Gaga247

Regarding University of Edinburgh

How is this any less appropriate for the introduction than "Regarded as one of the most prestigious universities in the world,[7][8][9][10] the university is ranked 6th and 7th in Europe according to the 2011 QS and Times Higher Education Ranking"

Personally I'd say that the nation student survey is more of an authority than the time higher education ranking. Wikipedia is not an advertising platform - prospective students deserve an unbiased description of the university. I am going to report you under the 3RR rule if you continue to remove this statement.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.24.254.212 (talk) 07:04, October 10, 2012‎

People only go to one university, the expectations may different for example. The link below will go though some key examples. Edinburgh, is having an NUS bote today, hardly anyone filled in the survey other than some complainers as a protest. At some universities almost everyone may have done. It has very questionable value. The global league tables consider things like citation per faculty, demonstrating research capabilities, not comparable. To the above comment, i didn't make it, ask the person who did, I would say the ranking of 21st in the world in QS covers what it says. Perhaps you are confused and meant to ask that to another user maybe, i onyly edited in once and commented in the talk page that a citation was needed for the endownment comment?(Gaga247 (talk) 16:24, 10 October 2012 (UTC)).

Why not in the introduction?

I am only willing to accept your compromise if you can give a good reason why is should not appear in the introduction. Saying that it is not comparable is not sufficient.

Again please note that wikipedia is not design for PR - it is suppose to be an encyclopedic resource. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.24.254.212 (talk) 17:12, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

As a general rule, if there is a dispute, the longstanding version remains. adding someting later on is no big issue, so you can do that. But the results you attempting to add are from a very dubious, if at all reliable source, and adding it therefore to an intro with concrete facts is not appropriate. International league tables look at things such as student/staff ratio, and citation rates per staff etc, and therefore tend to be more appropiate as opposed to the domestic ones. A student only goes to one university. How am i supposed to know if my teaching is good or not compared to another university? i dont know, there is no way of knowing. At some universities like edinburgh, there is currenty an nus vote, very few people at all took part in the survey compared to other universities, a reason why it did so badly in the survey, and also because there was an active movement to vote zero to try and get the university to listen. The university has acknowledged some issues, but a survey coming to results on a low turnout protest is not very good for inclusion. If you look at other articles it is not really normal to include that. Also the intro is already quite long, if people want to read it, its availiable later on, but for something like this where the outcome is not really a serious measure, inclusion in the intro is not really appropriate. It is an encyclopedia remember, not a news feed of events on campus, so the intro should not change very often, in fact very rarely. remember if you are trying to break the long held text, it is you who must go to talk to request changes if its disliked. Its your job, not mine.