This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
I'm removing the tag asking for factual claims to be verified. It's not really clear what section is being referred to, but if anyone knows of any errors, than they can simply be corrected. As it stands, most of the article's claims are straightforward, and I can't see much discussion here about what's actually innacurate (apart from the Farrago mistake, pointed out more than a year ago), the tag seems unnecesary. -- Brendanfox 12:47, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Please have a look that this site from the Australian Research Council. It clearly shows that Melbourne University did not get the most new funding in 2005. It ranked fifth, behind USyd, ANU, UNSW and UQld: www.arc.gov.au/info_users/factsheet_statsoverview.htm
A section for famous alumni?
The result of the debate was don't move. — Nightst a llion (?) 08:56, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
University of Melbourne → The University of Melbourne – {The is in the official name - see [1] also naming policy on the use of "The"} copied from the entry on the WP:RM page
Oppose OK. I should have gone down one more line. Xtra 10:36, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
I have created a template for the Colleges and added it to the bottom of the page. If you like it, it should be added to each of the College pages. Add {{University of Melbourne Colleges}} to the bottom of the College page. To look at it see Template:University of Melbourne Colleges. I would do this myself, but I am off soon to Sydney for a Workshop. -- Bduke 22:40, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
Should Ridley come off the template? There is now a page for Ridley that says it is no longer a Melbourne Uni College. -- Bduke 03:04, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
Someone flagged these for merging in with the University of Melbourne article, but on one of the talk pages, when they should go on the receiving and giving article main pages. I have fixed that up. However, now to comment. This makes no sense. There are other Melbourne University Student Clubs with their own articles - Football, Maountaineering and Basketball. There is also a Student Union article. So the choices are:-
If you have thoughts add them below. -- Bduke 05:53, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
I disagree. Shall we toss a coin?. AChan 12:11, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
I've removed the merge tag. There is obviously no support for this merger. Garglebutt / (talk) 21:27, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
When did the idea come about that VSU will 'severely' diminish services? I could possibly understand the use of something like 'VSU is likely to diminish some services', but considering that the legislation hasn't even come into effect yet, I think that stating that services will be 'severely' diminished is premature. MickBarnes 02:31, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
I reckon that's a better description, and better avoids the alarmist predictions that CSU advocates are making. MickBarnes 05:01, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
I notice the people removing it are from WA and SA. Is it a coincidence? Xtra 09:52, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
First off, Xtra, what sort of assertions are you making? Because I am from Western Australia I am anti-Melbourne or something? Moving beyond the ridiculous, the Melbourne newspaper article which was cited did not even support the claim that the university was Australia's most prestigious. It said "...has changed the culture of our most prestigious place of learning". Since it is from a Melbourne newspaper, for all we know they mean Victoria's most prestigious place of learning. True, it does go on to say "most prestigious academic job in Australia", but that does not mean "job at most prestigious university in Australia". A quick Google search brings up very mixed results, which seem to favour the University of Sydney being the most prestigious in website comments (though probably largely due to identical text put out by the university itself). So you could say "Melbourne University is arguably the most prestigious university in Australia", but you could equally say "Melbourne University is arguably not the most prestigious university in Australia". This sort of conjecture should be avoided unless we refer to a reputable source one way or the other, such as the Good Universities Guide or whichever organisations perform rankings of universities by prestige. - Mark 03:47, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
The latest THES ranking, and more specifically the peer-review component, does however support the view that Melbourne is the most prestigious university in the country. The THES panel included some 2500 academics from around the world.
