Talk:University of the Philippines Diliman

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

Noted Alumni and Professors[edit]

Does "noted" mean "notable"? IMO, they are not notable. =) --Prem Vilas Fortran Rara 07:02, Dec 16, 2004 (UTC)

External links[edit]

I removed a bunch of external links that weren't very helpful to the article. See the guidelines at Wikipedia:External links. Coffee 15:03, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I removed some redundant links as well. Sunbursts 13:22, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violation[edit]

The whole history section of the article was removed because it's a copyright violation. Someone please rewrite it with original material to fill the void... a good school deserves a good article. Coffee 21:56, 29 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

University of the Philippines, Diliman or University of the Philippines-Diliman?[edit]

Anyone? --Howard the Duck 05:42, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is also getting me stumped. Back then in our Department's official publication, we used "University of the Philippines Diliman", without the comma. But if restricted to choose bet. the comma and the hyphen, I'd go for the former. Not to 'copy' the styles of Western universities, but "University of the Philippines, Diliman" and "UP Diliman" looks just right and comparable with "University of California, Berkeley" and "UC Berkeley". What do you think? -- Corsarius 19:59, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]


The "Philippines-Diliman" is more prevalent in the Philippines. I think only Wikipedia uses the "Philippines, Diliman" convention. However if acronyms are used, it is "UP Diliman", with no hyphens and commas. --Howard the Duck 14:39, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know a little late, but my two cents. The dash is what I see more, especially for other UP schools, i.e. UP-Visayas (when not UPV). However, Wikipedia seems to use the comma for all the UP schools. For UC Berkeley (California) and UMass Amherst (Massachusetts) there is neither a comma or dash. So what to do? I would lean towards the common usage, the one that people are more likely to search under, or use the same convention UP Diliman and UP Manila use, nothing at all. They have on their websites just a space. UPV has U of the P in the Visayas which is wordy.--Bruce Hall 11:38, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Section 4 of the RA 9500 An act to strengthen the University of the Philippines as the National University lists the names of the constituent universities without commas or hyphens. Shinjimikhael (talk) 09:43, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Student Organizations[edit]

Hmm...how about:

  1. cleaning up this list,
  2. trimming it, or
  3. giving it its own article?

The list seems to get longer by the day, with more student organizations raring to see their names on this Wikipedia article (and I haven't even checked the write-ups for NPOV). This isn't the case with other articles about other universities. For example:

  1. Harvard University and Harvard College---the organizations are not listed under the University article, and then again not all organizations are listed in the College article, though they are grouped by purpose (acad-related, fraternity/sorority, athletics, music...).
  2. Yale University uses a different approach; the organizations are listed on a separate article. What's more, like the Harvard College sub-section, the student organizations article is neatly categorized (e.g. all acads-related orgs go together, all athletic organizations go together, all fraternities and sororities go together, all musical orgs grouped together...)
  3. Oxford University lists less than ten organizations on the main article, but references a link to a separate category (actually, two categories) for student orgs.

