Talk:Engineering Institute of Canada

Merge discussion

I propose that the article Engineering Institute of Canada Fellows be merged as a section of the Engineering Institute of Canada, thereby giving more substance to the list. Newwhist (talk) 19:02, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Not decided yet: If the list is standard hidden when opening the article, this seems a good idea. And the "body" of both articles is indeed not that big yet. On the other end, there are other examples where the "list" is put in a separate article like List of Fellows of the Royal Society and List of Principals and Fellows of Jesus College, Oxford. Even without the fellows itself, articles like IEEE Fellow, Fellow of the AAAS and Fellow of the American Institute of Architects are separate. For me it is currently a weak yes, but I like to wait and see what others say. SchreyP (talk) 20:24, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

There was a recent unilateral redirect of the Engineering Institute of Canada Fellows article to the Engineering Institute of Canada article. That editor was acting in good faith but seems not to have noticed the funadamental difference between the two articles; this may be due too the poor title of the former which is really just a list and may better be retitled as such. Alternative approaches include:

1. two articles; retitle of the Fellows article
2. one consolidated article, improved with the Fellows component becoming a subsection of the main artcile
3. deletion of Fellows article; retention of EIC article, improved to note the election of Fellows but without the lists

I am still inclined to the second alternative. Comments? Newwhist (talk) 13:45, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

We don't need a list of all the society's individual fellows; most of them are not and never will be notable enough for their own independent encyclopedia articles anyway, and we almost never need long lists of non-notable people (especially not when your idea of size management is to keep the list rolled up; we need the list even less if you can't make a coherent case for keeping the names unhidden.) The main article should certainly name fellows who are notable enough to support independent articles, but we don't need a complete list of everybody who's ever been a fellow of the organization. As well, please understand that one topic does not have to be strictly synonymous with another topic to merit a redirect instead of an independent article; the only criterion that has to be met for a redirect to be a valid solution is that the two topics have a relationship, so the fact that there's a "fundamental difference" between the two articles isn't really relevant to the discussion. Bearcat (talk) 05:44, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Bearcat makes good points. But again, which alternative to persue? I infer that he/she may be inclined to Alternative 2 subject to any listing being limited to people with a BLP in Wikipedia. I agree that a long list of mostly non-notable people is not edifying to most, especially if a clear direct external link can be given which provides the same information to those who may be interested. Newwhist (talk) 13:15, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Since when are EIC Fellows elected via member societies?

Looking at the offical reference also in 1996 member societies are mentioned next to the Fellow names, so "since 2000" could be the wrong interpretation. -- SchreyP (talk) 21:12, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Engineering Institute of Canada. 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/20111004225504/http://www.eic-ici.ca/member_societies.html to http://www.eic-ici.ca/member_societies.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110322034051/http://www.eic-ici.ca:80/english/tour/lmo2.html to http://www.eic-ici.ca/english/tour/lmo2.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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) 11:14, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Engineering Institute of Canada. 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/20110706173930/http://history.csce.ca/docs/History%20Notes%20feb01.pdf to http://history.csce.ca/docs/History%20Notes%20feb01.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100907203937/http://www.cgs.ca/cgssociety/060821briefhistorycgs.pdf/view to http://www.cgs.ca/cgssociety/060821briefhistorycgs.pdf/view

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 05:07, 21 September 2017 (UTC)