I am a student at MU and have a pretentious disregard for all things Sydney/NSW, however, it seems like this whole rankings thing has gone a little too far. Cornell University (featured) only includes the sentence "Cornell ranks among the world's top universities" with a nice reference in its introduction, and in my opinion not much more than that is really justified here. Any objections/thoughts? • L eon 08:48, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
"Melbourne University is one of the most prestigious universities in Australia,[1] and ranks among the world's top universities.[2] Melbourne is particularly strong in the fields of the arts, humanities and biomedicine.[3]" Suicup 10:15, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
It seems to me like the Architecture section contains far too many external links. If it doesn't bother anyone, I'd like to remove them all and place links at the bottom of the page. 128.250.6.243 03:14, 2 August 2006 (UTC) (who was actually • Le on 03:15, 2 August 2006 (UTC))
Oops, I realised that this applies to the Student Services section as well. Any objections to a rewrite? •
Le
on
03:17, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
If find it a little inconsistent that Arts is listed as the largest faculty with 6,400 students, while I have written on the Faculty of Science page that Science has over 6,500. I'm pretty sure that Arts still is the largest faculty, but I think that Science is probably second (which the article says is Medicine). Incidentally is the 6,400 undergraduate or overall students? My figure is from the Faculty of Sciences' Webpage, and includes both. [3] seems to be a good reference for enrolment numbers, but won't give the most recent data to non-staff. If you follow that link and select Historical & Summary Stats, then Load & Enrolments by Faculty, there is a document that puts Arts at 7,222 and Science at 6,328 (for 2004). I feel that this shows an inaccuracy with this article, and needs to be fixed. Matt73 01:47, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
OK, I'm changing it because noone else has. Incidentally, how could such inaccurate stats get put there? And left for at least 6 months? cf [4] Medicine only has 4,921 (not 5,800) and thats Gross Students, even students who only did 1 subject. Matt73 05:33, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
An anonymous contributor has claimed that the 'chief' theory for the origin of the word was due to a charity procession. I'm happy for it to stay in the article, however i'm curious as to how he knows/found out, simply because as a student at the uni, and having participated in Prosh week many times i have never heard of that definition. Suicup 09:42, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
I reinstated the alcohol reference because it is factually correct, and the consumption of alcohol is a component of the week. I don't understand how it is unnecessary. I also removed the 'citation needed' tags as it is impossible to source these claims - they are part of an oral history. Cheers Suicup 12:04, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Pfctdayelise, are you currently/ever have been a student of Melbourne University? If so, you would acknowledge the authenticity of the information.
Suicup
12:37, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
I removed the entire paragraph because IMO after sourcing and removing the weasel words there would have been nothing left anyway. Whoever wrote the paragraph had an obvious political agenda (i'm guessing from the socialist alliance), and this has no place on an encyclopaedia. Upon further investigation, it seems that the entire section was written by user 147.10.30.111. That user's edits have all been political tirades against capitalism (check out his/her G20 additions...), and one case where he/she inserted an potentially libellous remark which claimed that the principle of Princes Hill secondary college fought for the Khmer Rouge! Suicup 12:39, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
I agree that what was written by user 147.10.30.111 was unaccetable. However i have re-instated the paragraph as it was before this user began modifying it. It now provides an accurate picture of the current criticisms of the growing esteem plan without the political bias. This is absolutely necessary to maintain this section of the article rather than just summarily deleting it because it has been attacked by someone who has their own agenda. 144.133.82.254 11:56, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
User:Maxyk please do not deceitfully change inline links by stealth. If you want to make a point, do it here on the discussion page first, and then if a consensus is reached we can make the appropriate changes to the article. Suicup 04:25, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
Even if WP guidelines (which must be right?) say the article title shouldn't contain "the", that is no reason to leave it out of the text of the article. Besides, there's always an exception: see The The for example ;-) —DIV ( 128.250.204.118 05:10, 6 April 2007 (UTC))
The more commonly used logo based upon the arms has been replaced on the page with the official arms as granted to the university and used on degrees etc., this is really more appropriate. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mastronarde ( talk • contribs) 7:59, 12 May 2007 (UTC).
The more modern logo is, indeed, far more often used. However, the one which has been removed remains the official arms of the university and whilst not used in many circumstances it is used by the university in its official degree granting status and for legal purposes, i.e. the University Seal. The previous arrangement was more suitable.