Just my two cents ;-) --- Tito Pao 19:02, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Trim it, clean it, and put in its own article. Looking back on local examples, Ateneo has its organizations on their Loyola Schools article, which was presented short and direct to the point while DLSU-Manila and UST has theirs as a simple list. Having that huge list on this article is a big eyesore. --Mithril Cloud 10:35, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Done! ;-) --- Tito Pao 13:14, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Seems that the "Organization" section needs serious trimming as well. It's too huge that it doesn't even look encyclopedic anymore. --Mithril Cloud 16:23, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I know. But it's the main UP Diliman article that needs to be cleaned up first, so taking the orgs to its own article was the first step in doing this. But I'm also thinking of how to clean up the page. Maybe we can revise/delete most (if not all) of the descriptions. Then re-organize everything by category, though I'll need to read all names from top to finish to give me an idea on how these should be categorized. Based on a preliminary survey, I'm thinking along these lines: 1.acad-based (e.g. UP Cursor) 2.culture-based (the UP choirs, performing arts groups, visual arts groups) 3.geographic-based (e.g. UP Lakan) and 4.civic/advocacy/politics-based (UP Babaylan) --- Tito Pao 18:07, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Tito Pao's push for categorization makes sense. On the descriptions, some of the orgs already have their own Wiki pages, and thus do not need further description on the org List page. However, for the orgs that do not have their own Wiki pages, maybe we can allow 1-2 lines each. Also, is it just me, or are the red links on the orgs' names adding to eyesore? Maybe we can remove the Wikilinks from them for the meantime.-- Corsarius 18:36, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have to be fortright with this one...I'm actually working on the categorizations (off-line, of course, since it's a long, long page). I removed all red links and reformatted links, if available. I have also deleted the original descriptions since some of them read like blurbs from press releases. I'm expecting to get a lot of flak or (worse) vandalizations from members of these orgs who will be disgruntled with what I did to their original text, but I had to do this for the sake of making the article more encyclopedic (or else face the risk of having it deleted). On the safe side, I'll just leave out a short description of what college is the org based on (to use a fictional example, "UP Widgets Association is based in the UP College of Widgets"), or a short note on what it does or what is it (e.g. "UP Widgets Association - an association for BS Widgets majors"). I'll try to post them as soon as I have completed the first draft. Just to be sure, I will include comments inside the (revised) article's source code, as well as a few notes on the discussion page, so that future editors (most likely anonymous) will know how to make their entries more encyclopedic. --- Tito Pao 19:45, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Done! In anticipation of possible violent reactions, I've posted a not-so-short explanation on the Discussion page. --- Tito Pao 00:17, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Good work, man! The next problem now is to watch out for insistent org members. I admit, I once listed an org there with 2 lines of description, but I was looking forward to writing a full-fledged article on it in the future anyway. I guess orgs that had verbose descriptions in the first place have enough material for a Wiki article, or at least a stub, right? ;) Btw, considering that the Madrigal Singers already have their own Wiki article, shouldn't the org's description be somewhat shortened? Not to mention the org appears twice in the list. -- Corsarius 09:44, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Good point on the Madz, I'll have it changed in a short while. As for the insistent members, I make it a point to check my watchlist every now and then, so I'll keep an eye on this article every now and then. --- Tito Pao 13:27, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oks. I'll guess I'll help you with the 'patrol', considering that this list is bound to really grow in the future -- there are lots of UPD orgs that aren't in this list yet. Actually, I'm not sure if some of the listed orgs are already University-recognized (as opposed to College-recognized or strictly Department-based), though of course there's no way to verify that unless we check up with UPD's Office of Student Affairs :P -- Corsarius 14:18, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

UP's standing at the THES-QS rankings[edit]

Should we include it in the article? --Mithril Cloud 13:38, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. Though where would it be best to place the info -- a new paragraph after the lead, a new section after/before the "National Centers of Excellence, or somewhere else? -- Corsarius 14:27, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As of now, I don't see a suitable section. It could be added in the "Academics" section, but the article lacks that as of now. --Mithril Cloud 04:00, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hm. If it makes sense to you guys, maybe we can create a new "Academics" section, and move "National Centers of Excellence" under it as a subsection. -- Corsarius 12:32, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Although I believe that the article should have a major revamp first. Adding the rankings would come in second. --Mithril Cloud 13:08, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the THES-QS rankings should not be included at all. Since the THES rankings do not really get substantial information from this institution (the latest data for 2008 come from way back 2006), it can be observed that UP does not participate in the ranking. Therefore, the ranking of UP should not show up in the page, to preserve neutrality about the image of UP.Manong Arjhey (talk) 15:20, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Up centennial logo.jpg[edit]

Image:Up centennial logo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 23:15, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

University Info Box[edit]

Please don't make the University Info Box too small in font. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.213.80.79 (talk) 13:03, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have some qualms about the format of this article. As a current member of the University, I am quite concerned that the layout of the article is quite detrimental to its presentability. Unfortunately, I am not the best judge to revise and add information to the article since I am not conversant in the history, academic programs and services that the University has. As a concerned "Isko", I wish to help represent the university in a better light, but since it has not undergone any revision and reformatting for such a long time, I'd like to request someone to at least reformat this article in a more presentable form. Ulaire (talk) 14:47, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great Centennial Oblation Run[edit]

