Talk:Sungkyunkwan University

Merging Sungkyun Language Institute into this article?

The stub Sungkyun Language Institute should be merged into this article so that all small but relevant parts of the university community can appear in a single article. --Mumun 無文 13:19, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

I disagree. On this basis, California should be merged with the United States, which should in turn be merged with North America, and, in fact, the world. SLI is a semi-autonomous organisation within Sungkyunkwan University, and not an academic department as such. It has students who are not registered with the university for some of its non-credit classes, and as such can be seen as a separate entity. --User:Jpbarrass 11.54 p.m., 6th April, 2007

Hello, JPBarrass! Nice to meet you. You have deposited a nonsense response above. Would you care to provide a legitimate reason as to why the stub Sungkyun Language Institute should not be merged into Sungkyunkwan University? -- Mumun 無文 18:13, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Hello, Mumun 無文. You appear to have written a mildly offensive tongue-deeply-in-cheek response above. Would you care to read beyond the opening to my previous response, which was light-hearted, and continue to the crux of my point, being that it is not a department of the university and that it is, as stated in the first line of the article, semi-autonomous, a point on which I elaborated above? Perhaps after reading this again and taking some time to let it sink in, you will see that the point is not "nonsense" and perhaps then you will decline from writing barely disguised venomous comments.--User:Jpbarrass 8.00 a.m., 9th April, 2007

SCI World Ranking

After an intensive search, I have been unable to find anything relating to Sungkyunkwan University's position as 228th in the world based on the SCI. I propose, therefore, that this claim be removed until a reliable source can be obtained. User:Jpbarrass 04:38, 15 April 2007 (UTC).

I agree. I also couldn't find this information. Perhaps the editor who added that will come back and provide a source. In the meantime, let's rm. -- Mumun 無文 09:33, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I attached references for the new ranking of Sungkyunkwan university in 2006 although I am not the original editor. Brincos 04:07, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

A new issue has arisen over this matter, as raised on my user discussion page and opposed by Patriotmissile. I believe that the issue of the validity of SCI rankings should be raised on the SCI page and not in this article. The point of contention appears to be fair, but I believe it is misplaced. I would be interested in hearing others' opinions on this before moving to re-delete the point, as I do not wish to act single-handedly. Thank you. JPBarrass 06:18, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah. right. It is a methodology issue which applies to all the university in the ranking, not just Sungkyunkwan university. Brincos 21:32, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Official campus name

Neither Seoul campus nor Suwon campus is official names representing each campus of Sungkyunkwan university. The Humanities and Social Sciences campus and the Natural Sciences Campus are correct. [[1]] --76.199.9.236 08:08, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

location section

Is the level of detail in the Location section necessary/relevant? As of this post there are many coordinates etc. Other university articles do not have this level of detail. Thoughts? Mumun 無文 11:33, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

I have expanded this section to make the detailed parts seem more reasonable. I hope this helps. JPBarrass 14:49, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

~~ Stop doing vandalism on posts for other Korean universities. This is last warning for SungKyunkwan university students who are committing these insane acts. I know at least two persons, Mumun 無文 and Brincos, fro SungKyunkwan university has messed up the contents for other Korean universities. I definitely know SungKyunw=kwan university is notorious for their sick ans twisted acts to other universities, but this is really unspeakable insane acts. Let me tell you guys one thing. What you guys do harm on others can be exactly returned to you Sungkyunkwan people. ok? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Patriotmissile (talk • contribs) 21:59, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Brincos, you are really pushing me to a corner. Enough is enough. Don't forget you are the one who started this. It is obvious that you spend many of your times to do this kind of sick acts,and I won't look idly on your such acts. You have stared this since I made a justifiable comment for SKY schools. If you think you have a problem with it, why don't you discuss about it in the place where we can talk about it, not by vandalizing the Korea University thread. You acts are such mean and coward.