(also at VCA talk page) Where does the Australian National Academy of Music [6] fit with the Victorian College of the Arts & within the University of Melbourne? The ANAM is notable as one of 8 members of the "Australian Roundtable for Arts Training Excellence". (See Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts - Arts training bodies). Can someone please clarify, possible create an article, put something at Victorian College of the Arts or here. Thanks Paul foord 12:46, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
We don't need websites as per WP:NOT#DIR, also each college has its own article, so further detail is contained in those articles. Michellecrisp 03:46, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
This has been prodded for deletion. I have copy edited it a bit but see no reason why it should be kept. Most of what it says is already in this article. It is not sufficiently notable for an article but some of you may disagree. -- Bduke ( talk) 22:35, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
There is a number of anon edits from this IP range, which has a PTR entry in the vc.unimelb.edu.au domain (Vice Chancellor's Office). Noted in the Wikipedia Scanner http://wikiscanner.virgil.gr/f.php?ip1=128.250.98.0-255&ip2=&ip3=&ip4= Sa87 15:37, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
I can't believe nobody has acted on this comment. Following the link you will find that Mr. Davis is either editing his own article, that of his colleague Mr. Norton, and the Melbourne University article, or having someone in his office do it for him. To suggest that anyone editing from the vice chancellor's office could possibly have the neutrality of any of these articles in mind is ludicrous. senex ( talk) 07:02, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Do Australians wishing to apply or attend Uni have to complete an exam or test in high school and have substantial grades from post-high school years to be accepted, or is just if you've completed year 12? The section doesn't make it quite clear. Please advise. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Angel2001 ( talk • contribs) 13:34, 9 May 2007 (UTC).
No, in Australia whether you get in to a specific university is based solely on your high school score, there is no entrance exam, interview, or application like there is for some USA unis Hypo Mix ( talk) 11:24, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
/b/ (1) The discussion of recent events in student politics is quite out of place. That text should be moved to a Melbourne University student unions page.
(2) In the years of Alan Gilbert's recent leadership, key features include the establishment of Melbourne University Private, the University's inaugural leadership of Universitas21, and a strong public advocacy for greater private funding of higher education in Australia.
(3) A significant aspect of David Penington's leadership was the fight the university had with the state government of John Cain over the form of assessment for high school students, the Victorian Certificate of Education. - VC 2004 - Kwong Lee Dow was intergral in forming the VCE
(4) Arising out of the 60's, before its demise in the late 80's, was a remarkable experiment in university governance, the Melbourne University Assembly. There is a good book around about that somewhere, edited by Chris Francis.
(5) Yes, Farrago is the student newspaper. Not sure if there were others tho.
(6) membership of the Australian Vice Chancellor's Committee and, more recently, the Group of Eight.
(7) University of Melbourne (Florida) was a small school from 1953 to 1961 and was later absorbed by Florida Institute of Technology. Perhaps there needs to be a split.
(8) random associated notes, that I will assist in looking at - The student union issue needs to remain central to the affairs of the university, as this has resulted in an interem council being appointed (by the student body - without the bribing vouchers of the previous administration
(9) I do not believe that the University of Melbourne in Florida become a disambiguation, as the University has an international represntation, and the title should be changed to The University of Melbourne as appears on all offical documents.
