719:? Thats just one article, in fact about the only source which I think has ever used the term, so I also actually struggle how you can see the newspaper as independent from the term. As this may have been discussed before, i will try and avoid discussing the merits of inclusion. Perhaps describing or writing about the universities in question from a different source may be better, or perhaps mention how they have been ranked in a range of global league tables. The author does not offer a fact, they are actually offering their personal opinion. the Times Higher website is not peer reviewed material, they are writing what sells the magazine/adverts. Could you not find mention of this
573:
support the concept of 'is' and opposed to be 'was' implying it was a group regarding funding which was formed in 2004. I also feel the fact that it began about funding should also be included in the article, it was not a grouping to group together about prestige, it was about funding, and this article does not clarify this, appears to be rewritten by people wanting their universities to appear very high class, although im half satisfied the 'leading universities in the UK has now been removed'.
218:
200:
228:
89:
138:
120:
60:
32:
927:. There is very little evidence that this is a genuine formal grouping that was established in 2004 – if this was the case, I would expect to have seen far more mention of it in the 18 years since. It might be better to merge this stub into the golden triangle article as an alternative name for that informal grouping.
870:
No, not as written. It's a random, throwaway bit of trivia. If the article could be expanded, with some justification for including the "super elite" comment, then that would be different. For example: "Called 'super elite' by the THE, the group consists of a subset of the prominent Russel Group.
902:
Just to mention, Rangoon11, who wished to keep the article in question has recently been blocked, with a history of blocks for edit warring and sock puppetry. I thought this my be useful so to remove his previous opinions from any debate, although im not at all alleging any other user above might be
377:
Education is a devolved matter. it looks very much a UK government situation, hence would agree in should specify
English. I would a agree with Rangoon whey are of national importance, but that still doesn't mean you can say British. Edinburgh and St Andrews are also of huge national importance, and
572:
but at the least I am more happy now that the phase leading universities in the UK has now been removed, this was a completely unreferenced comment, but would still like super elite removing, that comes from one only one journalist back in 2004. I would also like references included which actually
352:
I think it is clear that
Rangoon has a direct interest in the articles, and sees the article as it was somehow a benefit to him/her. I dont really see why, but they seem to see things differently. Universities such as queens, Cardiff, Edinburgh, St Andrews, Glasgow.... have nothing to do with this
699:
There is a difference between being promotional and stating factual and cited information. The Times Higher
Education has described the members of the G5 as forming a "super elite". Why do you wish to remove this long-standing text from the article (text which I didn't put in the article I should
608:
I will find the page number and add it to the cite. I having nothing against the addition of content about funding and this is the first time it has been mentioned. The comment about the 'leading research universities in the UK' was in fact properly cited, I agreed to its removal in an attempt to
683:
I am happy to discuss recent changes, as long as other parties agree to stop blindly reverting all changes, with no explanation what so ever. Two things, the article should not try and be promotional, and secondly, there is no benefit in writing out all five universities again twice, that looks
538:
when asked, it would be polite if you would inform us the page number of a book which you cite something from, you cant just include a whole book and expect someone to read it all to check one point, when citing a specific points from a book, a page number must be given. I personally think this
539:
article is a bit of a joke, which is reflected on the comments made above in about is content. It was an informal group of meeting in 2004 to discuss funding, and is not relevant today, yet your references do not make it clear, and you seem completly unwilling to allow any change.
303:
To me it should be
English. Universities are done at national level, they are not British, but English or Scottish etc. They are funded from their respective bodies, for example Scottish Parliament (Scotland), Northern Ireland Assembly (NI), Sennedd (Wales), Westminster (England.
775:
No great issue with removing the duplicative list of members. In my view the reference to "super elite" is cited and relevant, as well as being a long standing part of the article, and should stay. Please don't attempt to force its deletion through edit warring any more.
