Talk:Institute of Philosophy, KU Leuven

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Andrewa (talk) 06:58, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

---

Higher Institute of Philosophy → Institute of Philosophy – At the time of its foundation the Institute was named The Higher Institute of Philosophy, as it originally offered graduate and post-graduate programmes. Studies rapidly expanded, with the addition of undergraduate studies as well as a full programme in the Dutch language. The English language International Programme dates from the time (1969) the university divided between the French-speaking and Flemish-speaking communities. In the International Programme a student can follow a full course of studies, in English, from BA to PhD. With the reorganisation of the KU Leuven in 1993, the Institute of Philosophy (HIW) was given the official status of a faculty. However, it retained its historic name of "The Institute of Philosophy". Source of this all? The about page on the Institute's official website Yentl f (talk) 20:03, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose You'd have to demonstrate that this is WP:PRIMARYTOPIC over the existing Institute of Philosophy. I doubt there is one. I suggest Institute of Philosophy (Belgium). --BDD (talk) 21:59, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
• Move to Institute of Philosophy, University of Leuven: Also, the existing Institute of Philosophy page should become Institute of Philosophy, University of London, and we should create a dab page at Institute of Philosophy that lists those along with Institute of Philosophy, University of Warsaw and any others we find. Note: I just put a move discussion notification at Talk:Institute of Philosophy. —BarrelProof (talk) 01:19, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

• At 07:00, 4 October 2013 Andrewa moved page Higher Institute of Philosophy to Institute of Philosophy, University of Leuven (As suggested in RM)
• At 07:00, 4 October 2013 Andrewa moved page Talk:Higher Institute of Philosophy to Talk:Institute of Philosophy, University of Leuven (As suggested in RM)

So, the page was moved. – wbm1058 (talk) 17:41, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Yes, it's a bit of a mess. But there were no valid arguments for the proposed move, and that's what I as closer needed to consider.

We could I suppose re-open that most recent RM, perhaps in the hope of achieving consensus on an alternate proposal, or at least examining the relevance of the arguments put above. And I do like BarrelProof's analysis. That could be a way forward.

But it's a bit beyond the scope of that RM, so I'd suggest some less formal discussion before going back to RM, with links to previous discussions, and noting that consensus can change. Andrewa (talk) 21:14, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Just after the above RM, Andrewa moved what was the Higher Institute of Philosophy article at the time to Institute of Philosophy, University of Leuven, moved Institute of Philosophy to Institute of Philosophy, University of London, and created a disambiguation page at Institute of Philosophy as I had suggested. And I was recently reminded that the formal RM process is not mandatory. What title renamings are being suggested now? At first glance, I suggest renaming the current Higher Institute of Philosophy article to Higher Institute of Philosophy, University of Louvain or Higher Institute of Philosophy, Catholic University of Louvain. Note that it's about a different topic than it was when the previous RM discussion was held. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 23:41, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Good point about the RM process being not mandatory. It's normally a good way of building consensus and/or coming up with alternate solutions, but if we come up with a good solution with consensus support, IMO we can and should just do it.

Noting however that it's good manners to ping any previous participants likely to object to the new proposal, and tends to be more efficient in the long run. (And some RMs lead to very long runs anyway.) Andrewa (talk) 01:27, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Institute of Philosophy, University of Leuven. 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/20090404055243/http://www.hiw.kuleuven.be/eng/about/history.htm to http://hiw.kuleuven.be/eng/about/history.htm

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) 09:28, 8 December 2017 (UTC)