(10) that the faculties are listed, and there is a discussion about Melbourne's responce to the Nelson reforms, the University is the only one in Australia to offer dual fee courses - that is Australian Fee and CSP for double degreees... however, I am new to this game and think that is am important area
(11) The phrase "The University has almost 40,000 students, who are supported by nearly 6,000 staff" is a bit flippant. A large number of staff members in any research university, including Melbourne, have little to no contact with students, whether they be in administrative or research roles. I'm being nitpicky, but it gives the article the impression it was written by a self-centered undergrad. It's a university, not a high school. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.253.35.62 ( talk • contribs)
(12)Melbourne was definately not ranked 15 in the Times Higher Education Rankings for 2008. More like 38th. —Preceding unsigned comment added by See8red ( talk • contribs) 12:20, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
"The Melbourne University Library is one of the busiest libraries in Australia, with three million visitors performing 42 million loan transactions every year"
I find this very hard to believe.. 3 million unique visitors? I checked the source and it says "our web sites serve more than 3 million visitors", and "Our branches see more than 1.4 million visits every year". Note that it's not "1.4 million visitors", but "1.4 million visits". 122.107.130.111 ( talk) 08:49, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
"The University will consolidate its three core activities—Research, Learning and Knowledge transfer—in order to become one of the world's finest institutions."
Have I missed something, or does that sound like a quotation from a UoM press release rather than an objective article? Oh, and my being an ANU graduate has nothing to do with it.... Rdbenham ( talk) 04:45, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
As per my edit summaries, there were a lot of claims which were not supported by references. I believe it is not in line with the WP:NOR and WP:SOURCE policies. However, this text was restored by 123.2.119.65 without any reasons provided.
123.2.119.65, so that other editors are able to work together with you to improve the article, could you please provide references or discuss the changes instead of just reverting the edit again? Also, your "revenge" by vandalising the referenced text in the Monash Uni article is not very nice. Hopefully we both want to see good quality articles on wikipedia, so there's no reason not to be WP:civil. Regards, 1292simon ( talk) 10:29, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
Also, this edit of yours is a clear copy-paste wp:copyvio infringement. Regardless of whether you wrote the text or not, since you added the link in that edit, you would have seen that the article's text was blatant plagiarism. 1292simon ( talk) 10:48, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.walkingmelbourne.com/building266_baldwin-spencer-building-melbourne-university.html. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. 1292simon ( talk) 10:48, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
Further apparent copyright violations and plagiarism in the contentious material (see also discussion at WP:ANI) seem to be from the university's history page and this version. - David Biddulph ( talk) 14:29, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
User:Moriarty.L has been blocked for copyright violations. His many recent edits seem to contain some good edits, but I have removed two copyrighted sentences and there may be more. Can we have some more editors taking a look at this? I am going to be busy today. -- Bduke (Discussion) 22:05, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
It's no longer refereed to as the "Melbourne Model" but "Melbourne Curriculum' see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melbourne_Curriculum there should be reference to this in the body of the page to make readers aware of the fact when they are directed to the Melbourne Curriculum page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mell.ning ( talk • contribs) 01:21, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
The references and citations in this article are all over the place. They are poorly referenced and most of them are just a URL. This is lazy referencing. Is anyone interested in fixing some of them? 121.220.222.63 ( talk) 04:00, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
Hay This is fahad. can you please guide my that what are the procedure to apply in this university.. its my wish to take an admission in Melbourne — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.180.191.66 ( talk) 12:35, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 3 external links on
University of Melbourne. 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).
Cheers. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 14:49, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
University of Melbourne. 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).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 03:09, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
University of Melbourne. 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).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 19:57, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on University of Melbourne. 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).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 04:36, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: NOT MOVED — UY Scuti Talk 17:30, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
University of Melbourne → The University of Melbourne – As the university's own logo in the infobox shows, the full title is "The University of Melbourne" — like The New York Times or The Hague. Tenebrae ( talk) 13:11, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on University of Melbourne. 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) 06:30, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
I've again removed the addition of "controversy" about a University employee. Per WP:BRD, it is the responsibility for the editor adding it to provide an argument for adding it.
