Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of universities in the Canadian Prairies/archive1
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The list was promoted by User:Scorpion0422 22:30, 2 December 2008 [1].
This is a bit of an unusual list. Initially, the following lists existed: List of universities in Alberta, List of universities in Manitoba, and List of universities in Saskatchewan. However, each of these lists contained less than ten items, so none could be featured. After nominating the lists of Canadian universities as a featured topic at Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/Universities in Canada, it has been suggested that these lists should be merged together so that there is a total of more than ten items to let it be featured.
Furthermore, since this is a list of universities from three provinces grouped together under the category of "Canadian Prairies", there isn't any other official connection between the lists of universities beyond this geographical characteristic. Therefore, in the lead, the first paragraph simply points out that this is a list of universities grouped together from three provinces. After that, the next three paragraphs discuss their respective universities. The reason that it has been organized in this manner is so that the lead doesn't only contain one sentence or two. Gary King (talk) 04:14, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment
Just a suggestion, though you may not like it, is that you could put all three of the lists together, with a new column called, "Province". Then, you could just put the See alsos in a "See also" section. -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24[c] 04:32, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- That's one alternative. However, this format is comparable to List of universities in Canada and so I'd like to try and keep it like that. Gary King (talk) 04:35, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I think you should change the table in that article too, but if you don't like this format, I suggest you not re-format it. -- SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24[c] 04:38, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I think you should change the table in that article too, but if you don't like this format, I suggest you not re-format it. -- SRE.K.A
- More comments
- Just a suggestion, though you may not like it, is that you could put all three of the lists together, with a new column called, "Province". Then, you could just put the See alsos in a "See also" section.
- University of Alberta should be above Athabasca University.
- I think Collège universitaire de Saint-Boniface should be sorted as a S, since "Collège universitaire de" is just like "University of".
- Why is Canadian Mennonite University placed last?
- The article does not have a link on Template:Universities in Canada.
-- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24[c] 04:38, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- All done. The template has links to the university lists for each province, and they redirect to this article. Gary King (talk) 04:49, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- One more comment
- I seriously think that you should create a "See also" section, since some readers may think that they are the main articles without looking at what it actually is. -- SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24[c] 06:29, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]- The navigation template links to the other lists. Gary King (talk) 01:46, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I know that, but some readers may not. Just move those articles to the "See also" section. -- SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24[c] 01:53, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I added List of universities in Canada. I don't think the ones for the other provinces all have to be listed. Gary King (talk) 02:05, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I think you did not understand what I was saying. I think that List of colleges in Alberta, List of colleges in Manitoba, and List of colleges in Saskatchewan should be in the See also section, not below the sections. -- SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24[c] 02:12, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]- Ah; I think that they're more appropriate where they are now because they are within the right context. Gary King (talk) 02:41, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I think you did not understand what I was saying. I think that List of colleges in Alberta, List of colleges in Manitoba, and List of colleges in Saskatchewan should be in the See also section, not below the sections. -- SRE.K.A
- I added List of universities in Canada. I don't think the ones for the other provinces all have to be listed. Gary King (talk) 02:05, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I know that, but some readers may not. Just move those articles to the "See also" section. -- SRE.K.A
Support - excellent list, comprehensive prose and tables. Definitely complies with WP:WIAFL.--TRUCO 23:31, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose - should have been left as individual provincial lists. It also hasn't been around long enough to ensure it will be stable. Me-123567-Me (talk) 03:32, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Please understand the whole context before going around tagging articles for deletion and whatnot. Those articles were part of a Featured Topic Candidate, but the consensus was to conflate them into one larger article. Gary did this so as to appease FTC reviewers and gain the support necessary for the Featured Topic to be formed. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:49, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- That, and it sounds reasonable to me that a merged list containing more than ten items is more useful than several small lists containing three items, or even one or two in the other sister list. Gary King (talk) 03:52, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Still doesn't change my opposition. So a few non-candadian people decided they should be merged, hmmm? Maybe we should do that to a few US state lists, perhaps List of colleges and universities in Alaska? Me-123567-Me (talk) 03:53, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Why does nationality have anything to do with it (Assume good faith please)? The merger was recommended on the Featured Topic Candidacy page by several editors. Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/Universities in Canada Dabomb87 (talk) 03:55, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Decisions are made on Wikipedia that concern articles of many countries and are made by people from many different nationalities. Someone doesn't have to be a citizen of one country to voice their opinion on article's about that country. Gary King (talk) 03:59, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Yet you also live in the USA, Dabomb87. My opposition stands. Good day. Me-123567-Me (talk) 04:01, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- When I first saw this list, I thought that it was very coincidental that the lists that were merged all had less than 10 Universities, and are all part of the Canadian Prairies. To answer Me-1234567-Me's question, Alaska cannot be merged with another list because it is a lone state, and is not attached to the main area of the United States. Also, please assume good faith here in Wikipedia. Next time, ask someone why they merged the articles first, then see if the article should be considered for deletion. I am a Canadian (as it says on my userpage), and I think that this list should stay merged. -- SRE.K.A
nnoyomous.L.24[c] 04:04, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]- Your opinion, while I may not agree with it, I will not argue with. Me-123567-Me (talk) 04:30, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- When I first saw this list, I thought that it was very coincidental that the lists that were merged all had less than 10 Universities, and are all part of the Canadian Prairies. To answer Me-1234567-Me's question, Alaska cannot be merged with another list because it is a lone state, and is not attached to the main area of the United States. Also, please assume good faith here in Wikipedia. Next time, ask someone why they merged the articles first, then see if the article should be considered for deletion. I am a Canadian (as it says on my userpage), and I think that this list should stay merged. -- SRE.K.A
