Talk:University of London Worldwide

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Added in citations for the LSE controversy portion. The last citation about 'fact', regarding the changes that may occur due to the Universities dissolution or modification at large, does not seem controversial. Hence, the, "it is unclear..."

If it is unclear, it should not be written down.

The addition of the OU Link[edit]

Whoever this UOFLER (works for the university?) was, when she/he revamped the EP page, that person has the foresight to refer to the OU as well. As I mentioned in my revision, since both OU and London EP ARE DISTANCE LEARNING PROVIDERS, it is only logical to speak of them in the same breath. After all, there are the premier distance education providers in the world. Hence, I see no reasons why the OU link should be removed. Furthermore, one of the other previous users (203.218.143.182) did say that “wikipedia is encyclopedic (shouldn’t it be written as: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia?),” it ought to include as much relevant facts as possible.

OU Link update The OU link has been removed for the second time, possibly by the same person using different IP addresses. I just don’t understand why would someone be so narrow-minded and refuses to act rationally 24.89.227.217 04:51, 14 March 2007 (UTC)24.89.227.217[reply]

Why an OU link?[edit]

We do we need an OU link? Is a link to distance learning not enough?--Duncan 10:28, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Respond to why an OU link
For one thing, it was not my intention to refer to the distance learning page when I restored the OU link. The OU link was restored for the purpose of serving as a benchmark comparison to the London EP only. Secondly, have you actually read the content of the distance learning page? It associates distance learning with diploma mills, accreditation problems to name a few. In addition, the distance learning page contains no list of reputable distance education providers. Hence, I believe that it does not do justice to the quality of the London EP by simply referring to the distance learning page while a more accurate comparison has been removed repeatedly by (I presume) the same person for no apparent (and valid) reasons. 24.222.164.251 04:11, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So why not improve the distance learning page? (Just to clarify, I am not the same person as anyone else)--Duncan 11:48, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Improving the distance learning page is certainly a viable option. But the issue is muted unless someone else takes the time to do a comprehensive update on the distance learning page. When I look at the users’ comments on the distance learning page, my impression is that revamping that page would be just as futile as to convince the same user of this page not to remove the OU link on a continuous basis. In the meantime, I believe that restoring the OU link on the London EP page remains as a practical solution.(Note: yes, I’ve pretty much figured it out that you weren’t the user who made the same unilateral change on the OU link again and again. Thanks for coming out though.)24.222.164.251 17:48, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

King's College London, LSE, and University College London to withdrawl?[edit]

How do we know that King's College London, LSE, and University College London are considering withdrawing from the external programme? Where is the citation? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.200.150.8 (talk) 11:03, 14 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

The article does not claim that they will withdraw from the EP. So there's no reference to it. However, it there clearly is an issue there, since they do plan to leave the University. --Duncan 03:30, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, all schools are considering withdrawl. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.135.133.203 (talk) 03:02, 6 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]
LSE wants its own degree granting powers, which, given its autonomy in the Universities' view and per its charter would make it a both de facto and de jure solo institution. It is also incorporated now. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.135.133.203 (talk) 05:53, August 20, 2007 (UTC)
That's not the case. The University allows colleges to award their own degrees. Leaving the university is a different choice: King's is staying, IMperial has left. Both issue their own degrees. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DuncanBCS (talk • contribs) 22:07, August 21, 2007 (UTC).
Would be great to see a reference. Really? All the schools? Birkbeck, Goldsmiths, Royal Holloway and SOAS could be big winners if LSE or Imperial pulled out. --Duncan 16:23, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Impact of Imperial withdrawal[edit]

I just had this emai from them...


Thank you for your enquiry. As you may be aware Imperial College is to withdraw from the University of London on 8 July 2007. Negotiations are currently in hand regarding future arrangements for those programmes offered by the University's External System in association, until now, with Imperial's Distance Learning Programme (Wye Campus).


The anticipated result of these negotiations is that academic responsibility for programmes other than the MBA will transfer with associated staff to the School of Oriental & African Studies (SOAS), University of London with effect from 1 August 2007. Contact details for communications concerning the programmes are unchanged.


I hope this helps.

N.B Please be aware that I am only in the office Monday, Tuesday and Friday and I will reply to all my e-mails in date order ASAP.


Kind regards,




Sheena Androliakos

Information Officer


University of London

Senate House

Malet Street

London

WC1E 7HU

UofL "encourages" colleges to leave?![edit]

"The University of London has also encouraged the LSE and University College London to apply successfully for their own degree-awarding powers."

That does not sound right. Why would University of London encourage them to leave. Unsigned comment.

They have not been encouraged to leave; they have been encouraged to apply successfully for their own degree-awarding powers. That's not the same as leaving. For example, KCL has issued its own degree, the AKC for its entire life.--Duncan 07:39, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

recent edits[edit]

I added a couple of minor footnotes and links. --Gnyc 05:18, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

more recent edits[edit]

I completed a major overhaul of the entry not too long ago. I penned a new history of the External Programme, and fleshed out a long list of famous alumni, including three Nobel Prize winners. I documented every claim, providing links to at least one, sometimes two or three, articles or websites that back up each claim. --Gnyc 14:36, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

With the recent change in name (from Prgramme to System), there is a new logo. I'm having trouble uploading it from work, can someone at least grab the version from the website www.londonexternal.ac.uk An armadillo 16:03, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Why are alumni noted as External alumni?[edit]