This appears to be a minor disagreement between academics about a study. It was the result of a statement on Twitter, so likely a personal statement, and not any kind of official statement by the University. The tweet and account has since been deleted, so impossible to say. But I don't see what relevance this has to the University as a whole. -- Escape Orbit (Talk) 09:27, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
I'm removing the tag asking for factual claims to be verified. It's not really clear what section is being referred to, but if anyone knows of any errors, than they can simply be corrected. As it stands, most of the article's claims are straightforward, and I can't see much discussion here about what's actually innacurate (apart from the Farrago mistake, pointed out more than a year ago), the tag seems unnecesary. -- Brendanfox 12:47, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Please have a look that this site from the Australian Research Council. It clearly shows that Melbourne University did not get the most new funding in 2005. It ranked fifth, behind USyd, ANU, UNSW and UQld: www.arc.gov.au/info_users/factsheet_statsoverview.htm
A section for famous alumni?
The result of the debate was don't move. — Nightst a llion (?) 08:56, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
University of Melbourne → The University of Melbourne – {The is in the official name - see [1] also naming policy on the use of "The"} copied from the entry on the WP:RM page
Oppose OK. I should have gone down one more line. Xtra 10:36, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
I have created a template for the Colleges and added it to the bottom of the page. If you like it, it should be added to each of the College pages. Add {{University of Melbourne Colleges}} to the bottom of the College page. To look at it see Template:University of Melbourne Colleges. I would do this myself, but I am off soon to Sydney for a Workshop. -- Bduke 22:40, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
Should Ridley come off the template? There is now a page for Ridley that says it is no longer a Melbourne Uni College. -- Bduke 03:04, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
Someone flagged these for merging in with the University of Melbourne article, but on one of the talk pages, when they should go on the receiving and giving article main pages. I have fixed that up. However, now to comment. This makes no sense. There are other Melbourne University Student Clubs with their own articles - Football, Maountaineering and Basketball. There is also a Student Union article. So the choices are:-
If you have thoughts add them below. -- Bduke 05:53, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
I disagree. Shall we toss a coin?. AChan 12:11, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
I've removed the merge tag. There is obviously no support for this merger. Garglebutt / (talk) 21:27, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
When did the idea come about that VSU will 'severely' diminish services? I could possibly understand the use of something like 'VSU is likely to diminish some services', but considering that the legislation hasn't even come into effect yet, I think that stating that services will be 'severely' diminished is premature. MickBarnes 02:31, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
I reckon that's a better description, and better avoids the alarmist predictions that CSU advocates are making. MickBarnes 05:01, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
I notice the people removing it are from WA and SA. Is it a coincidence? Xtra 09:52, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
First off, Xtra, what sort of assertions are you making? Because I am from Western Australia I am anti-Melbourne or something? Moving beyond the ridiculous, the Melbourne newspaper article which was cited did not even support the claim that the university was Australia's most prestigious. It said "...has changed the culture of our most prestigious place of learning". Since it is from a Melbourne newspaper, for all we know they mean Victoria's most prestigious place of learning. True, it does go on to say "most prestigious academic job in Australia", but that does not mean "job at most prestigious university in Australia". A quick Google search brings up very mixed results, which seem to favour the University of Sydney being the most prestigious in website comments (though probably largely due to identical text put out by the university itself). So you could say "Melbourne University is arguably the most prestigious university in Australia", but you could equally say "Melbourne University is arguably not the most prestigious university in Australia". This sort of conjecture should be avoided unless we refer to a reputable source one way or the other, such as the Good Universities Guide or whichever organisations perform rankings of universities by prestige. - Mark 03:47, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
The latest THES ranking, and more specifically the peer-review component, does however support the view that Melbourne is the most prestigious university in the country. The THES panel included some 2500 academics from around the world.
