75.128.15.231

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 08:15, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, 75.128.15.231. You have new messages at Codf1977's talk page.
Message added 08:19, 6 August 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Nothing to do with facts ! Codf1977 (talk) 08:19, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

August 2010

Please read Talk:University of Oxford rather than send me the same useless message as you have sent others. Please also note that, despite your claims to the contrary, the words "Oxford University is the 1st English speaking institution" do not appear in this source. Are you perhaps inaccurately paraphrasing "University of Cambridge is the second-oldest university in the English-speaking world (after Oxford)", words which do appear in that source? Bencherlite^Talk 19:41, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Everyone agrees that (a) Oxford University is the oldest university in the English-speaking world, and that Cambridge is the second oldest (b) Oxford University can be described as an "institution". However, to say that Oxford is the first English-speaking institution is a completely different thing. "Institution" is wider than "university", "oldest" and "first" do not mean the same thing. And you continue to misquote the source. Bencherlite^Talk 19:54, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

OK, let's take this very slowly.

You said: "Have you have any facts that state Oxford University is not an institution?"

My reply: No-one is saying that it is not an institution; please read point (b) of my previous message. Your failure to grasp this simple point is worrying.

You said: "Do you have any facts that state Oxford University is not the first university or institution?"

My reply: Your question makes no sense – the first university or institution to do, or to be, what? In any case, the burden of showing that the changes you wish to make are accurate and based on reliable sources is on you, and there is no burden on me to prove or disprove your proposed edits.

You said: "Do you have any facts that state "first English speaking"?"

My reply: You are the one saying that it is the first English-speaking, as opposed to being the oldest university in the English-speaking world. There is an important difference. The university functioned using Latin for hundreds of years, after all, not English.

You said: "First is also the same defination category as oldest".

My reply: You are saying it was the first institution to use English. That is different from being the oldest university in the English-speaking world.

You said: "I had tour guide books that are printed in 1930, 1980, 1997 that all state Oxford University is an institution and the first of its kind to speak English, not England but in the world. Shall I take imageshot to state the fact to reference the facts more?"

My reply: The first of its kind to speak English? From when, and for what purposes? Any source that you can provide for that specific claim would be good to see.

Also, please, in future, sign your messages on talk pages using ~~~~. Bencherlite^Talk 20:20, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

And that's why I used acedemic sources following the context to state the nature of the proof in the pudding for the article. I used the words first, English and institution base on acedemic source for each term and applied it to the article. Do you prefer to just have people edit without sources?

You seem to argue first is different than oldest. Everybody knows Oxford is the oldest but the first in the English language regardless of Latin is the point of education part I am expressing as a fact. English was enbedded in the institution. If you made a statement and said that is the oldest painting in the museum and I said that is the first painting ever ever produced in the museum. How do you state the oldest one to the first one ever made?

Difference between first and oldest

(N.B. I am not saying this is the case in this example)

Company A was formed in 1990 to produce widgets, Company B was formed in 1995 also to produce Widgets, Company C was formed in 2000 also to produce Widgets, in 2005 Company A went bust and was dissolved. Leaving ONLY Company B and Company C producing widgets.

• It is true to say that Company B is the oldest company producing widgets.
• It is true to say that Company A was the first company to produce widgets.
• it is not true to say that Company A is the oldest company producing widgets.
• it is not true to say that Company B is the first company to produce widgets.

so just because someone is the oldest does not necessarily make them the first. Codf1977 (talk) 21:01, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Well then maybe we should take the term "oldest" out of the article then and we can just call it Oxford University then. Instead of oldest we can just say founded 1203 by the English. I can throw my conclusion of fact of first English speaking institution request and you can throw out your term oldest university out of the article and make everybody happy then; I mean first and oldest is no important according to what your saying. Do you concur with that?

Sorry I don't follow - why should the term "oldest" be removed Codf1977

--Well like I said first should follow in the term in leading with what the University was created as the first English language institutions yet your defending oldest but you have not provided your oldest term in defence, so we can knock off word "oldest" out of the article and call it founded in 1203 then and I will knock off first english speaking instition. What do you say, we can teach the unknown less than what they know already.

(talk) 21:14, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

"Founded 1203"? Eh? Bencherlite^Talk 21:22, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

You didn't know Oxford University was founded in 1203?

Your message on my take page

What are you talking about? Your reference 1 does not contain the term "First English speaking institution" and as a study guide it is not a great source. Your reference 2 does state it is the oldest "university in the English-speaking world" but it is a claim by Oxford University itself and therefore not a good source. It is however true and there are plenty of good sources that state this. Your references 3 and 4 do not state it is the "1st English-speaking institution" and neither are good sources or academic sources. Of course Oxford University is an education institution, but the claim that it is the first English-speaking institution is dubious in the extreme. What about the Guilds for example. I also do not think that it conducted its business on foundation in English anyway, but used Latin like the Church. Others above have made similar points, It is you who are disrupting the article on Oxford University. --Bduke (Discussion) 22:54, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Ok Bduke, so since you say I am disruting the article then, answer these questions as I have forwarded to your talk page.