This is held only in December since 1977 but now it is dubbed as this, and held here in Diliman:"The Great Centennial Run" In the “UP Oblation Run," 100 UP-based Alpha Phi Omega (APO) Fraternity and several UP alumni on June 18, at 11:00 a.m., ran naked along the University of the Philippines (UP) campus to commemorate the centennial anniversary. They sprinted from the Vinzon’s Hall and stopped at Palma Hall, for short photo opportunity.www.gmanews.tv, 100 UP fratmen, alumni join Oblation Run for centennial celebration Jejomar Binay, alumnus and former prime chancellor of APO fraternity led the event.inquirer.net, ‘Great Centennial Run’ in UP--Florentino floro (talk) 09:45, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Constituent Universities Templates - UP Diliman[edit]

Meynardtengco (talk) 13:20, 14 July 2008 (UTC) new templates for constituent universities:[reply]

(Place information, specific to a constituent university, in the corresponding template)
{{UP}}
{{University of the Philippines, Diliman}}
{{University of the Philippines, Los Baños}}
{{University of the Philippines, Manila}}
{{University of the Philippines, Visayas}}

Image copyright problem with Image:Unibersidad ng Pilipinas.png[edit]

The image Image:Unibersidad ng Pilipinas.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --01:59, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please improve UP Diliman article[edit]

It looks more of a catalog than an encyclopedia article with all the lists and everything. More on history and information, please. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.55.205.115 (talk) 11:09, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requested Move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. 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 move request was move. Jafeluv (talk) 08:21, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

University of the Philippines, Diliman → University of the Philippines Diliman — UP Gazette (January - March 1983 p.6), under executive order no.5 during the 956th meeting of the Board of Regents. The official name is "University of the Philippines Diliman" --Dihamsal (talk) 11:33, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above six requests were added to this one since the same reasoning applies to all. Jafeluv (talk) 10:10, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

--- @Aubergine, WP:OFFICIAL is a general statement and an essay compilation re:official names, please see: Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(schools)#Choosing_a_name it shows that "School article titles should use the full official name of the school as provided by the school itself, unless the most common name for the school is significantly more well known than the official name." And since University of the Philippines, Diliman (University of the Philippines pause Diliman) (or los banos or manila etc...) is not common name and is not well known (in fact, its not being used except here in Wikipedia), thus the articles are using the wrong name and therefore the official name should be used. I'm an instructor at UPLB and I Strongly Agree to the proposal to move/rename the articles. And with this argument, I propose that the move be done immediately, anyone who would second the motion? --Meynardtengco (talk) 18:46, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

  • Agree University of the Philippines Diliman is not just a campus, or a branch of University of the Philippines system, but an autonomous university by itself under the University System and it should be treated as such. To use a dash or comma after University of the Philippines is to confuse the readers that UP Diliman is just a campus or a branch. It is not only the "official name" and "legal name" but also the more commonly used name. Please look at the websites of UP Diliman and other constituent universities.
"University of the Philippines, Diliman" and "University of the Philippines - Diliman" are no better alternatives than "University of the Philippines Diliman. They are mere errors borne out of confusions. I cannot understand the reason why "University of the Philippines, Diliman" was there in the first place.
By the way, I will also add this requested move template to the talk pages of other consitutent universities of University of the Philippines System since all them follow the same naming convention. --Dihamsal (talk) 04:05, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongly Agree. As an Alumnus and as former faculty, haven't used either the dash or comma EVER. Also agree as per all autonomous units. - Alternativity (talk) 07:10, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree I teach at UP Visayas and I have never seen UP Diliman or any UP college with a comma. I seen a hyphen used, though maybe not with Diliman. I do think that regardless it should be consistent across all UP pages.--Bruce Hall (talk) 15:38, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree. I've often wondered about this and have used both the hyphen and the comma separators. But whether a separator or not is used is extremely trivial per the naming guidelines so I'd choose on using the official name and that is without any separator. --seav (talk) 02:36, 30 July 2009 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.

