Talk:University of East Anglia/Archive 1

Archive 1

Debate concerning the relative merits of UEA and its relationship with the city of Norwich

It is said by the locals that Norwich lost a second-class golf course to acquire a third-class University, the University of Easy Access. In fact the University was built as much to attract the professional graduate to relocate in Norwich as acquire an education. Today a good 5%-8% of graduates recognising the quality of life in Norwich to be in many ways superior to that of London and the home Counties decide to stay on after graduating. There is also large-scale commuting between Norwich and London each week-end during term time.

UEA has in fact an extremely poor relationship to its host City and did not even bother to acknowledge any of Norwich's famous Citizens (Elizabeth Fry, Crome and Cotman, George Borrow, Sir Thomas Browne) for almost thirty years. Nelson however, jingoistically it did.

When UEA was being built it was a mere gentleman's agreement by handshake that it would NOT encroach upon the nearby green belt. It has NEVER stopped building, albeit often with fine architecture, and is fast becoming a festering carbuncle encroaching upon the green belt. UEA has one of the largest, if not the largest, campus car park, which now sprawls ugly onto turf and anywhere else one can dump a car. How's that for green awareness amongst staff and students.

UEA has done little to enhance its relationship to its host City and remains quite insular and aloof from it, even having the audacity to 'borrow' the City's motto 'Do different'(which it does not). More appropiate for UEA would be 'look around you more'. Even when UEA did finally acknowledge that it was located in the home of one of Europe's most esteemed seventeenth century scholars (Sir Thomas Browne) it was through a poorly selected plaqued quotation which does not quite make sense as is taken out of context.

It was left to the late and great German-born author Max Sebald to explore and acknowledge the imagination and scholarship of Sir T.B. Fourty years on and still no real substantial recognition of the encyclopaedist, scientist and moralist. 'And this is why although Universities are often full of men they are also often empty of learning'. Even in my undergraduate days the same erroneous received knowledge, heavily influenced by 'political correctness' was peddled about Sir T.B. Let's hope UEA can ammend some of the neglectand DO something substantial for Sir T.B.'s quattrocenttenary in 2005, tidy up their act environmentally and not end up as a heavy traffic-laden short-cut to the newly-built hospital nearby. It's high time for UEA to give something back to their host City, other than a scenic lake.

On the positive side, and there is one (just), the schools of Climate Research, and DEV, the Sainsbury Arts Centre and of course the many writers associated with its Creative writing course, Wilson, Bradbury,Rose Tremain etc. are worthy of praise.

Sorry for the rant its just that I've personally seen the social impact of this University upon my home City ( I now live quite near the campus) and have witnessed UEA's development from 1963 when wearing short trousers I frantically waved my Union Jack with hundreds of others for the Queen's visit, to my graduation there in 1984, to the present day. The Norwikian

---

I think there are many other positives that for whatever reason you cannot or will not see - the presence of UEA makes Norwich a much more "rounded" city, and that is to its benefit - without the city its relative isolation would have sidelined it long ago. It's hard to imagine that the city's cafes and restaurants would be so numerous or of such high quality without the uni. Also, UEA have done a lot to put Norwich on the map musically, venues such as the Waterfront and NAC only survive because of the uni, and together with the LCR mean that Norwich gets some big name acts that otherwise would not come to the city. As an ex-student of UEA, I have to say I love Norwich, a city I would not otherwise have learned much about if I hadn't spent three years there, and I think most of the fellow students I keep in touch with feel the same - we occasionally revisit the city and surrounding area and enjoy it a lot. You state that the uni attracts graduates to relocate as if that were self-evidently a bad thing. I don't see how this is the case, to me that's a good thing. The quality of life in Norwich is better than in London, so what's your problem? Just want to keep it the way it used to be, just for yourself maybe? Other benefits of the uni are less obvious - for example the courses I took had very close links to local industry, and there was a cross-feeding of both skills and research work between the two. The John Innes institute is a prime and high-profile example. This means that Norwich has some hi-tech companies that otherwise wouldn't even be there. There is a similar cross-pollination of local companies and organisations with lots of other stuff going on at the uni - music and drama as well as "hard" sciences. Obviously it is not possible to build a university without some detrimental impact on the land use, but I would far rather see a university built than yet another bloody golf course - the country is vastly turning into one huge golf course and does not need another one - also, the conversion of what were old gravel workings into an attractive lake and woods now attracts a lot of wetland wildlife that wasn't there before. Overall I think the university has used that land well and sensitively, and far from being a carbuncle on Norwich's doorstep, I think it greatly enhances and benefits the city, often in ways that are less than obvious to the casual observer, but also in very obvious ways, if people can be bothered to think about it. One of the things I was aware of when studying there was a certain antagonism between the students and the locals - this struck me as a great shame and very unnecessary, yet typical of a towns that feel imposed upon by what they see as institutions that have nothing to do with them. This perception needs to be corrected - and perhaps the uni needs to do more in that direction, but equally the local population needs to start seeing the university as a facility that belongs to them and get more involved in it - both town and uni would benefit from that. So stop carping and get off your arse and go up there and see what's on offer - you might feel differently once you get involved. If there are areas you feel the uni hasn't acknowledged sufficiently - local scholars for example - then that's something you can do something about yourself - the uni is there for everyone, it is the sum of its parts and its students and contributors, it doesn't impose the will of some faceless individual on the city. It's not a corporation. People can decide to feel positive or negative abouit something, but if they don't bother to find out the facts then that decision is merely prejudice. GRAHAMUK 23:19, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)