- Yet you also live in the USA, Dabomb87. My opposition stands. Good day. Me-123567-Me (talk) 04:01, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Decisions are made on Wikipedia that concern articles of many countries and are made by people from many different nationalities. Someone doesn't have to be a citizen of one country to voice their opinion on article's about that country. Gary King (talk) 03:59, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Why does nationality have anything to do with it (Assume good faith please)? The merger was recommended on the Featured Topic Candidacy page by several editors. Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/Universities in Canada Dabomb87 (talk) 03:55, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Still doesn't change my opposition. So a few non-candadian people decided they should be merged, hmmm? Maybe we should do that to a few US state lists, perhaps List of colleges and universities in Alaska? Me-123567-Me (talk) 03:53, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- That, and it sounds reasonable to me that a merged list containing more than ten items is more useful than several small lists containing three items, or even one or two in the other sister list. Gary King (talk) 03:52, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Please understand the whole context before going around tagging articles for deletion and whatnot. Those articles were part of a Featured Topic Candidate, but the consensus was to conflate them into one larger article. Gary did this so as to appease FTC reviewers and gain the support necessary for the Featured Topic to be formed. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:49, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(outdent) I am going to ask Matthew or Scorpion to disregard this oppose as unactionable because the opposer has not fully examined the details of the matter (consensus to merge articles) and seems intent on undermining users' contributions and/or comments simply because because of their nationality. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:05, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- See also WP:WORLDVIEW. Me-123567-Me (talk) 04:13, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I have a perfectly valid argument, thankyouverymuch. Now who isn't assuming good faith, hmmm? Me-123567-Me (talk) 04:17, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Please be more specific. Cite areas in the article where you feel there is bias of any sort. In addition, that policy does not mean for non-Canadians not to edit the articles at all. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:16, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The simple fact that non-canadians decided it should be one list. Me-123567-Me (talk) 04:17, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't understand you. Are you saying that only Canadians should be allowed to edit articles related to their country (another irrelevant and totally wrong point)? Dabomb87 (talk) 04:19, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- How would you feel if all candian editors went and decided that List of colleges and universities in Alaska should be merged with Harvard University for example? Me-123567-Me (talk) 04:23, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- This is a wiki, anybody can edit. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:24, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Answer the question, please. Me-123567-Me (talk) 04:25, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- As long as they had good reasoning for the merge and consensus, I would not care. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:27, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- And if it wasn't good reasoning? Me-123567-Me (talk) 04:30, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- (reply on users' talk page)
- And if it wasn't good reasoning? Me-123567-Me (talk) 04:30, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- As long as they had good reasoning for the merge and consensus, I would not care. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:27, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Answer the question, please. Me-123567-Me (talk) 04:25, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- This is a wiki, anybody can edit. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:24, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- How would you feel if all candian editors went and decided that List of colleges and universities in Alaska should be merged with Harvard University for example? Me-123567-Me (talk) 04:23, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't understand you. Are you saying that only Canadians should be allowed to edit articles related to their country (another irrelevant and totally wrong point)? Dabomb87 (talk) 04:19, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The simple fact that non-canadians decided it should be one list. Me-123567-Me (talk) 04:17, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Please be more specific. Cite areas in the article where you feel there is bias of any sort. In addition, that policy does not mean for non-Canadians not to edit the articles at all. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:16, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I added this discussion to the Wikipedia:Canadian Wikipedians' notice board. Me-123567-Me (talk) 04:36, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relevant to the discussion:
- You said: "And if it wasn't good reasoning?" The reasoning for the merge was this: To have one well-developed article instead of 3 stubby articles and per consensus on the Featured Topic Candidacy page. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:33, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Again, you didn't answer the question. To avoid "stubby" isn't a good reason. Or we'd delete stubby articles, which we don't. Did you not want that comment brought up there? Me-123567-Me (talk) 04:37, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I answered on my talk page, no point making this one longer. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:41, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- comments. (same as for above) Can you change the letters in the key to be bold instead of italic, so they match the table headers (making it easier to spot the correlation).
- Also i think the article overall (which i agree is much better as the merge) would look better if the tables had the same column widths. Can you pad them so this is the case? (I do it using nb-spaces, but i'm sure there is a better way). Then it is much easier to scroll down and compare the entries from seperate provinces, and would flow better. Will support if those are done, as the rest complies with criteria.Yobmod (talk) 08:52, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Also, concerning the oppose above, i think that we should be encouraging editors to merge very short lists, if it can be done in a logical way, as it is here by grouping contiguous states. A stub article is bad enough, a stub list is next to useless. This way looks better and is more useful.Yobmod (talk) 09:58, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I've done your suggested points. Thanks! Gary King (talk) 15:58, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Hence, support.Yobmod (talk) 15:14, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Good list and well written prose. Fulfills Wikipedia:Featured list criteria—Chris! ct 00:50, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)
- "There are six universities in the province of Alberta,[1] regulated by the Ministry of Advanced Education and Technology."-->There are six universities in the province of Alberta,[1] which are regulated by the Ministry of Advanced Education and Technology.
- "There are four universities in Manitoba,[3] under the responsibility of the Ministry of Advanced Education and Literacy."-->There are four universities in Manitoba,[3] which are under the responsibility of the Ministry of Advanced Education and Literacy.
- Refs 5 and 6 need publication dates (at the bottom of the pages). Dabomb87 (talk) 15:49, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- All done. I can't find the publication date for reference 6. Gary King (talk) 15:53, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, I meant ref 4. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:58, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- All done. I can't find the publication date for reference 6. Gary King (talk) 15:53, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Very nice article with references and an informative lead. I strongly support the merge of the three provinces; this list is an appropriate length. However, what is the difference between this and the relevant sections in List of universities in Canada? I would support a complete merge of all the lists. Reywas92Talk 16:49, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.