Jump to content

Talk:University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Assessment: banner shell, Illinois, Higher education (Rater)
 
(30 intermediate revisions by 14 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Afd-merge from|Center for Plasma-Material Interactions|Center for Plasma-Material Interactions|24 November 2021}}
{{afd-merged-from|Center for Plasma-Material Interactions|Center for Plasma-Material Interactions|24 November 2021}}
{{Vital article|topic=Society|level=5|class=C}}
{{ArticleHistory
{{ArticleHistory
|action1=GAN
|action1=GAN
Line 9: Line 8:
|topic=education
|topic=education
}}
}}
{{Talkheader}}
{{afd-merged-from|Varsity Men's Glee Club (University of Illinois)|Varsity Men's Glee Club (University of Illinois)|17 February 2016}}
{{afd-merged-from|Varsity Men's Glee Club (University of Illinois)|Varsity Men's Glee Club (University of Illinois)|17 February 2016}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|vital=yes|1=
{{WikiProjectBannerShell |1=
{{WikiProject Illinois|class=c|importance=top }}
{{WikiProject Illinois|importance=Top }}
{{WikiProject Universities|class=c}}}}
{{WikiProject Higher education}}
}}

{{Archives|auto=yes|search=yes}}
{{Archives|auto=yes|search=yes}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
{{User:MiszaBot/config
Line 25: Line 25:
}}
}}


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

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Why is there no 'at' in the article name? "University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign" rather than "University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign"? The latter is stated as the official name of the institution, and seems to be the widely used version. Should it be changed? I am not directly familiar. [[User:Onanoff|Onanoff]] ([[User talk:Onanoff|talk]]) 01:12, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
* [[commons:File:Champaign City Building.jpg|Champaign City Building.jpg]]<!-- COMMONSBOT: discussion | 2021-09-10T17:55:42.138337 | Champaign City Building.jpg -->
:See [https://marketing.illinois.edu/messaging/name Our Name]. [[User:Dicklyon|Dicklyon]] ([[User talk:Dicklyon|talk]]) 02:07, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
Participate in the deletion discussion at the [[commons:Commons:Deletion requests/city-data images|nomination page]]. —[[User:Community Tech bot|Community Tech bot]] ([[User talk:Community Tech bot|talk]]) 17:55, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
::https://illinois.edu/about/index.html branding has changed to not include at. Here's a good blog post: https://aaronson.org/blog/whats-the-name-of-this-university [[User:Dipthong01|Dipthong01]] ([[User talk:Dipthong01|talk]]) 18:43, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

== Wow ==

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:University_of_Illinois_Urbana-Champaign/Archive_2#Requested_move_9_April_2021 This] is probably one of the most outrageous RM outcomes I have seen. This goes directly against our MoS, which ignores how institutions brand themselves and what sources use. [[User:InfiniteNexus|InfiniteNexus]] ([[User talk:InfiniteNexus|talk]]) 21:49, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

:Agreed, I missed this RM somehow, and I never noticed the change. It seems many people were unaware, given how few participants there were for a discussion involving a major university. I'd certainly support somebody reopening it. I find [https://aaronson.org/blog/whats-the-name-of-this-university this blog post] (linked above) unconvincing. <span class="nowrap">–[[User:CWenger|CWenger]]</span> ([[User talk:CWenger|<span style="font-family:Webdings;"><big>^</big></span>]] • [[Special:Contributions/CWenger|<span style="font-family:Webdings;"><big>@</big></span>]]) 23:05, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
::The RM should have been overturned per [[WP:RMNOMIN]]: {{tqq|Any move request that is out of keeping with naming conventions or is otherwise in conflict with applicable guideline and policy, unless there is a very good reason to ignore rules, should be closed without moving regardless of how many of the participants support it}}. But it's been so long (two years), MR is no longer a noption, so a new RM would have to be opened. [[User:InfiniteNexus|InfiniteNexus]] ([[User talk:InfiniteNexus|talk]]) 01:24, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 21:06, 6 February 2024

Former good article nomineeUniversity of Illinois Urbana-Champaign was a Social sciences and society good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 26, 2006Good article nomineeNot listed

Article name

[edit]

Why is there no 'at' in the article name? "University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign" rather than "University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign"? The latter is stated as the official name of the institution, and seems to be the widely used version. Should it be changed? I am not directly familiar. Onanoff (talk) 01:12, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See Our Name. Dicklyon (talk) 02:07, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
https://illinois.edu/about/index.html branding has changed to not include at. Here's a good blog post: https://aaronson.org/blog/whats-the-name-of-this-university Dipthong01 (talk) 18:43, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wow

[edit]

This is probably one of the most outrageous RM outcomes I have seen. This goes directly against our MoS, which ignores how institutions brand themselves and what sources use. InfiniteNexus (talk) 21:49, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, I missed this RM somehow, and I never noticed the change. It seems many people were unaware, given how few participants there were for a discussion involving a major university. I'd certainly support somebody reopening it. I find this blog post (linked above) unconvincing. CWenger (^@) 23:05, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The RM should have been overturned per WP:RMNOMIN: Any move request that is out of keeping with naming conventions or is otherwise in conflict with applicable guideline and policy, unless there is a very good reason to ignore rules, should be closed without moving regardless of how many of the participants support it. But it's been so long (two years), MR is no longer a noption, so a new RM would have to be opened. InfiniteNexus (talk) 01:24, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]