Academia edit

Article is no longer a featured article

Except for the sections on the ancient world and the medieval period, this article is very U.S.-centric, partly by showing a lack of awareness of other perspectives (see section "Recent_economic_changes"), partly by using U.S. examples, where, say, Italian, French or German examples would be more appropriate (as in the section "Rise_of_academic_societies"). Where it is not entirely U.S.-centric, international perspectives are mostly limited to England. The section "Eighteenth_and_nineteenth_centuries" is all about the U.S., despite America still being a backwater at the time. With all due respect for the University of Pennsylvania and Ben Franklin, in an 18th century history of academia, one would expect the University of Göttingen, the University of Leiden and a host of other European universities (and other institutions) to be more important to mention. And whatever happened to the renaissance, humanism, in fact the entire period from the end of the middle ages until the mid-18th century? Is the foundation of the Royal Society really the only thing worth mentioning from that period? (Note that there may also be non-Western institutions which should be mentioned. I am just focusing on the things I personally find most obvious.)

The article is not badly written, but a clear systemic bias, significant omissions, and a lack of proper referencing, makes it inappropriate for featured status. u p p l a n d 16:27, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Remove. Apart from anything else, the article has one reference, and no indication what parts of the article are referenced by it. Jkelly 19:33, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove: the nomination says it all, really. There is more to the world than the English-speaking part of it. Filiocht | The kettle's on 08:21, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove per nominator. Bishonen | talk 15:41, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove per nominator. - Mgm|(talk) 09:30, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]