Talk:Student television in the United Kingdom/Archive 2

Archived requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was Discussion inconclusive, with no prejudice against the creation of a new move proposal right after the closure of this one. Suggest choosing a model where participants may express their positions briefly, clearly, and without resorting to unrelated matters and personal attacks.--Hús ö nd 01:12, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I propose that the page is moved to Student television in the United Kingdom. Firsty, the Manual of Style states clearly Do not capitalize second and subsequent words unless the title is a proper noun. Secondly using the adjective British probably isn't a good idea as the page includes Northern Irish student television - using in the United Kingdom avoids this problem. It would also bring the article name in line with the bold text in the lead paragraph. Are there any objections? CR7 21:17, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

actually it includes a republic of Ireland station, so the term British was used since they are all part of that archopeligo. perhaps you should try reading the article first next time Sherzo 23:36, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

CR7 is right here I'm afraid. It is culturally unacceptable to citizens of both the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland to include an Irish university television station in an article entitled British student television. The term British is associated with Empire and especially England to which the Republic of Ireland is not part of. I think by referring this article as British you really mean pertaining to the British Isles, the actual and acceptable name of the group of islands. Something a teacher should be aware of. Therefore, a more appropriate title would be Student television in the British Isles TorstenGuise 07:25, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well since the term British refers to the British Isles and not any of the nations, England, English, Scotland Scottish, Wales, Welsh and Ireland Irish. since the name was acceptable to Jmalky, Tominsaac and CTN the Irish nation in question. I am aware that some Irish people have a bigotry against the British and i raised this very question when the page was in development since even the term British isles is offensive to these people, however since the British and Irish government always use the term these Isles and the only other option is Islands of the North Atlantic which includes Iceland and Greenland it was decided it would be pedantic and over confusing especially since the only Irish station wanted to be included with the British ones and even joined the british group Nasta

as for your other point Ireland was part of the UK and its Irish troops made up a third of the military, and several Irishmen were prime minister including field marshal wellington, perhaps you should stick to science rather than try and lecture on history. Sherzo 11:02, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless of British referring to 'the British Isles', the island of Ireland (both the Republic and Northern Ireland) are most definately not part of (Great) Britain, which includes only England, Wales and Scotland.. In response to "perhaps you should try reading the article", I did read the article and thought it meant Northern Ireland due to the fact the title said British. I don't know if you're British, but I know 100% that I am. 'British' is a very touchy term in Ireland as a whole and only Northern Ireland is ever referred to as being British in any sense. Calling this article British Student Television is not geographically or politically correct. I suggest therefore that Student television in the United Kingdom and Ireland or Student television in Britain and Ireland are good substitutes. CR7 11:34, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just as an extra, the suggestion that we should use 'British Isles' is a bit sketchy as well according to British Isles naming dispute. CR7 11:36, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i'm glad your a 100% sure of your own nationality. you thought it meant northern ireland despite saying Dublin? don't they teach geography in the UK anymore? outside of fringe of vocal lunatics on the internet the british isles is an oft use term in the rest of the world, and since this article was designed to replace the Nasta one if you had joined ino on the development of this article or done some research you'll see that it isn't a seperate cultures its one culture of student television that grew in Britain and spread to Ireland its be like saying Disney is now a franco-American company because it opened eurodisney, and further to any of that CTN what to be included with the British, they joined the the UK's National Association of Student Television rather than start an Irish one. Sherzo 14:56, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is nothing to do with culture, it's to do with the name of the article! The Republic of Ireland is most certainly not Britain or British. According to the page history you are the only person that's edited it and it was full of spelling and grammatical mistakes. Please don't insult British geography if you can't use capital letters properly. This is an encyclopedia, not a blog. The article should be what is geographically correct and politically correct - calling it British Student Television is not acceptable. The page will need renaming regardless as it's against Wikipedia policy - student and television shouldn't have capital letters - see here. Wikipedia also promotes a neutral point of view policy and describing Ireland as British is not neutral. CR7 15:54, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really suprised at the level of ignorance and poor judgement that Sherzo has demonstrated here. The rather disappointing way that this article was created.

Firstly as the debate on the original Glasgow University Student Television had gone quiet, but by no means reached a consensus (with the exception of what Sherzo concidered credible print sources in the UK). The opportunity was taken to create this article and push the GUST article under the carpet. The only person who even mentioned the possibility of creating such an article in this debate was in fact Sherzo.