---

All very well said,and valid points made, but as a seventh generation native of Norwich I am as much in possession of 'facts' about UEA and the City of Norwich as anyone else. My concern is that many who graduate from UEA possess little or no civic responsibilty and merely milk the City without making any positive contribution to its welfare. Norwikian 02:20, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)

To be fair, I think the perception that students 'milk' their host town is common in many places, due to many staying there for the duration of the course and then moving on. I remember encountering that at Newcastle where I did my degree and in Sheffield where my brother did his. There's certainly something to that, but to be fair when you leave University you often end up living wherever you can get a job; as a recent graduate you end up with less chance to be choosy. (TimTim 17:33, 9 March 2006 (UTC))

For a 'third class' university it does remarkably well, academically and socially (fact, not opinion). As for the affect on Norwich, UEA has brought much investment into the area. Without UEA Norwich would still be a quirky city far away from everywhere, poor, with all the usual generalisations about the Norfolk population. UEA put Norwich on the map. It is actually quite far out of the town centre anyway, so its not as if it dominates the whole city. If anything Norwich 'milks' the wealth students bring in, and the skills they provide. Anyway, there is still a small golf course! Bluemoose 16:53, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

---

The Locals

Have to say re: University of East Access, perhaps true 40 years ago, but places are pretty competitive there for subjects now, and it's a European and even world leader in plenty of subjects (Environmental Science, Creative Writing, American Studies, Biological Sciences, and many more). From memory, the Medical School is something like 1:8 ratio accepted.

I frankly think it is a little tragic that the locals would rather have a golf course than a university on their doorsteps. There are public lectures open to all, evening classes, the largest sports facilities of their kind in the UK, libraries, and so on. Presumably the population of Norwich would rather hit balls with sticks than read a book.

Reply

Yes of course, no-one is belittling UEA's academic acheivements, though Schools and specialities it develops come and go depending on which way the wind is blowing, these days and these days it is all hands to the pump to develop in medicine (ever wondered why the new NNUH was built on other side of Yare yalley ). The fact remains however that UEA has an extremely impervious and indifferent relationship to the City other than basically just economic, when so much more could be contributed. I hear planning permission for a multi-storey car-park is in the pipe-line, now there's a true display of envronmental acumen for you, when it would be empty half the week when almost everyone schuttles off to London and Home counties at the week-end.

There seems to be a lot of popular self-help books equating golf with spiritual enlightenment these days, i for one would rather hit a ball with a stick anyday than be on the grey terraces known as Campus where the transient briefly gather for a term or two.Norwikian 15:15, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Well those who are apparently being guided by wind direction are the doctors who will save your life when you get ill, but i suppose a golf course is more important. Bluemoose 14:39, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Haha, you probably play golf aswell. - FrancisTyers 02:37, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