Too much of an eyesore[edit]

Is the list of deans/list of degree granting units too relevant to be included on the Organization section? Or should they be just encased in boxes? The list is too long. I've seen the Ateneo de Manila page and it has much comprehensive information about the univeristy. And this is supposed to be an article on the flagship campus of the national university. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.202.241.32 (talk) 16:22, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions for re-writing the article[edit]

How should this article be re-written? Some comments above expressed my opinion too about it lacking narrative substance and readability. Instead of adding my comments to theirs, I decided to start a new section with a title that is hopefully more descriptive rather than expressive. I agree that the article needs to be re-written with more information in narrative form rather than list form. This afterall is an encyclopedia article. This lists are trivial and not informative to the more casual learner, as encyclopedia articles should be. If someone would like to know who a particular dean is or what the centers of excellence are, they can look for a comprehensive website, which we could link to if we want. Further, the article seems to lapse into boosterism while other parts are disjointed. Finally, more information needs to be given about the buildings, the campus, the student body, etc. There certainly needs to be a history section. In other words, there should be a more well-rounded picture drawn of the school. I will wait a few days and then do want I can, but that is limited since my knowledge of UP Diliman in limited.--Bruce Hall (talk) 10:00, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Noted. Wish you could help for revamping the whole article. I started about a week ago. And I put it under construction.--JL 09 q?c 07:11, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am placing the following lines of text here in the talk page. As noted by Bruce Hall, the article lapses into boosterism and is rather disjointed, specially the lead section. --Meynardtengco (talk) 01:13, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

UP Diliman (apart from the [[UP System]]) ranked 262nd among universities worldwide and second in Philippine rankings according to 2009 [[Times Higher Education Supplement|THES]]-[[Quacquarelli Symonds|QS]] World University rankings.<ref name="thes-qs">{{cite web|title=University of the Philippines|url=http://www.topuniversities.com/university/499/universityofphilippines|publisher=[[Times Higher Education Supplement]]-[[Quacquarelli Symonds]]|accessdate=4 August 2010|year=2010}}</ref> In 2010 THES-QS Asian university rankings, UP Diliman fall into 78th rank from its 2009's 63rd place.<ref>{{cite web|title=Asian university rankings - top 200|url=http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/asian-university-rankings/overall|publisher=[[Times Higher Education Supplement]]-[[Quacquarelli Symonds]]|accessdate=4 August 2010}}</ref> On the other hand, UP Diliman got 889th place on the 2010 [[Webometrics Ranking of World Universities|Webometrics]] worldwide and first in the Philippines.<ref>{{cite web|title=Philippines ranking|url=http://www.webometrics.info/rank_by_country.asp?country=ph|publisher=[[Webometrics Ranking of World Universities]]}}</ref>

, and recently won first place in the [[UAAP Season 71|71st]] season of UAAP.<ref name="uaap 71 pep wins">{{cite news|title=UP Pep Squad defends title in UAAP Cheerdance |url=http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/sports/09/07/08/pep-squad-defends-title-uaap-cheerdance|accessdate=4 August 2010|date=7 September 2008|agency=ABS-CBN News.com}}</ref> The [[Philippine Madrigal Singers]], a musical choir based in the university, is the first choir to win twice in the [[European Grand Prix for Choral Singing]] for the years 1997 and 2007.<ref>{{cite news|last=Alcuin|first=Papa|title=Madrigal Singers win European Grand Prix for the second time |url=http://showbizandstyle.inquirer.net/breakingnews/breakingnews/view/20070827-85002/Madrigal_Singers_win_European_Grand_Prix_for_the_second_time|accessdate=4 August 2010|newspaper=Philippine Daily Inquirer|date=27 August 2007|author=Pablo Tariman}}</ref>

American University of the Philippines[edit]

I am removing the reference about the University being named the American University of the Philippines until no other reliable source can be found for it. Additionally:

  1. In Act No. 1870 or the legislation that established the University clearly states:

Section 1. The Governor-General is hereby authorized, within the powers and limitations hereinafter specified, to establish in the city of Manila, or at the point he may deem most convenient, a university which shall be known by the designation of "University of the Philippines," the same being organized as a corporation under that name. [1] This legislation does not even contain the word "American".