Secondly, and a major sticking point for me in any debate on the use of language in wikipedia, is International editors not understanding the consequences of the use of certain phrases in creation or editing articles. I'm constantly baffled why international editors have the need to impress themselves on articles for the only reason that it doesn't fit their particular interpretation on the guidelines regarding notability, or what wikipedia is not. I understand that there is a wide range of interpretations from the hard core deletionist, to the hard core inclusionist. However. Editing an article that is removed from their national and influential sphere, not as it is their interest or expertease, but as a jobsworth for the rules, to me is becoming more and more unacceptable.

Finally is the tone that Sherzo has used in this debate, inferring that his knowledge is superior to us meer mortals. The same mortals who live in the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland, who have to deal with these issues on a day to day basis.

CR7, the original source of this article can be found here.If you examine the talk section you will see the limited level of consultation over the use of the term British, and the rather good and unused suggestion by Tomisaac to use Student Television in the UK and Ireland instead (Incidentally, his whole contribution to the debate there). TorstenGuise 20:23, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

first let me deal with your point about the terrible editing of international editors and how they have zero knowledge of anything that happens in the UK etc. First International editors are a good thing since they have no Bias i have no desire to make Student TV in the UK look good or bad just represent it honestly and informatively, if more non biased editing took place on many US articles wiki would be a better place. An example of the benefits of non bias editors can been seen on the article this replace. the Nasta page misrepresented what nasta was in an effort to increase its notability so was misleading the individual stations had all edited the page in such a way that it would appear they were all superior to the BBC and practically perfect in every possible way. I edited that article as i edited this based on research as best i could achieve it from my inferior nations, but rather than using your instanteous knowledge of all things uk to improve this article what have you done what subistantive contribution have you made? its editors like you that bog wikipedia down in the munsha and why i have grown weary of constantly battle editors whos sole objective is to stamp there own world view.

as to the matter of the name the article is about the culture of student tv in Britain primarily the Irish in general and CTN in particularly have made no contribution to that as yet and CTN itself is of no note as none of the stations are other than through its connect to that British Culture since it petitioned to join Nasta it would not be eligible in any other way, and to rename the article to reflect that one station joined a British student association would be entirely misrepresentative of the article unless you were to add substantionally ammounts on the contribution of Irish Student tv i assume via your omnipotent knowledge of all things british and irish but then that would mean adhering to the spirit of wikipedia by acutally research and then contribution something, rather than make pedantic arguments based on your world view and how wiki should reflect that.

If you feel that agrieved by the name put in an RfC i was only trying to improve wikipedia foolish for me even to try, but one thing all the month this article was in development with your vast knowledge of all things british you didn't make a single solitary contribution

Sherzo 20:59, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that link TorstenGuise. On the NaSTA article front, there are now millions of double redirects to this page from the NaSTA one even though the two aren't quite the same, so something needs fixing there. Regardless of the culture, Ireland still remains seperate from Britain and the name must reflect that, it's wikipedia policy for neutral descriptions. The article name is entirely unacceptable and I'm glad that I'm not the first to consider the naming of this article. We have the following possibilities: Student television in the UK and Ireland, Student television in the Britain and Ireland, Student television in the UK and RoI and the expanded forms. Rather than argue about whether or not the rename is necessary, it'd be better to choose one of the options and to get on with it. CR7 21:06, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your welcome CR7. Personally I prefer Student television in the UK and Ireland. Snappy and to the point. Returning briefly to my grievance on international editors. The internet is not the only source of information in the world, something International editors tend to rely on when working on articles such as this. The internet is also not the most reliable source of information either. I certainly would not use the vast majority (if any) of it's content when compiling a research paper. So whereas there would be some bias from a local editor, there would also be bias from an international editor due to the limited, and not nessesarily reliable relevant subject matter available on the internet. This also impacts on the honest opinion of the subject matter that the international editor sees. There goes the NPoV from the international editor theory out the window.

Finally, I could not contribute to the development of this article, as I was not aware of it until it appeared magically in place of the GUST article. I only found the source after Sherzo had indicated yesterday that the work was developed by Tomisaac and JMalky on my talk page. It's interesting how there is a gap of over a month of inactive editing, yet little publicity on the other relevant topics. You must expect some criticism when an article is being created in relative secrecy, then try to defend yourself by asking where is your input. I'm not saying I'm an expert on British & Irish culture either, or have an instentaneous knowledge of all things UK. I'm meerly pointing out the basic fact from being here that we know stuff you don't! TorstenGuise 21:50, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

have you put in a RfC yet? is it because then you would be unable to try and stamp your own world view on the article?

you claim i'm so evil for using the internet to research and improve an article that i couldn't know have to made one edit base on the information you can access from acutally living there? no you've complained about the title, you are in fact what is wrong with wikipedia perhaps you'd feel more at home on conservapedia more your style. As for developed in secret thats just hiliarious i would of been more than grateful i frequently requested in fact on the Nasta talk page, i uploaded it preciously because no one had many any editions in so long, the Nasta page couldn't be left as it was, but its not by responsibility to get you involved you get yourself involved if you can't be bothered how is that my fault?