As a note, the car park _has_ received planning permission but is no longer required due to action on behalf of the University, they seem to be wanting to build it anyway. If you're really against it, there is a group campaigning against it called STAG (Sustainable Transport Action Group) who would love to hear from you. As a side note, the Student Union Council recently passed a motion condemning the car park. - FrancisTyers 12:22, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Please don't forget that as a native of Norwich i (unlike all other posters here) have personally witnessed the development and non-existent relationship to host City for the past 40 odd years ! Indeed last week whilst cycling to work at N&N hospital thru campus i was fired at with a paint pellet from residences. These are the people claiming to be educated . In reply to Francis Tyler the UEA has in all probability only begun a medical school out of expediency to geographical location to the new hospital.It had 35 years previous to develop a medical school  ! As previously stated this university behaves like a crazed drunk, only 'developing' schools when economic reward is within grasp. It could not even choose its own motto or identity 'borrowing ' the City's (not town) motto for itself. Again other than directing students with spending cash to the City both UEA and the city remain fairly indifferent to each other, much more could have been done in developing a relationship to City, as for doctors saving lives don't forget that Dr. Rihab Taha: Iraqi Biological Weapons Chief, AKA Dr. Germ was also a UEA graduate!Norwikian 12:05, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

It's a little unfair to mention being shot at from residences with a paintball from residences to demonstrate a lack of respect for local residences from students without mentioning that over the past few months there have been a series of unprovoked attacks on staff and students of the UEA by, according to the police, one or two groups of local youths. Considering that the people commiting attacks are Norwich natives, then surely it's just as fair to say that the city isn't doing much to improve it's relations with the university as visa versa? However, as a current student, i can't really say i've felt that the uni has a particularly poor relationship with the city. The waterfront venue in the city is co-owned by the union and the city council, many people living locally to the university use the on campus shops and bar and, as previously mentioned, the student population contributes a significant amount of money to the local economy. As best as i'm aware, no university in the country has a perfect relationship with the city/area it's located in, it's common to hear complaints about students causing problems in areas around all universities, and it usually isn't fair. It's also common to hear people say that universities contribute little or nothing to the local area, and this isn't really fair either. Indeed, it strikes me as odd that you would say this as you are both a Norwich resident and a UEA graduate, surely this is evidence that the UEA contributes to the local community, unless you consider your degree and studies to be worthless? --Ant991 01:32, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

LCR?

What's the proper name of the LCR? I see it's down as the "Lower Common Room", but in my day (admittedly nearly 30 years ago) it was the "Large Common Room"! -- Arwel 00:26, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

I have a friend who is currently an undergraduate there and she refers to it as the "Lower Common Room" - perhaps "LCR" usage is so ubiquitous that all had forgotten its original meaning? Wee Jimmy 11:07, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Dunno, but its definately "Lower Common Room" now - FrancisTyers 02:26, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

"Large Common Room" according to this page. --rbrwr^± 08:46, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

Definately lower. Martin 08:52, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

Both. Those crazy Union goons. [1] and this page. - FrancisTyers 14:41, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

* As a current member of the student population, I am absolutely certain that the name of the venue is the Lower Common Room. It would be more appropriate to say that it is sometimes refered to by its former name, The Large Common Room. A Google search of the site yields the following results:

site:www.stu.uea.ac.uk "Large Common Room" (Five results, but identical pages) site:www.stu.uea.ac.uk "Lower Common Room" (Nine results, five individual pages) Which, therefore, do you think is most accurate? 139.222.229.185 20:48, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi, I'm also a current member of the student population (I think people who are editting this page are mostly students or former students) and I've heard it called both. - FrancisTyers 21:21, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

What is reads now is fine. - FrancisTyers 21:22, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Notable Alumni

There seem to have been a few shady additions to the list, at least one fictional as well as Eddie Izzard who simply recieved an honourary degree there but never attended a course or earnt a degree in the typical fashion. Surely honourary degrees don't count toward that list or else many universities would have thousands of celebrities down as 'notable alumni' given that several celebrities recieve one each year? UEA could also claim Bob Geldof and David Attenborough for starters. Also I'm pretty sure that Paul Whitehouse dropped out in his first or second year, so technically I guess he shouldn't be on the list either as he never graduated.