  1. The University seal currently in use was approved by the Board of Regents in 1913. Prior to the use of the current seal, the university used a logo based on the seal of the City of Manila which carried a name of the "University of the Philippines" [2] [3]
  2. There was no mention of an "American University of the Philippines" in the monograph, The first 75 years (1900-1983) published in 1985 for the university's diamond jubilee anniversary. A digitized copy of this book is available on the University Archives website.
  3. Personally, I have access to a diploma issued by the University in 1936, and in nowhere in it does it say "American University of the Philippines".

In view of the above-mentioned, this particular part of the article as well as the article cited is erroneous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nixenzo (talk • contribs) 14:49, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use candidate from Commons: File:UPD Oblation.jpg[edit]

The file File:UPD Oblation.jpg, used on this page, has been deleted from Wikimedia Commons and re-uploaded at File:UPD Oblation.jpg. It should be reviewed to determine if it is compliant with this project's non-free content policy, or else should be deleted and removed from this page. Commons fair use upload bot (talk) 03:21, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:UP-OuezonHall-1.jpg Nominated for Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:UP-OuezonHall-1.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests April 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:UP-OuezonHall-1.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:14, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page[edit]

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request it's removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

  • http://wiki.alumni.net/wiki/Asia/Philippines/Metro_Manila/Quezon_City/University_of_the_Philippines_-_Diliman/#map
    Triggered by \balumni.net\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 15:43, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on University of the Philippines Diliman. 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) 16:11, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 18 external links on University of the Philippines Diliman. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 03:42, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on University of the Philippines Diliman. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 12:27, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on University of the Philippines Diliman. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 18:46, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:University of the Philippines Diliman/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Ed! (talk · contribs) 02:48, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Unfortunately, this article meets the quick-fail criteria with several substantial issues that I don't believe can be addressed in a quick manner. I am very happy to work with interested parties to walk through some of these issues and would be happy to see the article again were it to be nominated for Good Article status. Let me provide some feedback on some of the things that need to take place first, though.

  • Copyvio issue: I strongly suspect that the current "History" section, as it is, has been wholly copied from the university's own history page with some rewording, though with some parts omitted entirely and other parts apparently mistranslated. This section of the article, as it is, needs to be removed and totally rewritten, using multiple third party sources. See WP:Sources for a better idea of some of the kinds of references that are essential here.
  • Substantial citations needed: The "Campus" section is only slightly better with citations pointing to a source. But that section, too, is severely lacking in sources. The information here needs to be attributed to multiple, reliable third party sources. It also lacks inline links. The same can be said of the academics section, which is severely lacking in citations as well. Each of these should have a run-through with a better eye on where links are appropriate and a thorough copy-edit is needed. See WP:MOSLINK for our style on how to link and WP:CITE for a better look at what we would consider good sources.
  • Sourcing issues: Substantial problems with the sourcing of the article: as it is now, much of the content is sourced to university manuals and literature, with a comparatively small portion of articles linked from independent newspapers. I could five dead links, as well. WP:RS will give a better handle of the kinds of sources we would look for.


GA review (see here for criteria) (see here for this contributor's history of GA reviews)
  1. It is reasonably well written:
    The copy on History needs to be totally removed and started from the beginning. Best to construct from a series of other articles.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable:
    Substantial citation additions needed. Several sections almost entirely unsourced or reliant on one source.
    Existing sources also need a fix. I note five dead links, some bare URLs and some lacking information.
  3. It is broad in its coverage:
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy:
    Over-reliance on the university's own material, which in some cases is lifted wholesale.
    Also some concern with links, as several have been dead for some time and there's a need for some updating of the links.
  5. It is stable:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate:
    Significant images can be found. Definitely thinking this is good.
  7. Other:

To be sure, I think the article has potential and some parts of it have been formatted and sourced. But on the overall, substantial work is needed. Again, I would be happy to work with contributors looking to work with the article, but at this time it should be taken back and given a better look. —Ed!(talk) 03:25, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:22, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:55, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:University_of_the_Philippines_Diliman&oldid=1210803759"