This is an article that represents the growing culture of student tv in the Britain for the name to include Ireland would lead you believe that Ireland has had some impact on this cultural it has not, its simple a note in this article because an Irish station petition to join a British student tv group its utterly insane pedantic and misleading to include Ireland in the title.

on the matter of international editors, yes we are all so retard we are unable to make intelligent judgements on what we read or identify a reliable source because we all lack the superior british brain. you yourself have edited articles on other countries do you really feel your competent to write about Korea? given how you live in Britain or does this rule solely apply to the UK? because were all lower orders of lifeforms compared to the British? Wikipedia acutally preferes web sources, to prevent articles like the upper peninsular war so that anyone check them, rather than having to wait till some neutral person from that country haps along and has both the time and energy to go and check them references in the article, that is why we have a notability standard, to guard against such bias. Sherzo 11:09, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i removed to reference to Ireland i hope that makes you happy, perhaps you could now attempt some substantive contribution to wikipedia Sherzo 11:09, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't claimed you are evil for using the internet for research, I meerly critisised the credibility of the internet as a reliable reference resource. You can read about national cultures all you want, but living the culture is very different. It gives you a differing knowledge. I didn't get dragged into this subject until the GUST debate, to which there is no real reference to this on there. Being pedantic about national politics is actually important to the UK & RoI. I never suggested that we were superior in intellect or knowledge, you did. If you check the history of the Radio jamming in Korea article, you will note that I made the second edit to the article and marked it for speedy deletion. Well within my rights as a newpage patroller. The notability standard, like all rules on wikipedia is open to very wide interpretation. Something that differs significantly from the inclusionist to the deletionist. As for your suggestion that I should be editing Conservapedia, I couldn't be more against the principles of such a restrictive environment of knowledge. Remember, I'm a scientist. TorstenGuise 12:26, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This has nothing to do with being pedantic, Ireland is not part of Britain - fact. Calling the Irish British is like calling the Americans British; they were British in the past, but not anymore and don't like to be called that way. I am in no way encouraging restrictive information but making a correction to what is factually inaccurate. I'll see what I can do for an RfC. CR7 13:13, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that the main article is already down for RfC, since 29 July. CR7 13:18, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There seem to be three issues here. The capitalisation is the easy one, it should be fixed. Then there's the question of whether British student television is preferred to Student television in the UK, and so on. I can't get excited about that, either is fine. But the question of Ireland fascinates me... at present there seems to be no mention at all of Ireland in the article, so why have it in the title? Why not instead create a stub on Irish student television or Student television in Ireland or something similar? Andrewa 07:17, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There was a mention of Ireland, but Sherzo removed it so that the argument to rename the page would become null and void in his opinion. If you look on the main page's history and go back to the last version I edited, you'll see where it was mentioned. From what it appears that is the only student TV station in Ireland, so the stub would be pretty pointless, including it back here under the title Student television in the UK and Ireland. If the Ireland section grew, it could be spun off; but if it remains as only the one station it'd be fine in with the rest. CR7 13:14, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've only just noticed this page has been copied over from the corner of my userspace where it was being worked on. To be honest, I made the stub of the article, and around the same time I ended up reading a few comments that had been made by others (who shall remain nameless) working on the original NaSTA article in other articles. I found the attitude to discussion so uncivil and childishly argumentative that I decided I wasn't going to risk working with them, and I left the article alone. My original plan had been to get a bit more structure in, advertise the rewrite heavily on [NaSTA]] and GUST talk pages (and message individuals) and then move it over if there was consensus. I didn't really intend a secret rewrite (as I think was mentioned above somewhere), but after I stopped working on it I decided not to bother advertising it too much.