MagicBez 23:26, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Just added my old flatmate from when we moved into flat 4 of Mary Chapman Court the day the builders moved out in 1977! I noticed last week that Neil Morisetti (ENV 76-79) got promoted to Rear Admiral and Commander UK Maritime Forces last November, so that's fairly notable, I think. He was only a midshipman in his UEA days... -- Arwel (talk) 12:53, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Images

Where have all the pictures gone? If we need some non-copyright ones, some of mine — a few of which were here before, many edits ago — are available over on Commons. Angmering 07:28, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Alumni order

I've just restored alphabetical order (for the second time) within each category to the list of notable alumni. Does someone think having them in a random order is better?? I've also tried to make clear that the correct form of a Royal Navy officer's name is "<rank> <name> RN", so hopefully someone will stop trying to expand an link the "RN"! -- Arwel (talk) 20:41, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

(Copied from User talk:Arwel Parry:)
btw arwel i am the guy ur locked into a mini edit war with regarding uea alumni, personally i think the list is better ranked in order of notability rather than alphabetically, dont you? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jamesmh2006 (talk • contribs) 02:05, 9 March 2007 (UTC).

Actually, no - ranking alumni by "notability" is inherently POV and therefore contrary to Wikipedia policy, how do you decide that someone is more notable than another? Alphabetical order is the only objective order to list them in. -- Arwel (talk) 22:52, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Students assessed using Wikipedia?

Can we have something in the article about this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/6422877.stm ?? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 193.62.111.10 (talk) 13:49, 7 March 2007 (UTC).

It's a single, small project - and really better not to include it simply for the issues regarding self-referential Wikipedia stuffs. AKismet 00:20, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

External links & categories

links

I noticed that some editor reverted my edit where I removed a multiplicity of links to different pages on a website. Whilst these links are not "spam" in the pure sense of the word, they would probably fall into the usage of the term as generally applied on wikipedia. I have nothing against the subjects in question, but rem the links in order to comply with WP:EL, specifically point 2 of WP:EL#Important_points_to_remember; and point 13 of WP:EL#Links_normally_to_be_avoided. I do accept that WP:EL is merely a guideline, but I believe the changes make for a better and clearer article.

categories

The same applies to the categories I removed per Item 3 of WP:CAT general guidelines : the page University of East Anglia already belongs to the category Category:University of East Anglia, which in turn belongs to Category:Education in Norfolk Category:Universities in England, Category:Norwich and Category:Nursing schools in the United Kingdom, so they should not be in the category as well as the subcat. There is clearly some confusion about categorisation: I feel that the university page clearly does not belong to the cats Category:Alumni of the University of East Anglia, Category:Academics of the University of East Anglia and Category:People associated with the University of East Anglia, and have been deleted.

Anyhowy, Category:Alumni of the University of East Anglia and Category:Academics of the University of East Anglia belong to Category:People associated with the University of East Anglia, a sub-cat of Category:University of East Anglia. I believe these categorisations are largely correct. Ohconfucius 03:55, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

New Logo

Where did this new logo come from? It's not being used on the official UEA website, they are still using the one labelled "pre-2008" logo in this article. Million_Moments (talk) 09:54, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Since the original uploader is no longer active I have replaced the image with the "original" until such time the new UEA logo is used on the website Million_Moments (talk) 09:58, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

They're certainly using their new logo on their printed communications - it was certainly on the invitation to this years Congregation which they sent me about a month ago. See links off the Publications Offices' guide to using the logo. -- Arwel (talk) 21:12, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Crest Location

Most university articles on Wikipedia present the university's crest at the top of the table, and the logo at the bottom of the table (e.g. Imperial College London, University of Birmingham, University of Oxford, University of Cambridge) - why can't the UEA crest be located likewise? Also, most of the crest images now seem to be SVG files, which looks much cleaner on-screen, even enlarged. Could someone perhaps find an SVG type file of the UEA crest? —Preceding unsigned comment added by ThomasBuckley (talk • contribs) 13:12, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

You could always ask nicely at the graphics lab. Seegoon (talk) 10:56, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Reversed Logo = More Official

I have edited the logo (bottom of the infobox) several times, only to see my edits changed back seconds later.

I strongly recommend we use the reversed logo at the bottom of the infobox, as it respects the logo positioning, whilst the non-reversed logo does not. See the UEA Identity Guidelines here:

http://www1.uea.ac.uk/polopoly_fs/1.74459!uea_brand_identity_guidelines.pdf

The background colour for the reversed logo is Pantone 302, one of UEA's two corporate colours. The reversed version of the logo is used way more often than the non-reversed, on campus and in official publications. Thus, in response to its rash dismissal by 79.75.213.102, it is not the "wrong" logo at all, its usage is actually preferred by UEA itself.