In addition, I have a proof from massmedia that the Sungkyunkwan university fabricated the numbers of SCI journals by 55% increment. So it is a sheer fact, so you may have to accept it according to your claim that the any fact is welcomed, right? If you change any of contents for Korea University, I will start from there. Don't even think about deleting the facts! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Patriotmissile (talk • contribs) 00:48, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

clarification and surgery required

Thanks to the guy named Epthorn, I realize that there are so many things to be revised in this SKKU thread. Most of references are written in Korean, which is completely useless according to Epthorn. I will also add the fact I know about SKKU wth relevant references. Those fact are as following: falsification of SCI journal numbers by SKKU [2], inll reputation of SKKU defaming on other Korean universities [3], and percentage of regular job employment in SKKU university [4],

I may start do surgery on the thread for Sungkyunkwan university in harmony with my friend Epthorn do his job on KU thread.Patriotmissile 15:16, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Stop trying to quote me. You are inept at it. Instead cite the regulations yourself. Here: 1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability#Sources_in_languages_other_than_English 2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources#When_you_add_content I am tired of seeing you use my name in areas where it is inappropriate. I ask anyone who references this page to disregard any misquotes and follow wiki-guidelines. Epthorn 15:35, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

That's your problem, Epthorn. Please don't be a sissy. Please let me know if there's rule that I can't use or quote your name in Wikipedia. Anyway, it seems that you are also interested in SKKU thread. Don't worry I will take good care of this thread for you. Do you job I will do mine. Like you see, this SKKU thread desperately ask me to do surgery on it based on your (Epthorn) standard, right?Patriotmissile 15:39, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

I believe your actions and "sissy" comments are in violation of WP:CIVIL. Further you are continuing to engage in personal attacks WP:NPA. Do not source me or MISQUOTE me as a source in Wikipedia. Please do not contact me or reference me- I have grown tired of this behavior. Do not use me as an excuse to commit vandalism and then complain when you did not read the policies for yourself as I helpfully provided several times. Epthorn 15:59, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

I have no idea what you're talking about. Since when the word sissy did become a thrash talk? In addtion, you, Epthorn, supported Brincos when Brincos talked me as a dog, right? Which is worse dog or sissy, it's up to individual people. Well contacting you or quoting you is my freedom. If not, as I told you sevral times, bring the clauses writeen in Wikipedia.

In addition, I have never mentioned that I will make vandalsm on the Sungkyunkwan university thread. I just mentioned that I will fix this thread accordin to Epthorn's standard. Do you have a problem with it? If so, that's just nothing but refelection of your contradiction.

Strangely, Epthorn, it seems that you feel bad after I started my move on the Sungkyunkwan university thread. You said you're absolutely nothing to do with SKKU, and Brincos, who is Sungkyunkwan university alumni, but I don't know. To my view, you have behaved exactly like Brincos except an ID. Please don't mention that ask administrator to do so. Since Brincos himself revealed that he is an expert of computer and can do anything, so it is a piece of cake for him to use proxies, including one from the KU server.

You do your job, I will do mine, Epthorn.Patriotmissile 17:02, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

A few hours ago, Patriotmissile gave a sincere apology to Epthorn as shown in [5] for accusing Epthorn of being a sockpuppet of me, Brincos. I'd just like to make it sure for whom to read this discussion with clarity. I am not Epthorn. Patriotmissile just made a wrong guess and did absurd discuss here. Brincos 06:40, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Civility & Personal Attacks

Hi there. Please note that per our policies on civility and personal attacks, comments such as sissies and cowards are out of line and may lead to loss of editing privileges (i.e., blocking) for the editors who make them. Please moderate your behavior. Thank you. --Bfigura ^(talk) 19:11, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Wow what a systemic defense line in this Sungkyunkwan university has! Ok I may not use the words like sissy or coward again, but your Sungkyunkwan university alumni Brincos talked me as a dog. I'd like to have an apologize for it. If dog is a slang, sissy and coward are friendly words in my town used frequently as a slang.