I reckon the best name is probably Student television in the UK and Ireland - it is both accurate (grammatically and geographically) and short. It uses instantly recognisable short-form names of both countries. We could also use 'ROI' for Ireland - this is a term that I have only seen used infrequently, at least inside the UK. It may cause confusion if used in the article heading. The only title with comparable accuracy is Student television in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and in the Republic of Ireland, which I feel is cumbersome to say the least... I suggest the scope of the article should include both Ireland and the UK because at the moment the two countries share NaSTA, and NaSTA is a significant part of the student television scene.

One thing I still can't understand is how any discussion on UK Student TV subjects on wikipedia ends up in a finger-pointing, name-calling slanging match (and don't any of you say 'But he started it!', and I'm not referring to this debate on it's own, there's a LOT of it in the archives!). It's a relatively uncontroversial subject which has a few good sources, and it's only significant issue is the occasional person coming along and using the encyclopaedia to self-promote - but those are easily dealt with. As such, I'm out of this one - I'm only going to make spelling and grammar edits to the articles if I feel like it from now on. Have fun guys!Tomisaac 14:35, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right then, I'm in favour of Student television in the UK and Ireland. TorstenGuise also suggested his support to that title earlier here too. What are other people's views? In favour or against? CR7 15:18, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not merely suggesting it It has my full support. I've replaced the articles references to Ireland to re-enforce that. TorstenGuise 17:17, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

the reference to Ireland, which i did inform you i had remove, is an aside it bears no relevance to the article, as the Irish station and thus Ireland has had no influences on that culture and any influence it did have would be within the British tradition as already established, we not call hollywood films anglo american despite the huge influence British culture and actors writers directers etc have had on it, similiar British cultural tradition previous have had Irish and American contributors, Byron, TS Eliot, George Bernard Shaw yet we still regard them as british. so any mention of ireland in the title without substanstive evidence would be misleading for anyone trying to research it just as the Nasta article had been.

the Irish question aside, why do you feel student television in the UK would be superior the current one do either of you intend to make actually contributions to the article with your encyclopedic knowledge of all things British? for instances you could fact check that guinness book of records reference.

Sherzo 18:31, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, the title is nothing to do with the culture. Everyone but you has seen the title needs changing. When this is settled I intend to try and put some work into the article; however at the moment my main priority is sorting out templates as part of the WikiSchools project. CR7 22:39, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

explain for us inferior non brits then? why is Student Television in the UK better than British student television? Sherzo 06:55, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think we have haven't we? What is it that they say about America & Britain? Two nations separated by the same language! TorstenGuise 08:09, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

yet again with the insults rather than reasoned arguments, doing your nation proud you truly are, you have yet to present one reasoned argument why British student television is an inferior title to Student Television in the UK, rather than your petulent and petty attacks on non brits. American articles are frequently called that american rather than in the united states, so what exactly is your argument for this far less "snappy" title is just change for change sake or just to try prove something to be pedantic because we have disagreed on other articles? i give yourself a victory for your ego perhaps? if so wiki really isn't the place but if it will improve your personal happiness if your life is that depressingly sad then by all means do it. Sherzo 18:00, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, calling it British Student Television is politically AND geographically incorrect. CR7 23:24, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is anyone apart from Sherzo objecting to the renaming of the article Student television in the UK and Ireland? CR7 00:00, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As a member of CTN, I'm all in favour of calling the page Student television in the UK and Ireland. As well as the political and geographical reasons outlined above, the main reason for approving of this new title is in consideration of NaSTA. The NaSTA constitution was amended in March 2007 to include any student television stations in the Republic of Ireland who wish to be included. True, as yet, there is only the one, CTN, but the door is now open for others.

What concerns me is the repercussions of having no separate NaSTA Wikipedia article. Since entering NaSTA into the search box redirects the searcher to this article, that implies that all topics relevant to NaSTA will be covered, or at least have the potential to be covered in this article. Actively excluding Ireland from the article does not faithfully represent the current state of student television in the UK.

--Jazzypants 17:38, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

and what cultural contribution has CTN made to student television in the British Isles? CTN inclusion is trivia at this point nothing more, like mentioning Canada in an article primarily about the US no one would say it should be renamed. on the nasta issue it wasn't notable for its own page just as CTN isn't notable and certainly not notable enough to change the name of this article.

also i know students in the UK have a prepensity to to create sockpuppets and will just say that is not the way to reach consenus wikipedia is not a democracy and this not a vote.

i like how CR7 and TortenGuise have no acutally arguments for there proposed change just the fact i'm against. if you simply presented your arguments for the change succiently and clearly you may convince me to change my mind. Sherzo 19:22, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To be quite frank, so far the only person that has objected is Sherzo. Everyone else has embraced the concept openly. Unless there are any other objections then there is a clear concensus to rename the page. CR7 (message me) 20:12, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The articles held within Wickipedia are more than a record of cultural contributions alone: it gives information of many types on many subjects. I disagree with your analogy of the US and Canada. When people wish to talk about the US and mention Canada, they talk of North America. There is no point in excluding one when there is a term covering both. Although there is no accepted corresponding term in this case, 'the UK and Ireland', as stated above, is a geographically and politically accurate phrase in the circumstances.