Top institutions such as the University of Oxford, McGill University, the University of Manchester and such all use reversed logos. I adamantly believe the usage of the reversed logo will not only be preferred by UEA, but will stand the article in much greater stead.--WorldAtlas (talk) 00:20, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

I've just read through the guidelines. The reversed one does actually make the most sense. It is the most used on campus and publications. The presentation page of the guidelines itself features a reversed logo. Go with it.--ThomasBuckley (talk) 12:23, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

If nobody comes forth with valid reasons as to why the reversed logo shouldn't be used (frankly I cannot think of any) by tomorrow, then I shall upload it onto the infobox. I think that's reasonable.--WorldAtlas (talk) 12:00, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

STOP! YOU CAN'T DO THIS. The inverse logo is completely revolting (the normal one is bad but the inverse is far worse). You 2 are blatantly the same person as nobody in their right mind would prefer the inverse logo. You better not change it or i will change it back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.75.215.137 (talk) 11:41, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Colours

Since when are UEA's colours black and blue? Are they not blue and yellow? —Preceding unsigned comment added by ThomasBuckley (talk • contribs) 15:25, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm not 100% sure, but these are certainly the colours of the UEA scarf in any case, which is what is frequently used in articles on here. See Imperial College London for example. Jamesmh2006 (talk) 02:05, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I have replaced the previous "Royal Blue and Navy Blue" by the UEA scarf colours, that I have also referenced. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ThomasBuckley (talk • contribs) 12:06, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Unless opposed, I am taking the liberty to replace the incorrect navy blue with the correct blue. The reference doesn't cite navy blue in any way whatsoever. The university colours are listed as black and blue in The History of the University of East Anglia, Norwich book by M. Sanderson. A picture of the University scarf, from the Ede & Ravenscroft website (http://www.gownhire.co.uk/gownhire/(mxn1kd2kxgvrsomrfcauocml)/popups/AccessoryDetails.aspx?id=c93d3edb-732b-4c09-9e85-9617544015b6) clearly shows the colour is in no way navy blue. AlpsAlpsAlps (talk) 03:10, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Infobox - Scarf

I reckon the scarf should be in the infobox. Aesthetically, it makes the colours appear more official. Having the scarf colours under the boxed colours follows the lead of the University of Cambridge article and the University of Oxford article, thus surely we can't go wrong? —Preceding unsigned comment added by ThomasBuckley (talk • contribs) 10:21, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

"Aesthetically, it makes the colours appear more official." - colours are or aren't official. I've never heard of university colours being semi-official. However, I too noticed not only do Cambridge and Oxford do it, but Manchester, Imperial, York, Birmingham and so on. Unless opposed, I am uploading the CORRECT (ThomasBuckley, see reference) scarf colours into the infobox. AlpsAlpsAlps (talk) 03:46, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned references in University of East Anglia

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of University of East Anglia's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "FT 2002-war":

• From University of Nottingham: "The 2002 rankings - From Warwick". Warwick Uni 2002.
• From University of Warwick: "The 2002 ranking - From Warwick". Warwick Uni 2002.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 01:00, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Remove POV

The Student Union is one of the best ones in the country. It is run by the executive committee of which there are 12 different officers. The full time sabbatical positions are Academic, Communications, Finance and Welfare. There are also Part Time Officers who are International, Publicity, Environment, Womens, Ethical Issues, Sports, Societies and Liberations. They are held to account by Union Council. The Student Union provides a lot for students at UEA and is not often given the credit that is worth by the University who repeatedly refuse to give it a decent level of funding.

have moved this here as it is clearly not NPOV and doesnt cite sources. If these can be sorted it can go back in the article. Ian3055 20:11, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

There’s also the fact that its complete bull, the student union tries to rip its fellow students off at every opportunity. - Current Student, 1 May 2006

In agreement to the comment made above, the student union may appear semi-successful on the outside, however any employees from within would gladly tell you that it is run and managed by a bunch of useless individuals. The ENTS (Or entertainment department) especially is pissing most of the union’s money away on frivolous expenditure. This is not POV as citation and evidence can be clearly supplied if not due to the nature of the post. --Current Student 2006

This does seem to be written in a promotional style. The first dubious claim that I read was that the University has a "Strong Academic Reuputation". I think this should be source to be honest as this University does not rank particularly high, and is not one of the Universities that springs to mind when students make their applications through the UCAS system. To be brutally frank - in terms of school-leaver popularity it would be suitably described as a "second rate" institution. Kbdguy (talk) 16:02, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

HEAVY EDIT!!