The Exteneral program offers the same degrees as the traditional program via distance education. So why are alumni marked down as alumni from the external program as if they are different? Why aren't they just listed as grads from the U of L? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.91.165.183 (talk) 18:28, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because the external programme is effectively, for want of a better term, the "college" for them. Given the nature of the University it's useful to list people by which route they took the degree. Timrollpickering (talk) 14:32, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Prisoner of war studies?[edit]

Could someone please help me here. I'm trying to find out more about these POW's studying but the link provided as a source on this page (Tatum Anderson, "History lessons at the people's university," Guardian Weekly, May 16, 2007) is dead. All I can find through searching the web on my own is the university of London itself and its brief mention. Would anyone happen to know of where I can find this article archived or perhaps something else on this subject?--Him and a dog 13:19, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bot report : Found duplicate references ![edit]

In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :)

  • "Guardian Article" :
    • Tatum Anderson, "History lessons at the people's university," Guardian Weekly, May 16, 2007 [http://www.guardianabroad.co.uk/education/article/283]
    • Tatum Anderson, "History lessons at the people's university," ''Guardian Weekly'', May 16, 2007 [http://www.guardianabroad.co.uk/education/article/283]

DumZiBoT (talk) 07:55, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

UoL International Programmes , 'Distance Learning' and Open Uni[edit]

As a Registered student I should make the following clear: There is no distance learning involved. UoL external students only pay for registration and examination fees. No tuition is taking place. That was the traditional conception of UoL programme: You pay fees for your right to sit high standard exams by a prestigious organization and possibly end up with a respected degree. You're either supposed to study on your own or attend whatever other institution you might find helpful. Unfortunately, UoL downplays this fact nowadays as it wants a piece of the 'distance learning' pie. But in reality 'distance learning' is irrelevant. Secondly, UoL external programme has no 'open' admission policy. Open Uni links, or links to other colleges that have appeared in the article were rightly removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.73.34.178 (talk) 10:19, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on University of London International Programmes. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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 IITalk to my owner:Online 08:25, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on University of London International Programmes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:38, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Article title[edit]

Is the parenthetical "(Worldwide)" really correct? It looks like a disambiguator but it isn't one. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 14:48, 20 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

“For internal purposes only, we will be referring to ourselves as ‘University of London Worldwide’.” https://london.ac.uk/news-opinion/london-connection/news-brief/thank-you-embracing-our-new-name – Kaihsu (talk) 15:50, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Add WHO boss[edit]

Current boss of WHO is alumnus, pls add — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:598:B88B:E54F:9D17:B25B:25ED:CE22 (talk) 11:57, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 9 April 2019[edit]

I want to write an article here. Finaskundil (talk) 08:05, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. – Þjarkur (talk) 10:22, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 21 October 2019[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Page moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Jerm (talk) 17:48, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

University of London (Worldwide) → University of London Worldwide – I believe that the article name should be University of London Worldwide, which is the official name, rather than University of London (Worldwide). The common name is University of London, but that is already used for the university article.[1] WP:NCDAB prefers a natural disambiguation like University of London Worldwide to a parenthetical disambiguation like University of London (Worldwide). The article was moved in September 2018 without a move discussion. TSventon (talk) 10:57, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. This should be done. Proceed ahead with an administrator who can move the page to a new title. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.69.15.11 (talk) 11:29, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, sock puppets don't get a vote. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:18, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I started this discussion because Category:University of London International Programmes has not yet been updated (discussion currently at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Speedy#On_hold_pending_other_discussion). @Rathfelder: and @Black Falcon: were involved in that discussion. @Robminchin:, do you agree or disagree with this requested move? TSventon (talk) 12:06, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Seems sensible to me. Rathfelder (talk) 15:00, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree – seems a sensible move. Robminchin (talk) 16:06, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • @TSventon: Could you point to a source indicating that "University of London Worldwide" is the official name? Based on an admittedly brief search, I could not clearly sort our the relationship between University of London Worldwide and what appears to be the subject of this article—i.e., the distance learning program formerly known as University of London International Programmes. -- Black Falcon (talk) 23:00, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    User:Black Falcon, did you read the footnote to this talk section? It is a 2018 announcement on the UoL website that the UoL International Programmes brand was being replaced by the UoL brand and that the new name of the department for internal use is UoL Worldwide. There is a link to a leaflet at the end, which gives the former department name, UoL International Academy and that UoL Worldwide will be used in committee and governance papers. I think this shows that UoL Worldwide is an official name and is the same operation as International Programmes. It is unhelpful for us firstly that the name for external use is UoL so it can't be used for the external programmes article and secondly that UoL Worldwide is for internal use so external sources will generally not use it. TSventon (talk) 00:49, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    I did, but I missed the "internal purposes only" statement. Thank you for pointing me to it. Support rename as proposed. -- Black Falcon (talk) 18:57, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

References

  1. ^ "Thank you for embracing our new name". University of London. Retrieved 6 March 2018.

Semi-protected edit request on 10 December 2021[edit]

Air vice-Marshal Dr George John Beldecos, Hellenic Air Force
 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:18, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 10 December 2021 (2)[edit]

Please ADD as the last external student, who completed a PhD under the External System (under the military graduates section)

Air vice-Marshal Dr George John Beldecos, Hellenic Air Force

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. We need sourcing, and the person must also be notable enough for a wikipedia article. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:28, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:University_of_London_Worldwide&oldid=1205845708"