth it is necessary to put back the old introduction. Example of errors of the preface: It is wrong to write that "The Catholic University of Leuven was founded in 1425", since it was founded in 1834. It was not founded as University of Leuven, closed by the French Republic in 1797. It was not transferred to Mechelen at the Catholic University of Mechelen, but was founded in Mechelen in 1834. It did not "return" to Leuven in 1835 but was established in Leuven in 1835.-- Viator ( talk) 07:35, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Bruxellensis ( talk • contribs) 07:03, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
Please stop pasting the entire judgement of 1844 again on this page.
By the way, I've only just noticed that this article only starts in 1835, leaving the 1834 university in Mechlin to a seperate page. This is helpful for clarification and I think makes the current introduction (or the one proposed above) relevant and meaningful. Please stop quoting that tribunal thing from 1844 everywhere.
PCC7500 (
talk)
21:12, 21 August 2019 (UTC)