I am a student at MU and have a pretentious disregard for all things Sydney/NSW, however, it seems like this whole rankings thing has gone a little too far. Cornell University (featured) only includes the sentence "Cornell ranks among the world's top universities" with a nice reference in its introduction, and in my opinion not much more than that is really justified here. Any objections/thoughts? • L eon 08:48, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
"Melbourne University is one of the most prestigious universities in Australia,[1] and ranks among the world's top universities.[2] Melbourne is particularly strong in the fields of the arts, humanities and biomedicine.[3]" Suicup 10:15, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
It seems to me like the Architecture section contains far too many external links. If it doesn't bother anyone, I'd like to remove them all and place links at the bottom of the page. 128.250.6.243 03:14, 2 August 2006 (UTC) (who was actually • Le on 03:15, 2 August 2006 (UTC))
Oops, I realised that this applies to the Student Services section as well. Any objections to a rewrite? •
Le
on
03:17, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
If find it a little inconsistent that Arts is listed as the largest faculty with 6,400 students, while I have written on the Faculty of Science page that Science has over 6,500. I'm pretty sure that Arts still is the largest faculty, but I think that Science is probably second (which the article says is Medicine). Incidentally is the 6,400 undergraduate or overall students? My figure is from the Faculty of Sciences' Webpage, and includes both. [3] seems to be a good reference for enrolment numbers, but won't give the most recent data to non-staff. If you follow that link and select Historical & Summary Stats, then Load & Enrolments by Faculty, there is a document that puts Arts at 7,222 and Science at 6,328 (for 2004). I feel that this shows an inaccuracy with this article, and needs to be fixed. Matt73 01:47, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
OK, I'm changing it because noone else has. Incidentally, how could such inaccurate stats get put there? And left for at least 6 months? cf [4] Medicine only has 4,921 (not 5,800) and thats Gross Students, even students who only did 1 subject. Matt73 05:33, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
An anonymous contributor has claimed that the 'chief' theory for the origin of the word was due to a charity procession. I'm happy for it to stay in the article, however i'm curious as to how he knows/found out, simply because as a student at the uni, and having participated in Prosh week many times i have never heard of that definition. Suicup 09:42, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
I reinstated the alcohol reference because it is factually correct, and the consumption of alcohol is a component of the week. I don't understand how it is unnecessary. I also removed the 'citation needed' tags as it is impossible to source these claims - they are part of an oral history. Cheers Suicup 12:04, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Pfctdayelise, are you currently/ever have been a student of Melbourne University? If so, you would acknowledge the authenticity of the information.
Suicup
12:37, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
I removed the entire paragraph because IMO after sourcing and removing the weasel words there would have been nothing left anyway. Whoever wrote the paragraph had an obvious political agenda (i'm guessing from the socialist alliance), and this has no place on an encyclopaedia. Upon further investigation, it seems that the entire section was written by user 147.10.30.111. That user's edits have all been political tirades against capitalism (check out his/her G20 additions...), and one case where he/she inserted an potentially libellous remark which claimed that the principle of Princes Hill secondary college fought for the Khmer Rouge! Suicup 12:39, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
I agree that what was written by user 147.10.30.111 was unaccetable. However i have re-instated the paragraph as it was before this user began modifying it. It now provides an accurate picture of the current criticisms of the growing esteem plan without the political bias. This is absolutely necessary to maintain this section of the article rather than just summarily deleting it because it has been attacked by someone who has their own agenda. 144.133.82.254 11:56, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
User:Maxyk please do not deceitfully change inline links by stealth. If you want to make a point, do it here on the discussion page first, and then if a consensus is reached we can make the appropriate changes to the article. Suicup 04:25, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
Even if WP guidelines (which must be right?) say the article title shouldn't contain "the", that is no reason to leave it out of the text of the article. Besides, there's always an exception: see The The for example ;-) —DIV ( 128.250.204.118 05:10, 6 April 2007 (UTC))
The more commonly used logo based upon the arms has been replaced on the page with the official arms as granted to the university and used on degrees etc., this is really more appropriate. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mastronarde ( talk • contribs) 7:59, 12 May 2007 (UTC).
The more modern logo is, indeed, far more often used. However, the one which has been removed remains the official arms of the university and whilst not used in many circumstances it is used by the university in its official degree granting status and for legal purposes, i.e. the University Seal. The previous arrangement was more suitable.