357:
level. Our university system/structure is not the same either. It's just the same as having a group related to funding in France, a German university would have no place in it. This group is about funding, high reseach incomes etc, has nothing
759:
may have been to try and state why those 5 universities formed the group, however it really does not do this. Do you know a better reference which would explain why those 5 universities were selected, and not another university
855:
Yes - this would reflects the group's raison d'etre and public perceptions of the universities' reputation, and is an appropriate citation. FWIW a properly cited reference to opposition to the group would also be worth adding
791:
I was contemplating adding a comment that other Russel Group universities opposed the grouping? This would say that they felt it was better if pressure was applied from all 19 Russel Group universities. Any
871:
The G5 first met in secret, with few vice chancellors knowing of its existence." Now, that I could support. Just randomly inserting it into the article makes it look like promotion, as Hkong91 says.
332:
I have no view on this one way or another, but my issue is they way it was done, so if the clear consensus is that this change should be made, I am happy to make it. 22:30, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
398:
It appears to be a grouping which occured in 2004 for funding arrangements under the labour government. Can we please discuss whether this group is still meeting, or whether it should say
430:
The opposite is the case, third party citations are required showing that the grouping is now defunct. In the absence of any it should be assumed that the grouping still exists.
166:
42:
960:
965:
955:
70:
445:
The references clearly point out that it was related to university funding legislation in 2004, there is no evidence or reason why it is meeting now. It isnt.
737:
Anyway, do you agree that there is no need to list the names of five universities twice, I can understand if you think the wording could be phrased better that
970:
807:
Until you desist from attempt to force changes to this article through edit warring I wont waste any more time discussing the article with you on this page.
950:
162:
250:
741:, but I see no point in listing them all again? Then perhaps we can come up together with a better way of describing the universities as well. Thanks
145:
125:
241:
205:
644:
589:
555:
461:
418:
320:
924:
723:
in the BBC perhaps. I'm deeply surprised that if its classed as a serious grouping and on here its not been mentioned ever?
827:
Should the article contain a mention of the Times Higher
Education's description of the group as forming a "super elite"?
671:
512:
100:
876:
66:
38:
893:
640:
585:
551:
88:
872:
477:
457:
414:
367:
316:
233:
106:
660:
For the record, I think it should remain, the article does need more sources to establish notability.
932:
632:
577:
543:
449:
406:
383:
308:
472:
That matter may now be closed providing reference, given in article history is added to the article(
59:
31:
889:
832:
812:
781:
705:
614:
525:
435:
340:
249:
on
Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
861:
636:
581:
547:
402:. If it is still meeting, can someone please post evidence for it thanks. Thanks, saariselka1.
628:
can you please add the page number, also there should be a full stop at the end of the article
908:
846:
797:
765:
746:
728:
689:
666:
507:
473:
453:
410:
363:
335:
These institutions are of national significance and profile and 'British' is quite correct.
312:
217:
199:
150:
928:
828:
808:
777:
701:
610:
521:
431:
336:
288:
246:
944:
857:
904:
842:
793:
761:
742:
724:
685:
17:
501:" kindly take the time to state there cases here for it's inclusion or removal ?
661:
502:
379:
223:
154:
609:
settle consensus and avoid further edit warring, not because it was uncited.
137:
119:
936:
912:
897:
880:
865:
850:
836:
816:
801:
785:
769:
750:
732:
709:
693:
673:
648:
618:
593:
559:
529:
514:
481:
465:
439:
422:
387:
371:
344:
324:
520:
I'm willing to lose that wording but not to have relevant cites removed.
158:
923:
From the sources cited, it seems to be basically another name for the
82:
54:
26:
497:
Would the parties warring over the inclusion of the phrase "
245:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
161:
on
Knowledge. Please visit the project page to join the
353:
group hence
England, as universities are not done at
149:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
378:
by using G5 is almost stating these are above them(
499:and the leading research universities in the UK
8:
283:
194:
114:
99:does not require a rating on Knowledge's
69:on 3 December 2011 (UTC). The result of
715:So what if they have described them as
286:
196:
116:
961:Redirect-Class United Kingdom articles
175:Knowledge:WikiProject Higher education
966:NA-importance United Kingdom articles
956:WikiProject Higher education articles
239:This redirect is within the scope of
178:Template:WikiProject Higher education
143:This redirect is within the scope of
86:
7:
259:Knowledge:WikiProject United Kingdom
971:WikiProject United Kingdom articles
262:Template:WikiProject United Kingdom
105:It is of interest to the following
951:NA-Class Higher education articles
394:Does this group still exist today?