1. Do you have any facts that state Oxford University is not an institution?

2. Do you have any facts that state Oxford University is not the first university or institution? Not in England.

3. Do you have any facts that state Oxford University is not the "first English speaking institution" in the world?

Are you a former or current Oxford University student or a former or current Oxford University adminstrator or professor or instructor or even visited Oxford University?

Oh not sources from article page, please forward your sources on acedemic sources please.

University of Oxford

From Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring: please wait for consensus at Talk:University of Oxford before re-adding your proposed content. You seem to be engaged in discussion, but a number of editors have objected to your edits. Anything you can do to keep the disagreement on the level of interpretation of high quality sources and away from personal accusations would be appreciated.

If this is a shared IP address and you, dear reader, did not make the edits in question, please disregard this note. - 2/0 (cont.) 07:24, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

More on Oxford

In answer to your questions.

1. Did you read my comments before replying? Yes, Oxford is an 'institution', but it was not the 'first English speaking institution', it was only 'the first university in England' or if you prefer 'the first university in the English speaking world'. Institutions include churches, courts of law, schools and just about everything else. Your wording is ambiguous and inaccurate.

2. Yes. It was the first university in England/United Kingdom, but again not the first institution. Why do you not want to call it a 'university'? What is better about calling it an 'institution'?

3. If by "English speaking institution" you mean "English university", then you would be right, but your wording would be wrong. If you mean any institution, or even any educational institution, then of course there were institutions before Oxford University that spoke/taught in English at an earlier date. There were schools in Canterbury and Rochester in the seventh century, who would have had to teach children about Latin in English before teaching them *in* Latin.

Finally, no I have no connection to Oxford, but I know people who do. I'll ask them what they think, if you insist. This is wholly irrelevant, however, as this is Wikipedia, and I am a longstanding Wikipedia editor.

As for 'academic sources', I see that you have provided none yourself (only generalist popular websites and news media). That means that you would probably accept [1] which states that medieval universities taught in Latin. The author is Jackson J. Spielvogel an emeritus Associate Professor from Pennsylvania State University.

For English teaching in English schools see [2] which states that grammar schools were teaching Latin in English by the mid-fourteenth century ThomasL (talk) 22:26, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Another academic source suggests that Oxford was teaching solely in Latin until the mid-fourteenth century. [3] ThomasL (talk) 22:34, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

You asked on my talk page:- Do you have any facts that state Oxford University is not an institution?

Of course it is an institution. It is an educational institution, better known as a university.

Do you have any facts that state Oxford University is not the first university or institution?

It is the first university in England and the 3rd in the world. It is also the oldest as it has been operating continuously. It is not the first institution in England. That is just obvious. What about the royal court. That is an institution.

Do you have any facts that state Oxford University is not the "first English speaking institutional" in the world?

There are clearly other institutions that spoke English long before Oxford University started. The court of King Alfred is just one. The various craft guilds such as the masons is another example. We do not have to think about whether Oxford University actually was English speaking.

Before disagreeing instantly, send the sources but not the same sources on the Oxford University page but in academic sources so I can see your arguments.

Almost all your sources are not academic sources and as far as I can see none of then actually use the words "first English speaking institutional",

Oh have you ever attended Oxford University? A former student or teaching profession at Oxford University or related to Oxford University have been to the institution?

I spent 6 years as a student at Oxford in the late 1950s and early 1960s. I had a visiting academic position there for a year in the early 1970s. I visit Oxford fairly frequently as one of my daughters lives in Oxford. I was in my old College several times in May this year. Is that good enough for you? None of it matters of course. We follow the best sources. I strongly recommend that you give up on this. You clearly do not have a good knowledge of the history of Oxford University and thus are unable to judge sources well. There is a strong consensus on the talk page to not accept your edits to the lede. Just accept that. --Bduke (Discussion) 23:32, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 18:52, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Codf1977 Talk Page

Hi,

In case you had not noticed, I am not interested in what you have to say, please do not post to my talk page again. Codf1977 (talk) 02:48, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

I have tried asking you, that did not work, so I am telling you DO NOT POST TO MY TALK PAGE AGAIN Codf1977 (talk) 06:39, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

I am trying to get you to play smart and answer the questions I asked you to answer. It is just that simple, this is a discussion on the talk pages about what you deleted on the edits on Oxford University page so I am going to retreat and ask you with the why questions.

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for attempting to harass other users. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|Your reason here}}, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Favonian (talk) 08:26, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

---