This article is within the scope of WikiProject Higher education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of higher education, universities, and colleges on Wikipedia. Please visit the project page to join the discussion, and see the project's article guideline for useful advice.Higher educationWikipedia:WikiProject Higher educationTemplate:WikiProject Higher educationHigher education articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Singapore, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Singapore on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SingaporeWikipedia:WikiProject SingaporeTemplate:WikiProject SingaporeSingapore articles
This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
This article is written in Singaporean English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, centre, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
Latest comment: 1 year ago3 comments3 people in discussion
I have removed a paragraph from the History section of this article. It is an isolated incident about a single student, and has no relevance to the "history of the university" as it would imply based on its location and content. Courtesy ping to C.Fred as they indicated they would like to see a talk page discussion, however I think from a BLPCRIME perspective (plus ONUS, and various other sundry ALLCAPS guidelines) it should stay removed until there is a consensus to re-add. Primefac (talk) 11:20, 27 September 2023 (UTC)Reply
Agreed. I also had requested the page protected under potential BLP violation. I just got off work and would have removed the same text under the same reasoning. I welcome a reinsertion if there is a long term significance/impact directly to the university. Nothing I see so far indicates so. Is the student body a notable organisation outside of the university? Have the elections and appointment policies change since? Is there interference/interdiction by the university on this issue? If so, I may support a reinsertion but with no names mentioned as the crux will be the policy changes, and not the persons involved. – robertsky (talk) 11:38, 27 September 2023 (UTC)Reply
The passage that seemed relevant to the school was this: The incident resurfaced in September 2023, when [individual] was deemed by the school to be eligible for the NTUSU presidential elections despite the prior controversy, because disciplinary investigation proceedings by NTU had concluded, “there would be no further disciplinary sanctions for the alleged individual beyond being counselled by the school”. On a further look, there is no discussion beyond that of anything that affects the school, so I endorse the removal, even though my first look made me think it was removal to sanitize the school's reputation. —C.Fred (talk) 15:09, 27 September 2023 (UTC)Reply
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
