Talk:University of Suffolk/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions about University of Suffolk. 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 |
The union
Shouldn't it be made clear that it is a 'Student Union'? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.249.102.226 (talk) 16:19, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Self Promotional Content and Advertisement Like Content
Some of this page is written like an advert. Statements such as vibrant town, and friendly are either irrelevant and/or subjective and appear unprofessional in an encyclopedic context. If someone from wikipedia notices this the page will be flagged, assume thats to be avoided. Would suggest re-editing these parts as they may well have more of a detrimental effect. Perhaps someone with more knowledge of UCS than me myself can do so.
"that welcomed its first students" - welcomed in this case is not really acceptable encyclopedic language.
"The 700 student strong school" - Subjective and meaningless out of a relative context.
"The Suffolk Business School also takes pride in its partnerships" - pride not needed... who exactly is it who has pride? Suffolk Business School is not a person!
"The School prides its self on its relationship with local hospitals and has a good reputation for providing trained students" - same as above, and again subjective and relative. Good reputation are claims that need to be substantiated by third parties, and then referenced.
"give a trendy feel to this vibrant area" - Subjective, wikipedia is about facts and objectivity. Popularity in general and within certain demographics can be proven or noted, trendyness and vibrantcy clearly can not. Wikipedia pages on pieces of art wouldn't say that the work is "good" and "thoughtful".
"The iconic new building" - iconic is subjective from a primary source.
"Ipswich itself offers a superb range of facilities for all students" - Superb has no relative context, not that superb is language that should be used anyway and subjective.
"this area has some stunning villages and miles of rolling countryside" - subjective.
"The Centre has its own unique identity and offers a friendly atmosphere in which to study." - subjective.
"is of great importance to the Centre" - promotional, and no evidence.
"to many students who believed they could never achieved" - promotional, subjective, and irrelevant in a encyclopedic context.
"that the facilities are among the best in the region" - subjective, you may note awards or specific data given but direct referance to it being the best like this is promotional.
Think that should be clear, although there is far more. This page has been written in a quite blatently promotional way which is not the point of wikipedia, and I believe will only reflect badly on the institution if it appears to be self promoting through what should be an objective source of information. I suggest if you are not aware of this policy you review such before continuing. This article should aim for: Neutrality, Objectivity, Relevancy and Verifiability. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.169.223.53 (talk) 17:24, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Additional information
I have updated most of the information on the page and included images which reflect Ipswich's nature and feel. However, i've found that information on the UCS learning centres (Otley, Bury St. Edmunds, Great Yarmouth, Lowestoft) is a bit sparce at best. If anyone else has anything to contribute to the stated learning centres or the UCS its self, please do.
Info bar addition
The info bar is now present on the UCS wikipedia page, however it is in need of statistics relating to the UCS and it's centres (i.e. number of students). This would be a well welcomed addition to the page.
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:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:37, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
Possible plagiarism
I noticed that one section was a copy and paste from the UCS website. This was a copyright violation, so I removed it, and replaced it with my own words diff. I think there may be more here, so keep an eye out, and remove it on sight. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 10:30, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
- Well, after a few years and a few times of looking at this, I eventually got around to gutting it and trying to source it all up. There's more sources to get at the BBC and, I imagine, the EADT and Evening News sites, but it's a start. The infobox probably needs redoing. Thanks to whichever SU person edited it to bring it up on my watch list. Blue Square Thing (talk) 21:57, 28 September 2012 (UTC)