By the way, I am thinking about when is an appropriate time to upload the following facts to the SKKU main thread with revision on all contents with the references written in Korean:Those fact are as following: falsification of SCI journal numbers by SKKU [6], inll reputation of SKKU defaming on other Korean universities [7], and percentage of regular job employment in SKKU university [8],

Thank you.Patriotmissile 20:26, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I have no affiliation to the institution in question. And please note that "he started it" is not a valid defense of uncivil behavior. (I didn't mean to pick you out, I just scanned through and saw a number of uncivil edits pop out at me -- my comments were meant to apply to all. Clearly dog is also patently incivil). And I'm not 100% sure, but I believe that as this is the en-wiki, references in english are preferable. (I'm not going to comment on the situtation those ref's address, as I'm not familiar with the incident). Best, --Bfigura ^(talk) 21:11, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Neutrality

Due to the tone of this thread and ambiguity of references with the standards admmonished by the user Epthorn, I put the neutrality check on this thread. So please do not remove the tag until disputes are dissolved.Patriotmissile 21:09, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

I found user:Jpbarrass has undone my current revision without acceptable reasons. Those revisions were covered by the references written by journalists, not by individual readers or netizens, in relaible major newpapers. In addition, I found someone has tried to distort my intention of revisions with their own guessing. I think that is not an appropriate behaviour in Wikipedia.Patriotmissile 15:07, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Also, user:Jpbarrass gave a note for reasoning his latest revision as follow;

'Section referring to a message board removed - inadmissible in encyclopaedic articles. This seems to be nothing beyond inter-university warring between rival students'

However, Jpbarrass also removed the other content regarding falsification of reporting numbers of SCI journal publication with no reasons. It is not an acceptable and civil reaction.Patriotmissile 15:12, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Brincos removed the POV-check tag without any consents, and it is certainly not an orthodox way to modulate and pacify disparities, suggested by Wikipedia. I also can't understand the way Brincos judged and concluded about the character of the refence issued for 'hooliganing '. The reference was written by journalist, not by individual netizen, in major Korean new paper, so if there's any problem on the reference, it is better to start negotiating the journalist who wrote that article to clarify its character. You can't simply conclude the reference as a 'yellow journalism'.

Have you ever seriously thought about my edit? Brincos 04:47, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I have~ Have you ever seriously thought about my edit, too? Think the definitions of the words properly, before you actually apply them on your written expressions.

I will leave the current status of this thread now, but I will ask administrators to decide the autheniticity of the reference.Patriotmissile 03:04, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I am still waiting for the third party you mentioned at the time of 14:35, 14 September 2007 in [9]. Could you even remember how many times you have told me that you would report? How about the official channels you mentioned at the time of 23:55, 22 October 2007 in [10]? Still being busy to report? I am really tired of your BRAG. Is this time real? Please let me see them, huh? -_- Brincos 04:47, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Would you please focus on the subject ongoing? You always try to escape from awkward problems you wish to evade by threatening with putting your imaginatory false charge. Oh also, I'd like to mention you that I reported your confession on your tracking other wikiusers' computer by plausible illegal means to administrators.

Patriotmissile, I just told you that I were just waiting the third party and the administrators 'cause you definitely told me that you had reported something. But no one showed up. Have you ever thought how I would think of this? huh? Brincos 15:20, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

By the way, it looks that using the word 'brag' on me seems not to be that polite. Watch your behaviour. In addition, as I told you, you removed the POV-check tag without any consents, and also you removed lines supported with reliable references without any reasons. That's a serious violation.

It looks that you're so lenient to yourself for doing acts what others hate, but so reluctant to others do the similar acts what you hate. That's what people call 'selfish and contradictory behaviour'Patriotmissile 14:31, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

You might need one more free lesson. OK. First, you need to explain to me why you put the POV tag. Brincos 15:20, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Your free lessons always are merely worthy in accordance to their free values. You keep trying to avoid important issues by bringing personal matters. Here, the most important issue we have to talk is the arbitrary deletion of contents covered by the authentic references by you, Brincos. I still can't understand why you removed the contents I added without any consents, which were loyally accorded with Wikipedia requirements. About the articles referring to falsication of SCI publication numbers by Sungkyunkwan university and notoriety of SKKU as a defamer of other Korean universities are based on true, and the articles were written by journalists, not by individuals with bad feelings on SKKU.