Nothing makes my blood boil more than someone asking me "Who the hell are UEA anyway?", so I blew off a little steam in the Academic Reputation section. In all seriousness though, I think most of us will agree the change was overdue. AlpsAlpsAlps (talk) 20:47, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

The academic section does not seem to contain neutral POV. I have added an entry which points to a more reliable method of ascertaining the the Universities academic credentials with respect to it's peers. Feel free to undo my changes but please update this section with a more neutral POV. Kbdguy (talk) 16:26, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

University ratings

(I'm posting this to all articles on UK universities as so far discussion hasn't really taken off on Wikipedia:WikiProject Universities.)

There needs to be a broader convention about which university rankings to include in articles. Currently it seems most pages are listing primarily those that show the institution at its best (or worst in a few cases). See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Universities#University ratings. Timrollpickering 22:38, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Thankyou for bringing this point to our attention. Can I please make a further point that if a Rating is going to be used to support a particular point, please use the most up-to-date and valid rating. The Times University Guide gives both a headline rating and then it goes further and gives ratings in a number of different areas. If it is more appropriate to use the rating from a particular category then please do so rather than using the headline figure - even though the headline figure might show the University in a better light. Kbdguy (talk) 16:31, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed

One or more portions of this article duplicated other source(s). The material was copied from: http://www.uea.ac.uk/about/History. Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:45, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

UEA latin name, anyone?

University of Cambridge: Universitas Cantabrigiensis ; Durham University: Universitas Dunelmensis ; University of Edinburgh: Universitas Academica Edinburgensis ; University of Oxford: Universitas Oxoniensis ; University of Warwick: Universitas Warwicensis and so on... I suppose UEA isn't pompous enough to have its own latin name yet? AlpsAlpsAlps (talk) 03:33, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

I've seen the translation "Universitas Angliae Orientalis" but it's entirely unofficial and coined by one of the staff. The newer universities have never used Latin for any formal purpose so most have never determined an official translation. Timrollpickering (talk) 17:26, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

The Latin names of the older universities originated at a time when (for good, sensible reasons) Latin was the language of European scholarship and a scholar with a knowledge of Latin could visit any university in Europe and be understood, and his papers could be read and understood in Latin by any scholar. As late as the 1680s, Isaac Newton at Cambridge published his Principia Mathematica in Latin, though his contemporary and rival Leibniz, a German at the Sorbonne in Paris, wrote his Théodicée and an unpublished work that was later to become his posthumous Monadology, in French.

The Latin names are thus appropriate for the older universities such as Oxford, Cambridge, Durham and Edinburgh, where they have a history of usage in original Latin text, but are mere affectations for the newer universities. --TS 12:30, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Climatic Research Unit hacking

I've redone the recent removal of the section on the hacking. At the moment this looks out of place on the UEA article, in terms of Wikipedia editing it smacks of recentism, and we'd be better off waiting a few months to see if the fuss ever amounts to anything of import for the university. We should avoid aping the newspapers, and always try to maintain the historical perspective. We have no deadline. --TS 12:38, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Public?

The first sentence of the lede states that the UEA is a public university, and gives a reference; however, the reference does not seem to corroborate this. The information is repeated in the infobox. I have looked at the UEA website but I have been unable to find confirmation of public status. Is there a source to verify this claim that I am unaware of? -- Scjessey (talk) 19:24, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

It is widely known that all UK universities are public bodies, with the unique exception of the University of Buckingham. Therefore if you are going to mark this fact as in need of a citation I suggest you do the same in regard to all other UK university articles Flaming Ferrari (talk) 14:13, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Flaming Ferrari. This isn't a hugely surprising statement to make about a British university. Perhaps we could find a way to work in a link to Universities in the United Kingdom which explains how British universities are funded, but it's inappropriate to require a distinct reference for the fact that East Anglia along with nearly every other university in Britain is publicly funded. --TS 14:22, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