Furthermore, the UK and Ireland have a unique relationship within Europe and arguably the world. Although two distinct countries, there are many formal and tacit agreements that ease relations between them. Many societies and institutions operate under the UK and Ireland banner.

I understand that you wish this article to be about student television within the UK. What I do not understand is why this article must be about UK student television alone. I think that it is right to mention student television in Ireland in this article (reasons: because student television in Ireland should be mentioned somewhere, and including it here will foster good relations within the community and give it a broader context; because NaSTA caters for stations in both countries (see below); because of the proximity of our countries and the unique relationship they have), and if that is to be done, then the title must reflect this. As has been mentioned previously in this discussion, to talk of Ireland without differentiating it from the UK is inflammatory and non-neutral.

As a brief aside, although new to the student television scene, I have observed that NaSTA is indeed notable in that it garners a lot of attention from both student and professional quarters. The longer it has been established, the more people within the industry will come from a NaSTA background, the more notable NaSTA will become. It is important to nurture these links. Disregarding something, whether it be NaSTA or CTN, because it is deemed insignificant by one faction will only serve to alienate some and leave others in the dark. It is in all our interests to encourage discussion of and dissemination of information surrounding all student television stations in these islands.

--Jazzypants 20:38, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have no problem mentioning student television in Ireland, however it should not be in the title as this would be misleading, it would make it appear that Ireland has played some part in this culture which it has yet to do. you say not to differate is non neutral but to tailor wiki to individual tastes is not neutral in the same way wiki disregards the tastes of Muslims by not putting pbuh after the name muhammad and having images of on his page similiar the page on Evolution is not tailored to meet the tastes of a few individuals, Wiki is a research tool for the population of the entire world.

Wiki has guidelines on notability and Nasta doesn't fulfill them student tv in the UK as a whole does there is a growing culture but more UK stations exist outside of Nasta than in it, and sources on nasta are poor at best as with many of the older stations. it gets significant mention in this article and you should feel free to expand just make sure its relevant sources are attached.

however wiki is not the place to nurture links or anything else to provide people with a resource material, and the fact Nasta might become important in the future is not a valid reason for an article it could equally disappear. wikipedia is not a place to advertise or promote your group and this is why we have notability and NPOV.

if you can provide evidence of the contribution of irish student tv on an equal level to that of British stations in a combined culture then i will support the name change. Sherzo 00:23, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have this simple question for you Sherzo. Is Ireland part of Great Britain, yes or no? CR7 (message me) 00:44, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

Resources[edit]

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

British Student Television → Student television in the UK and Ireland — or some other alternative such as "Student television in the UK and RoI". The adjective British does not recognise the Irish television station and is unneutral, the nouns shouldn't have capitals unless proper nouns. CR7 (message me) 01:38, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Survey[edit]

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.

Support - per nom. Reginmund 05:05, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Student television in the UK and Ireland. TorstenGuise 20:15, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support - per nom. --Fredrick day 15:56, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Uk and Ireland would misrepresent the article. if to student television in the UK would wish to salient argument for why this is a superior title rather than change for changes sake. Sherzo 15:45, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Student TV in Britain has been going for more than 40 years with dozens of stations from scotland to plymouth exeter to wales, in contrast its only been going in Ireland for a less than a year with one station, also CTN is not a part of Nasta, the door has been opened for it to join in the next academic year if it chooses to. Given the nature of student tv as with any student group CTN could well disappear next year whereas in Britain its a pretty safe bet based on the number and age of stations that it will keep going. This article shows the rightly proud history of Student TV in Britain ( not to mention what we can achieve on such small budgets) so the title should reflect that. Personally i feel the Nasta Article and all the station articles should be restored to represent this vibrant and growing field of media. The Capone Of Lesta 01:53, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion[edit]

Any additional comments:

The rename is not the basic issue. There's a long-standing battle here as to whether Irish student television should be included in this article or not, and that's not surprising considering the subject, and not likely to cease as a result of a rename.