The reference you put about SCI publications is just about a methodology issue which applies to all the university in the ranking. Of course, this is not falsication something, either. The other reference you put about Sungkyunkwan university internet hooligans something is just an example of yellow journalism 'cause no one can be certain if they are really Sungkyunkwan university students. Anyone can feign himself a Sungkyunkwan university student while doing something childish on the other universities' website. It is also possible that a Korea university student can try to defame Sungkyunkwan university by feigning himself a Sungkyunkwan university student while doing naughty things on a university's website. Does the reference say Police found out they were really Sungkyunkwan university students? No. This is just gossip which is not worthy of a reference. Brincos 06:41, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

That's just nothing but your claim. As the article [[11]] said, the rank has clearly produced by the result of application of mismethodology. How could it be possibly the same issue of journal can be counted multiple times in accordance to the number of authours. Does it mean that if the paper written by 100 authors can be considered as equivalent to 100 different papers. That's absurd. In addtion, the article stated that the numbers of papers reported by each university itself.

Once again, this is an issue applies to all the universities in the ranking. Korea university also can't be free from this issue by 28% as shown in the reference. I recommend you to make an article about it if you'd like to. Anyway, the SCI ranking arouse controversy is not shown any more in this article as well as the reference. What's the problem? Brincos (talk) 10:37, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Also, you keep trying to disregard the article [[12]] as a yellow journalism, but it is surely written by the journalist in major newspaper, and the journalist examplified the several facts done by SKKU students and alumni to many internet bbs(s). Now you are trying to evade the charge by putting some weird unreasonable excuses, but as I said if there's problem on the article, please talk with the journalist first. You said it is not certain those hooliganing acts had been actually committed by SKKU students, so the article is invalidated, but I'd like to ask to you that do you have evidences referring all those thousands of hooliganing acts were done by other university students to defame SKKU? Maybe you can ask police to prove the fact. Before you have evidences, you also can't convictedly define the article is a yellow journalism and those acts were done by other university's students, not by SKKU. In addition, according to your theory on that reverse-defaming, should I consider you as a Korea U alumni who wish to defame SKKU. That's a quite something I can't believe even in my next life. Please think what other students in Korean universities consider SKKU as is being. You can't simply demote the article by your own theory. As noted, please discuss with the journalist with your theory, before you demote the article to a yellow journalism. You look so proitective on your SKKU thread. Why don't you consider other threads as the way you value this SKKU thread.Patriotmissile (talk) 20:42, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Patriotmissile, you put the reference in this article. I didn't. Do you know what I mean? You have to persuade others in Wikipedia of worth of your reference. However, you can't. Right? This is why it should be effaced from this article. I do not contact Police, but you should do contact Police if you want to prove your reference. Brincos (talk) 10:37, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

About your question, just exactly like you mentioned and did, anyone can claim and put the tag to clarify the consents. I also have a suspicion that SKKU is the foremost 'university' in 'Korea'. That's a part of the reasons I put the tag for clarification. Now, is it acceptable to you to understand why I did so?Patriotmissile 01:02, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

The reason I asked why you had put the POV tag was that I just hoped you would find your nit-picking while you answer. Please refrain, bro. Don't spend your energy on the meaningless talk, please. Brincos 06:41, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Well,first of all, I am wondering when you gonna discard your ceaseless habit on judging anything arbitrary. I cleary didn't put the tag here due to the reason you are claiming. Maybe you are the one who put the tag in KU thread with your nit-picking intention. Based on the deduction I made, can I consider your above remark as a confession of the reasons what made your series of behaviours, including the reason you put the POV tag in KU thread? You clearly can't do any actions due to your personal feelings in Wikipedia. The tags are destined to be used only for clarification of ambiguous contents, not for a tool of revenge for personal matters. I could report this to others in Wikipedia, but I won't do so now. As I know it is a violation of Wikispirit. Please substite nominative in your words to yourself. You may find the words you said exactly are applicable to yourself. And about the all above three points I demurred, I am not gonna chage them now, but please remember that it's because I forgot them. I will surely remember them crystal clearly. I am just busy now. Please consider that you are the one who sculpt my attitude, and my attitude is a reflection of yours.Patriotmissile (talk) 20:07, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