(after ec) - That is not a satisfactory answer. "Widely known" is not the same as reliably sourced, and I doubt that the UEA meets the criteria of a public university in that it is "predominantly funded by public means through a national or subnational government". All the reading on the UEA website I have done leads me to believe that most of the university's funding comes from private sources. I respectfully submit that "public" requires a citation. -- Scjessey (talk) 14:23, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps an addition of a UK section to Public university would be appropriate to clarify that UK universities (except Buckingham) are 'independent' but (primarily) publicly funded? Pterre (talk) 15:28, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

The reason I brought this up in the first place is related to the hacking incident that took place in the CRU. It has to do with whether or not requests made under the Freedom of Information Act fully apply to the UEA's CRU department, since it relies almost entirely on private sources of funding. -- Scjessey (talk) 15:41, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

This says The European Commission of the European Union (EU) provides the largest fraction of our research income under the Environment and Climate Change Programme. The list at the bottom includes a mix of pubic and private sources but it does not appear to indicate a majority of private funding. Pterre (talk) 16:31, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

2011 University Guide

Can someone please update the university league table to include the 2011 results? I was going to do this myself but I got very confused as to how to do it! UEA is now 19th in the Guardian (up from 35) http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/table/2010/jun/04/university-league-table Marv101 (talk) 11:44, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Lead paragraph

I would suggest that rankings are currently given undue weight in the lead paragraph and should be removed (in accordance with WP:BOOSTER "the lead is not a section to astonish readers by establishing the quality of the college or university, only to serve as a summary of the rest of the article. Nor does the lead of the article have to include a preponderance of rankings and superlatives to establish the notability of a college or university since all accredited colleges and universities are inherently notable." This would leave very little left in the lead paragraph, however, and it could be expanded to better summarise the article. Reg porter (talk) 03:13, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Student Union?

The article perhaps overlooks the activities of the student union. What brings me to say this is that the clubs and societies are not mentioned once.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Hpka (talk • contribs) 09:57, 12 February 2005 (UTC)

"Purpose-built theatre"

In the article it suggests that the "purpose-built theatre", the Drama Studio, was built in 2001. I'm fairly certain it predates this by about seven years. If memory serves, there's a plaque in the foyer saying it was opened by Harold Pinter in 1994.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Lukeowen100 (talk • contribs) 19:55, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Consensus

Hello, I am asking that we come to a consensus of opinion over recent changes I made (this ver) and then partly reverted by User:Liometogo.

• Moving Administration section into a central "organisation and administration" section, per WP:UNIGUIDE it is common to discuss university leaders in this way. Equally we could split the current list to a separate article
• Layout of images in alumni, newer Matt Smith image was reverted and the formatting of equal rows in the gallery also
• Remove of academics images, surely this is reasonable as we have the same for alumni

Please discuss Aloneinthewild (talk) 20:26, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Alumni

Martin Tyler, the football commentator, is another notable alumni of the university. I'm new so I don't really know how to add links and such. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olympuse410 (talk • contribs) 13:18, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Avengers: Age of Ultron

Several scenes for Avengers: Age of Ultron were filmed at the Sainsbury Centre for Visual Arts. I have already added that info (with RS) to the SCVA's wikipage, but was unsure if it should be added here as well, and if it should then where to add it. It's rather notable given how big the film is going to be. here's the ref Vyselink (talk) 21:13, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on University of East Anglia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090207021411/http://www.ucs.ac.uk:80/about/News/pr20050225.aspx to http://www.ucs.ac.uk/about/News/pr20050225.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:27, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on University of East Anglia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20081219083433/http://www.norwich.gov.uk/intranet_docs/A-Z/Sports_Dev/2006/Norwich_Sports_Directory_2006_07.pdf to http://www.norwich.gov.uk/intranet_docs/A-Z/Sports_Dev/2006/Norwich_Sports_Directory_2006_07.pdf

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

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:02, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

"Universtiy of East Anglia, Norwich" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Universtiy of East Anglia, Norwich. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 May 10#Universtiy of East Anglia, Norwich until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC678 22:59, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Prof Michael Houghton.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:11, 6 October 2020 (UTC)