(also at VCA talk page) Where does the Australian National Academy of Music [6] fit with the Victorian College of the Arts & within the University of Melbourne? The ANAM is notable as one of 8 members of the "Australian Roundtable for Arts Training Excellence". (See Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts - Arts training bodies). Can someone please clarify, possible create an article, put something at Victorian College of the Arts or here. Thanks Paul foord 12:46, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
We don't need websites as per WP:NOT#DIR, also each college has its own article, so further detail is contained in those articles. Michellecrisp 03:46, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
This has been prodded for deletion. I have copy edited it a bit but see no reason why it should be kept. Most of what it says is already in this article. It is not sufficiently notable for an article but some of you may disagree. -- Bduke ( talk) 22:35, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
There is a number of anon edits from this IP range, which has a PTR entry in the vc.unimelb.edu.au domain (Vice Chancellor's Office). Noted in the Wikipedia Scanner http://wikiscanner.virgil.gr/f.php?ip1=128.250.98.0-255&ip2=&ip3=&ip4= Sa87 15:37, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
I can't believe nobody has acted on this comment. Following the link you will find that Mr. Davis is either editing his own article, that of his colleague Mr. Norton, and the Melbourne University article, or having someone in his office do it for him. To suggest that anyone editing from the vice chancellor's office could possibly have the neutrality of any of these articles in mind is ludicrous. senex ( talk) 07:02, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Do Australians wishing to apply or attend Uni have to complete an exam or test in high school and have substantial grades from post-high school years to be accepted, or is just if you've completed year 12? The section doesn't make it quite clear. Please advise. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Angel2001 ( talk • contribs) 13:34, 9 May 2007 (UTC).
No, in Australia whether you get in to a specific university is based solely on your high school score, there is no entrance exam, interview, or application like there is for some USA unis Hypo Mix ( talk) 11:24, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
/b/ (1) The discussion of recent events in student politics is quite out of place. That text should be moved to a Melbourne University student unions page.
(2) In the years of Alan Gilbert's recent leadership, key features include the establishment of Melbourne University Private, the University's inaugural leadership of Universitas21, and a strong public advocacy for greater private funding of higher education in Australia.
(3) A significant aspect of David Penington's leadership was the fight the university had with the state government of John Cain over the form of assessment for high school students, the Victorian Certificate of Education. - VC 2004 - Kwong Lee Dow was intergral in forming the VCE
(4) Arising out of the 60's, before its demise in the late 80's, was a remarkable experiment in university governance, the Melbourne University Assembly. There is a good book around about that somewhere, edited by Chris Francis.
(5) Yes, Farrago is the student newspaper. Not sure if there were others tho.
(6) membership of the Australian Vice Chancellor's Committee and, more recently, the Group of Eight.
(7) University of Melbourne (Florida) was a small school from 1953 to 1961 and was later absorbed by Florida Institute of Technology. Perhaps there needs to be a split.
(8) random associated notes, that I will assist in looking at - The student union issue needs to remain central to the affairs of the university, as this has resulted in an interem council being appointed (by the student body - without the bribing vouchers of the previous administration
(9) I do not believe that the University of Melbourne in Florida become a disambiguation, as the University has an international represntation, and the title should be changed to The University of Melbourne as appears on all offical documents.