"...including the reason you put the POV tag in KU thread..."? (-_-;) Did I have put any POV tag in Korea university page? Oh, my... Patriotmissile, write a fiction. I don't know who put the POV tag in Korea university page but absolutely I am not. Don't discuss in this way. This kinda attitude of yours really makes me tired. This is why you can't stop your discuss on me. Please don't write something which is not true. You know you have been accused many times due to your attitude by other Wikipedians. Please think about your attitude very seriously. Brincos (talk) 10:37, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Seonggyungwan vs. Sungkyunkwan

I am a little bit confused with the exact English name for the ancestry institute of Sungkyunkwan university. The official webpage, [13], says just "Sungkyunkwan" (You can see it at the upper left corner.) but some of you use "Seonggyungwan" for edit. How do you think of this issue? Brincos 17:34, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

The official Sungkyunkwan University website is not the official Seonggyungwan website. Sungkyunkwan University does not own Seonggyungwan and pays to use its facilities. It is to be referred to as are all other cultural relics, by the modern transliteration system, rendering it as Seonggyungwan. JPBarrass 14:47, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

No,no.. The official webpage I referred above is the official Sungkyunkwan website [14]. Am I missing something in your point? Brincos 16:03, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Intertwining with Seoul

I believe this article overstates the intertwining with Seoul's history and then goes on at length about Seoul in a style not dissimilar to that of a tourist board. This section could be made significantly shorter yet still contain all relevant information. Does anyone second this? JPBarrass (talk) 02:10, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

University Ratings

https://sites.google.com/site/southkoreaneducation/home/university-education-in-south-korea has a number of ratings tables, all of which include this university. Perhaps some of these should be used in our article. Kdammers (talk) 09:41, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Content Quality

I have attempted to clean up the article and remove a lot of the poorly written sections as well as unverifiable claims. However, there is an anonymous non-Wiki member who is reverting my improvements and adding in bizarre statements that don't have any meaning in English. This page needs protection so the quality can be cleaned up.

I don't think I need to explain to anyone why this whole passage must be erased: "The will of such an attempt is thereafter to be more modernized than the broadly spreaded occidental approach of mechanical education, and at the same time traditionally to be in succession of the Sungkyunkwan's academic spirit by all Korean confucians, all confucian schools of Korea, and the Sungkyunkwan foundation. Despite all invisible disturbance of numerous churches and anti-tradition fanatics, it's been successfully recovered by protection of national authority and by help of traditional inherited personage's donation. The university has no difference with location of campus and had no dicrimination of studying either night or day for a period. It's one of evidences of the Sungkyunkwan's educational spirit for anyone who could be qualified for studies."

As well, rather than predict that SKKU will continue to rise through the rankings, it is better to deal with more concrete, verifiable facts with secondary sources.

Also, it seems to be settled, but SAINT's current director is Michael Grätzel, and the goal no longer is to become one of the world's top 5 nanotechnology-related institutes by 2010.

Junganghansik (talk) 06:18, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

I see that I may have violated the rule for editing wars by reverting more than three times. I am sorry for breaking the rule, and if I am removed as a Wikipedia editor, please ensure that the quality of the page and its objectivity is protected.

Junganghansik (talk) 06:40, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Samsung Library at Suwon campus of Sungkyunkwan University.JPG

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:06, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

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:

• 문묘(성균관) 명륜당 은행나무.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:24, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Diplomas as NFTs

Sungkyunkwan University started offering its diplomas as NFTs earlier this year. https://www.tronweekly.com/south-korean-university-issue-nft-to-graduates/ TomReadsALot (talk) 20:30, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

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:

• 2009-01-24 - Portrait of King Jeongjo in Unhangak.JPG

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:37, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

Admission

When admissions will be opened? 110.47.175.11 (talk) 11:59, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

I mean admission for international students. 110.47.175.11 (talk) 12:00, 13 May 2024 (UTC)