Talk:Churchill College, Cambridge/Archive 1

Archive 1

toast

Is the article wrong, or have they changed the toast? Ee, when I were a lad, it were "[bong] The Queen! [drink] [bong] Sir Winston! [drink]". On t'other hand, that were a long time ago. Ee.

Has anyone ever been sober at that point?---Dah31 01:46, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

• I think it's Sir Winston first then her Madge - I'll check on Wednesday. Dmn € Դմն 09:39, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Layout and formatting problems

The third line of the History section is truncated, as though it's disappearing behind the photograph, although the whole line is visible when you edit the page. I'm not sure how to fix this. Can anyone else help? Mike Field 07:59, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Photos

Get some less dreary photos! The ones on the page look like they're just taken from an ordinary camera - surely there must be some more professional and nice looking ones kicking about somewhere? It sounds crazy, but the college can actually look really beautiful in the late spring and in summer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.179.108.57 (talk) 18:34, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Year of Establishment

The college website says that the college was founded in 1958. The official royal charter was granted on 3rd August 1960 (Churchill College Statutes Page 5) and the first undergraduates arrived in October in 1960. While it is incorrect to say it was founded in 1960, it was a very key year for the college. It was indeed not even a college until 1960.

WikiWebbie (talk) 00:46, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Why Cambridge?

The question may seem silly, but why was Churchill College located at Cambridge rather than the more obvious choice of Oxford? Churchill's great-grandfather, grandfather, father, and son were all educated at Oxford and he is said to have regretted not going to Oxford himself. Furthmore, his family's principal seat, Blenheim Palace is very close to Oxford. I am sure Cambridge was an excellent choice, but with all Churchill's connections with Oxford and, as far as I am aware, none with Cambridge, I can't believe I am the only person to wonder why Cambridge was given his college. Presumably there were other reasons of more importance than family connections that made Cambridge the suitable place, but it would be interesting to know what they were, and whether Oxford was considered. The even more obvious case of Cambridge being given surprising preference over Oxford, though for a very clear reason, is Lady Thatcher's patronage of Cambridge, despite her being a graduate of Oxford. I believe her preference for Cambridge is typically dated to Oxford's decision not to confer on her the degree of DCL. Churchill, however, must have had no such grudge.--Oxonian2006 (talk) 10:44, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

I believe Cambridge due to the reputation for Science within Cambridge. Winston Churchill wanted to emulate MIT. (WikiWebbie (talk) 11:42, 18 August 2008 (UTC))

Why Would Mrs Thatcher's patronage have anything to do with the matter? The College accepted its first students in 1960, well before Margaret Thatcher could have had any significant pull in making the decision. Churchill was alive when the decision was made.Kuitan (talk) 19:17, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Changes 1st August, 2009

I have added a few references to the College site, and to the College Archive as verification of some points. I have made corrected the start date for the college, from 1958 to 1960. There were no buildings in place in 1958, and the college itself was only incorporated by Royal Charter in August 1960.

I removed one word from the sentence about Francis Crick resigning from the college. According to his short biography at the U.S. National Library of Medicine, at Bethesda, MD (where there is an archive of his correspondence) he did resign as a fellow of the college after one year. There is no reference to the anecdote[1].Kuitan (talk) 20:34, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Chapel

I'm far from sure one can claim the chapel being incorporated into the college is what was aimed or that it is fully incorporated.

Any sources to support this? I'm not sure enough myself of the status of the chapel to make the change!

--

There is a long article on the controversy in the most recent Churchill College Review(2003). Chapel was intended to be sited where the squash courts are now, an integral part of the college fabric as in other colleges. Instead it was relegated to the far end of the sports field and run under a distinct management structure. Perhaps 'incorporated' is the wrong technical term, but the basic idea is true - the Chapel is now managed through the College itself (although I presume that refers fundamentally to fabric and funding elements distinct from spritual oversight). Anyone have the appropriate formal description?

Madir 14-May-2003

--

Yes, I read that article but obviously not closely enough!

I have asked some friends who are more closely connected than I am at the moment to check...

(Oh and the initial comment was from me)

Muppet 19-May-2003

--

I wish I'd kept my copy now. But the point struck me at the time that I'd have to modify my "Chapel AT Churchill" story. I see the Christian Union Website still uses this formulation - presumably it has just become the habitual expression.

Madir 20-May-2003

Far from conclusive but a friend who was a PhD student says it is still technically seperate and so "Chapel at Churchill" is correct. Not enough for me to actually change the article yet. I'll dig out the review tonight. Muppet 16:21 12 Jun 2003 (UTC)

I read the Chapel articles in the 2003 review last night, and they seem to suggest no status change: i.e. still not part of the college. Muppet 08:48 13 Jun 2003 (UTC)

People should be content with this. On the Churchill College Website where they say very clearly that the Chapel is NOT formally part of the College[2] Kuitan (talk) 10:56, 5 August 2009 (UTC) 10:54, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

student numbers

The page says: Undergraduates 210, Graduates 440, but I think it should be the other way around. About 2 undergrads for every postgrad.

Sheepy 5-Feb-2005

The latest figures from their website say that Churchill College has some 450 undergraduates, 280 postgraduates, 150 Fellows and 140 staff [3] Kuitan (talk) 10:56, 5 August 2009 (UTC) 5 August 2009 (UTC)

The Poker Team

Let’s put aside the issue if the college poker team is relevant enough to be included in this article, and just assume that it is. In this case, statements such “[the team] is the best in Cambridge” and the cuppers results need proper, verifiable sources. The first source given by WikiWebbie is from the JCR which is closely related to the college, so I would consider it a primary source, not secondary. Also it does not even mention ‘poker’ and ‘cuppers’ on the same page, so it’s not even a source. And the second source, “Poker Cuppers Results 2008/9”, is not verifiable, as it is not linked to. Therefore, I will keep reverting it until it is properly sourced, or WikiWebbie finally engages in a discussion instead of bull-dozing his edits through. — Richie 18:16, 30 August 2009 (UTC)