(10) that the faculties are listed, and there is a discussion about Melbourne's responce to the Nelson reforms, the University is the only one in Australia to offer dual fee courses - that is Australian Fee and CSP for double degreees... however, I am new to this game and think that is am important area
(11) The phrase "The University has almost 40,000 students, who are supported by nearly 6,000 staff" is a bit flippant. A large number of staff members in any research university, including Melbourne, have little to no contact with students, whether they be in administrative or research roles. I'm being nitpicky, but it gives the article the impression it was written by a self-centered undergrad. It's a university, not a high school. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.253.35.62 ( talk • contribs)
(12)Melbourne was definately not ranked 15 in the Times Higher Education Rankings for 2008. More like 38th. —Preceding unsigned comment added by See8red ( talk • contribs) 12:20, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
"The Melbourne University Library is one of the busiest libraries in Australia, with three million visitors performing 42 million loan transactions every year"
I find this very hard to believe.. 3 million unique visitors? I checked the source and it says "our web sites serve more than 3 million visitors", and "Our branches see more than 1.4 million visits every year". Note that it's not "1.4 million visitors", but "1.4 million visits". 122.107.130.111 ( talk) 08:49, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
"The University will consolidate its three core activities—Research, Learning and Knowledge transfer—in order to become one of the world's finest institutions."
Have I missed something, or does that sound like a quotation from a UoM press release rather than an objective article? Oh, and my being an ANU graduate has nothing to do with it.... Rdbenham ( talk) 04:45, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
As per my edit summaries, there were a lot of claims which were not supported by references. I believe it is not in line with the WP:NOR and WP:SOURCE policies. However, this text was restored by 123.2.119.65 without any reasons provided.
123.2.119.65, so that other editors are able to work together with you to improve the article, could you please provide references or discuss the changes instead of just reverting the edit again? Also, your "revenge" by vandalising the referenced text in the Monash Uni article is not very nice. Hopefully we both want to see good quality articles on wikipedia, so there's no reason not to be WP:civil. Regards, 1292simon ( talk) 10:29, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
Also, this edit of yours is a clear copy-paste wp:copyvio infringement. Regardless of whether you wrote the text or not, since you added the link in that edit, you would have seen that the article's text was blatant plagiarism. 1292simon ( talk) 10:48, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.walkingmelbourne.com/building266_baldwin-spencer-building-melbourne-university.html. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. 1292simon ( talk) 10:48, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
Further apparent copyright violations and plagiarism in the contentious material (see also discussion at WP:ANI) seem to be from the university's history page and this version. - David Biddulph ( talk) 14:29, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
User:Moriarty.L has been blocked for copyright violations. His many recent edits seem to contain some good edits, but I have removed two copyrighted sentences and there may be more. Can we have some more editors taking a look at this? I am going to be busy today. -- Bduke (Discussion) 22:05, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
It's no longer refereed to as the "Melbourne Model" but "Melbourne Curriculum' see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melbourne_Curriculum there should be reference to this in the body of the page to make readers aware of the fact when they are directed to the Melbourne Curriculum page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mell.ning ( talk • contribs) 01:21, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
The references and citations in this article are all over the place. They are poorly referenced and most of them are just a URL. This is lazy referencing. Is anyone interested in fixing some of them? 121.220.222.63 ( talk) 04:00, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
Hay This is fahad. can you please guide my that what are the procedure to apply in this university.. its my wish to take an admission in Melbourne — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.180.191.66 ( talk) 12:35, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 3 external links on
University of Melbourne. 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).
Cheers. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 14:49, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
University of Melbourne. 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).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 03:09, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
University of Melbourne. 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).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 19:57, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on University of Melbourne. 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).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 04:36, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: NOT MOVED — UY Scuti Talk 17:30, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
University of Melbourne → The University of Melbourne – As the university's own logo in the infobox shows, the full title is "The University of Melbourne" — like The New York Times or The Hague. Tenebrae ( talk) 13:11, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on University of Melbourne. 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) 06:30, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
I've again removed the addition of "controversy" about a University employee. Per WP:BRD, it is the responsibility for the editor adding it to provide an argument for adding it.
This appears to be a minor disagreement between academics about a study. It was the result of a statement on Twitter, so likely a personal statement, and not any kind of official statement by the University. The tweet and account has since been deleted, so impossible to say. But I don't see what relevance this has to the University as a whole. -- Escape Orbit (Talk) 09:27, 14 April 2021 (UTC)