Either approach would do. My hunch is that we have more chance of a lasting peace with two articles, one for the UK and the other for Ireland. But either way, any decision on the name is pointless unless it also reflects a strong consensus on this issue. Andrewa 01:58, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Student Tv in Ireland is yet to be notable and there is simple no real article to write, if there is an article on Irish Tv then i guess a sentence could be added to that. Sherzo 09:55, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is nothing to do with pride, it's to do with geographical and political fact, Ireland is not part of Great Britain and as such it should be mentioned in the name. The is no inference that Irish student TV is better than English, Welsh or Scottish student TV. CR7 (message me) 13:01, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

Double redirects[edit]

When you are done moving the article to and fro, please fix double redirects. `'Míkka 16:58, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

rename[edit]

wow that was a fast debate, anyway you still got to change it since its using to different names a political and a geographic, so it should either be the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland or Great Britain and Ireland. Capt Jack Doicy 20:13, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please see User talk:Capt Jack Doicy#Page renaming. `'Míkka 20:34, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Protected[edit]

the article is protected for 6 hours to stop messing with titles and cut and paste moves. You people better talk. `'Míkka 20:30, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We are, unfortunately the current topic we are all talking about is Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Sherzo. TorstenGuise 10:21, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've lost all respect for TortenGuise and CR7 since i can no longer believe that do anything in good faith as the tactics there little cabal will goto in order to try and get people banned with whom they are having content disputes know no bounds. [1] Sherzo 00:18, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notability[edit]

Y'all better provide valid references to reliable sources about Irish student TV and their association with UK student TV. Otherwise this page renaming is inappropriate. `'Míkka 20:41, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think there's proof enough above on this page - CTN of Dublin, RoI. It's a student television station and its in the UK and Ireland. CR7 (message me) 13:37, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Websites of TV stations themselves are not proof of notability. Independent evaluation from sources not associated with the corresponding universities are required. With today's technology every student dorm can set up Numa Numa-like broadcasting, no big deal. `'Míkka 15:07, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion[edit]

Any additional comments:

The rename is not the basic issue. There's a long-standing battle here as to whether Irish student television should be included in this article or not, and that's not surprising considering the subject, and not likely to cease as a result of a rename.

Either approach would do. My hunch is that we have more chance of a lasting peace with two articles, one for the UK and the other for Ireland. But either way, any decision on the name is pointless unless it also reflects a strong consensus on this issue. Andrewa 01:58, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Student Tv in Ireland is yet to be notable and there is simple no real article to write, if there is an article on Irish Tv then i guess a sentence could be added to that. Sherzo 09:55, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is nothing to do with pride, it's to do with geographical and political fact, Ireland is not part of Great Britain and as such it should be mentioned in the name. The is no inference that Irish student TV is better than English, Welsh or Scottish student TV. CR7 (message me) 13:01, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

the fact is you are wanting to change the entire name of an article over a trival aside, the article is about student tv in the UK with a brief mention of an Irish station, which isn't even part of nasta apparantly (perhaps someone who lives in the UK can fact check that you know how incapable us non brits are) so its following in the tradition of its british counsins but has yet to add anything to that culture, and may not even exist next year, so will the title become periodical changing with the whims of irish students? Sherzo 13:40, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Logos fair use[edit]

Just got a notification about the (lack of) fair-use rationale for Image:NaSTA_Logo.gif, it's fixed now. I'm confused as to why Image:GUST.png has got an 'orphaned fair-use' tag on it, it would appear to be in use at both GUST and in this article.. Is the Betacommand bot broken?Tomisaac 09:19, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Page move reverted[edit]

Page move was done improperly:

only 3 days of discussion
the poll shows way no consensus.
Notability of Ireland is not shown
No connection between Ireland & UK student TVs that could justify putting them into single article.

`'Míkka 15:30, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can the redirects be sorted then please? Along with the page that states 'Student television in the United Kingdom'. CR7 (message me) 16:39, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is a separate talk. For now I re-redirected them here. I see there is several dozen of alphabet soup, 95% of them are not mentioned in this page. Per wikipedia:Verifiability rule, all of them which are not mentioned in this article (supplied with releable sources of independent orign, not just their own websites) will be deleted in about a week. `'Míkka 17:53, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: from my POV, "independent" may be quite lax but not totally: if the station is mentioned at the university's website, it may be considered recognized, but if a student's newspaper says "my boyfriend and his buddy set up KöölTV" this would be insufficient for notability. `'Míkka 18:02, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]