25:
888:Notable, and properly sourced.--
226:
216:
198:
136:
118:
87:
58:
30:
823:RfC: Reference to "super elite"
65:This article was nominated for
37:This article was nominated for
925:Golden triangle (universities)
41:on 16 May 2013. The result of
1:
674:03:51, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
649:23:37, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
619:23:24, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
594:23:14, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
560:23:02, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
530:14:02, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
515:04:45, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
253:and see a list of open tasks.
482:00:38, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
466:23:37, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
440:22:27, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
423:22:07, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
388:17:42, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
372:00:26, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
345:22:29, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
325:22:12, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
146:WikiProject Higher education
903:a sock of Rangoon11. thanks
987:
898:00:23, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
881:21:13, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
817:18:18, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
802:17:48, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
786:11:52, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
770:22:48, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
751:22:39, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
733:22:37, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
710:22:27, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
694:22:22, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
242:WikiProject United Kingdom
937:22:00, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
919:Does the G5 really exist?
866:23:48, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
851:14:21, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
837:13:41, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
291:actions of a blocked sock
211:
181:Higher education articles
131:
113:
755:I think the addition of
165:, and see the project's
913:22:59, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
265:United Kingdom articles
362:to do with reputation(
234:United Kingdom portal
493:Edit war of Nov 2011
18:Talk:G5 (education)
841:No, reasons above.
299:English or British
169:for useful advice.
101:content assessment
652:
635:comment added by
597:
580:comment added by
563:
546:comment added by
489:
488:
469:
452:comment added by
426:
409:comment added by
328:
311:comment added by
281:
280:
277:
276:
273:
272:
193:
192:
189:
188:
167:article guideline
81:
80:
53:
52:
16:(Redirected from
978:
873:NinjaRobotPirate
669:
664:
651:
629:
596:
574:
562:
540:
510:
505:
468:
446:
425:
403:
327:
305:
284:
267:
266:
263:
260:
257:
236:
231:
230:
229:
220:
213:
212:
202:
195:
183:
182:
179:
176:
173:
172:Higher education
151:higher education
140:
133:
132:
126:Higher education
122:
115:
92:
91:
83:
62:
55:
34:
27:
21:
986:
985:
981:
980:
979:
977:
976:
975:
941:
940:
921:
825:
681:
667:
662:
658:
630:
575:
541:
508:
503:
495:
490:
447:
404:
396:
306:
301:
292:
264:
261:
258:
255:
254:
232:
227:
225:
180:
177:
174:
171:
170:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
984:
982:
974:
973:
968:
963:
958:
953:
943:
942:
920:
917:
890:MichaelProcton
824:
821:
820:
819:
789:
788:
713:
712:
680:
679:Recent reverts
677:
657:
656:Notability Tag
654:
626:
625:
624:
623:
622:
621:
601:
600:
599:
598:
567:
566:
565:
564:
533:
532:
494:
491:
487:
486:
443:
442:
395:
392:
350:
349:
348:
347:
300:
297:
294:
293:
287:
282:
279:
278:
275:
274:
271:
270:
268:
256:United Kingdom
251:the discussion
247:United Kingdom
238:
237:
221:
209:
208:
206:United Kingdom
203:
191:
190:
187:
186:
184:
141:
129:
128:
123:
111:
110:
104:
93:
79:
78:
71:the discussion
63:
51:
50:
43:the discussion
35:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
983:
972:
969:
967:
964:
962:
959:
957:
954:
952:
949:
948:
946:
939:
938:
934:
930:
926:
918:
916:
914:
910:
906:
900:
899:
895:
891:
887:
883:
882:
878:
874:
868:
867:
863:
859:
853:
852:
848:
844:
839:
838:
834:
830:
822:
818:
814:
810:
806:
805:
804:
803:
799:
795:
787:
783:
779:
774:
773:
772:
771:
767:
763:
758:
753:
752:
748:
744:
740:
735:
734:
730:
726:
722:
718:
711:
707:
703:
698:
697:
696:
695:
691:
687:
678:
676:
675:
672:
670:
665:
655:
653:
650:
646:
642:
638:
637:Edinburghgeog
634:
620:
616:
612:
607:
606:
605:
604:
603:
602:
595:
591:
587:
583:
582:Edinburghgeog
579:
571:
570:
569:
568:
561:
557:
553:
549:
548:Edinburghgeog
545:
537:
536:
535:
534:
531:
527:
523:
519:
518:
517:
516:
513:
511:
506:
500:
492:
485:
483:
479:
475:
470:
467:
463:
459:
455:
451:
441:
437:
433:
429:
428:
427:
424:
420:
416:
412:
408:
401:
393:
391:
389:
385:
381:
375:
373:
369:
365:
361:
356:
346:
342:
338:
334:
333:
331:
330:
329:
326:
322:
318:
314:
310:
298:
296:
295:
290:
285:
269:
252:
248:
244:
243:
235:
224:
222:
219:
215:
214:
210:
207:
204:
201:
197:
185:
168:
164:
160:
156:
152:
148:
147:
142:
139:
135:
134:
130:
127:
124:
121:
117:
112:
108:
102:
98:
94:
90:
85:
84:
76:
72:
68:
64:
61:
57:
56:
48:
44:
40:
36:
33:
29:
28:
19:
922:
901:
885:
884:
869:
854:
840:
826:
790:
756:
754:
738:
736:
720:
716:
714:
682:
659:
631:— Preceding
627:
576:— Preceding
542:— Preceding
498:
496:
471:
448:— Preceding
444:
405:— Preceding
399:
397:
376:
359:
354:
351:
307:— Preceding
302:
240:
155:universities
144:
107:WikiProjects
96:
74:
46:
757:super elite
717:super elite
684:ridiculous.
474:Saariselka1
454:Saariselka1
411:Saariselka1
364:Saariselka1
313:Saariselka1
945:Categories
929:Robminchin
163:discussion
829:Rangoon11
809:Rangoon11
792:thoughts?
778:Rangoon11
739:the above
702:Rangoon11
611:Rangoon11
522:Rangoon11
432:Rangoon11
337:Rangoon11
858:Dtellett
760:perhaps?
645:contribs
633:unsigned
590:contribs
578:unsigned
556:contribs
544:unsigned
462:contribs
450:unsigned
419:contribs
407:unsigned
360:directly
321:contribs
309:unsigned
159:colleges
97:redirect
67:deletion
39:deletion
905:Hkong91
843:Hkong91
794:Hkong91
762:Hkong91
743:Hkong91
725:Hkong91
686:Hkong91
355:British
289:WP:DENY
700:add).
157:, and
103:scale.
380:Fun27
95:This
933:talk
909:talk
894:talk
886:Keep
877:talk
862:talk
847:talk
833:talk
813:talk
798:talk
782:talk
766:talk
747:talk
729:talk
706:talk
690:talk
668:king
641:talk
615:talk
586:talk
552:talk
526:talk
509:king
478:talk
458:talk
436:talk
415:talk
384:talk
368:talk
341:talk
317:talk
75:keep
73:was
47:keep
45:was
484:).
400:was
390:).
374:).
947::
935:)
915:.
911:)
896:)
879:)
864:)
849:)
835:)
815:)
800:)
784:)
768:)
749:)
731:)
721:G5
708:)
692:)
663:Mt
647:)
643:•
617:)
592:)
588:•
558:)
554:•
528:)
504:Mt
480:)
464:)
460:•
438:)
421:)
417:•
386:)
370:)
343:)
323:)
319:•
153:,
931:(
907:(
892:(
875:(
860:(
845:(
831:(
811:(
796:(
780:(
764:(
745:(
727:(
704:(
688:(
639:(
613:(
584:(
550:(
524:(
476:(
456:(
434:(
413:(
382:(
366:(
339:(
315:(
109::
77:.
49:.
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
