Talk:ASEAN University Network

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on ASEAN University Network. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070202134449/http://www.aun.chula.ac.th:80/Miscellanous/Enlargement%20of%20AUN%20Membership%20_Announcement_.pdf to http://www.aun.chula.ac.th/Miscellanous/Enlargement%20of%20AUN%20Membership%20_Announcement_.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110415130732/http://www.asean.org/4961.htm to http://www.asean.org/4961.htm

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:55, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

Table of Institutions

I've removed the "Tables of institutions" from the "AUN member universities" section because it was basically redundant to the bullet list of universities in the same section. There's no need to have both a list and a table of basically the same encyclopedic information, and the list seems more than sufficient. There are Wikilinks to each individual member university where more information about the university can be found, so there's no need to add such details to this article. The table also had other problems such as the inappropriate use of non-free images, the embedded external links to various official websites, problems with the coloring of the tables being used per MOS:COLOR, inappropriate use of flag icons, etc., none of which are present in the bullet list; so, just removing it altogether and leaving the list as is seemed like the best option. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:33, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

It's definitely more useful for a viewer to easily view all the relevant fundamental details about each university at a simple glance if they so wish, rather than committing to a full research of going through every wikilink to get to know about these universities, especially when these prestigious universities are known differently with multiple names in different countries that the bullet list does not display without being too long. For example, the universities listed for Malaysia and Indonesia are widely known more by their Malay names both locally in Malaysia or Indonesia and internationally than their English translations but their English names are also used internationally. This also applies for all the other countries like Thailand, Vietnam, Myanmar, etc., especially when the common internet user in Southeast Asia would consult English Wikipedia more than any other language version of Wikipedia, so when they go over this table, it'll immediately connect in people's minds in whichever ASEAN country that it's that university we're talking about. I left the bullet list up so people can easily see which universities are to which country and for people to easily navigate to each of their wikipages if people do decide to look into any of these universities, otherwise if people don't want to know more about these universities in detail, then they can easily glance at that bullet list and stop scrolling before the table. I suppose we can leave out the copyrighted logos column, and the website links if we really can't have that. The colors, I patterned them with each university's prominent school colors which many of them are also mentioned in their wikipages. I'm not sure what you mean by the flag icons since flag icons are present in the bullet list, unless of course we'll just have the name of the country alone for that column.--Mlgc1998 (talk) 03:03, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

I disagree with your assessment that the table as you added it makes things generally easier to understand for the reader. I also thinks it's contrary to the way Wikipedia articles are intended to be written in a summary style. The point of a Wikilink is to give the reader a way to find out more detailed information about a subject mentioned in one article without having to include such detailed information in all articles mentioning the same same subject. While it makes since to list the institutes/schools that are part of the AUN, it's not necessary to list specific details about each of these institutes/schools in this article, especially when the same detailed information can be found in their respective stand-alone articles. Listing the institutions by name (and perhaps their abbreviated name) as well as the country where they are located seem more than sufficient for this article. Detailed information such as their native/alternative names, their addresses, etc. can be found in their respective article. This article is not intended to be a directory for everything AUN. I can appreciate you desire to make this article easier for the common internet user in Southeast Asia, but this is not just "Wikipedia for the common Internet user in Southeast Asia" so the article should necessarily be written with such a person in mind.

The bullet-point format used in the article seems sufficient to me, but a simple table of entries could work as well. There is no need, however, for both a both list of entries and a table which essentially lists the same entries and serves the same encyclopedic purpose; one of the other is fine. if the bullet-point format makes in difficult to include a bit more information about each institution, then maybe it should be replaced by a table; however, replacing it with a table shouldn't automatically be seen as a reason to replace it with a "bloated table".

Using color in Wikipedia articles should be done in accordance with MOS:COLOR. Wikipedia articles are read by people from around the world using all kinds of different devices; so, it's best to try an use color in a way that makes it easy for most readers to view the information without any problem. There are also readers who might not be able to see some colors as well as others or even see colors at all and this is probably why extravagant use of color is not recommended. This doesn't mean colors cannot be used but there should be a good encyclopedic reason for using them that goes beyond simply wanting just to use because the are the school colors. Do you think the average reader is going to understand that the reason a certain color is being used is because it's the school colors? Perhaps someone familiar with the AUN or it's member institutions might get the connection, but the average reader is probably going to just see them as random colors, and maybe even further wonder why some entries don't have colors.

The use of the flag icons in the bullet list might not be ideal, but it's not nearly as excessive as the way they were being used in the table per MOS:FLAG. It may not be ideal to have a flag icon of a country that links to the stand-alone article about the country located right next to a Wikilink to the same article where the same flag can be seen like is done in the bullet list, but it's really not necessary to use the same flag icon each time you mention a particular country in a table. Moreover, the template used in the bullet list was {{flag}} which works slightly different than {{flag icon}} template used in the table.

Non-free content such as logo files is almost always never allowed to be used in tables or tables/embedded lists like this per Wikipedia's non-free content use policy and also MOS:LOGO. Even freely licensed or public domain files found on Commons aren't really recommended to be used in such a way per MOS:LOGO. So, it's probably better to have a list/table which doesn't display any logos than one which is only going be able to display on some logos. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:51, 11 October 2019 (UTC)