Talk:University of Waterloo Faculty of Engineering

PDEng

Would it be worth while mentioning PDEng? I think it is worth mentioning because it is program unique to UW and because most students do not like the program. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.236.31.83 (talk) 01:21, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

I, along with many classmates, hated first year chem, doesn't mean we should list it here. I think it sets a precident to talk about specific programs. Being unique does give it some noteworthiness, but is it truely encyclopedic? I tend to lean towards no. Kratoz 14:02, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

The program is not unique to UW (as similar programs are being introduced in other co-op programs across the province and across UW faculties). While students do not like it makes it a good thing to avoid for the time being, it should be included in the future, along with it's history of being conceived by EngSoc and presented to the Dean, and approved to be developed over 5 years mirroring the 2009 graduating class. However, there are few (if any) citations. Annihilatron (talk) 18:24, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Removed a reference to dearwaterloo; it is a controversial site that more or less is platforming off of that section to soapbox and try to build support for anti-pdeng movements. Not really good stuff for a formal article. Annihilatron (talk) 15:07, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

NPOV?

• "One of the best engineering institutions in North America." Best institution? There are many aspects in shaping a good school, such as academic quality, student body, funding, research units. There are many schools in the US that are just as good/better than UW Engineering, so I won't go as far as to saying UW Engineering is one of the best engineering institutions in North America. --Shion Uzuki 03:28, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

It's not saying it is the best, but one of the best, which is a fair statement with it's reputation, especially in ECE. In regards to it being the largest engineering faculty in Canada, I was having this discussion over at the U of T engineering page. Waterloo has recently undergone futher expansion to it's enginering faculty, with the recent addition of management studies and architecture to the faculty, and will be adding new faculty for their recent Mechatronics, Nanotechnology, and Management Engineering programs. I assert that Waterloo has the larger faculty. From Waterloo's Institutional Analysis & Planning site you can view enrolment numbers, which for the most recent start of the school year is 4842 Undergrad Engineering + 438 Undergrad Software Engineering + 1115 Grad Engineering. This is significantly more than the "close to 4,300 undergraduate students and approximately 1,400 graduate students" from U of T's website. It is the largest faculty and I am reverting the changes, unless someone has stats from a different Canadian university that says otherwise Jeff 02:04, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

UofT's Engineering website under facts and figures were written in 2002. Chances in 4 years, there would have been big changes. And in 2003, was the year of the double cohort. Also, saying UW is one of the best engineering institutions in "North America" is a little over the top. Even MIT doesn't need that sort of boosterism. Thats considered to be extreme vanity. No it is not MIT of Canada or that BS.

Until you can provide proof contrary to the evidence I displayed you are just speculating. Macleans specifically notes that it's rating of UW as #1 in the Comprehensive Category is greatly due to it's engineering faculty. Last year UW placed 1st in ChallengeX and places always high in the North American Solar Challenge, both of which are North American Challenges. Their reputation is as being one of the best. Do you propose changing it to one of the best in Canada? Surely you cannot disagree with that. (Do you also care to register, sign in and sign your name as well?)Jeff 17:54, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

A faculty is more than just its undergrads. Yes, Waterloo produces some pretty good engineering alumni, but I seriously doubt that its research is among the "best in North America". (Personally, I tend to associate Waterloo's strong reputation with the quality of its programmers, given their status at Microsoft and their performances at the ACM.) FlocciNonFacio 04:43, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Speaking of proofs, you are also unsure how many students UofT actually took after 2002, you cannot state UW is the largest because there is a contradiction. On both websites, it says they are the largest. Not until this is cleared up, it cannot be put there as fact.

Sometimes, people question the validity of Macleans rankings and your claim of it to be one of the best in North America is far too bold. In all, it is based on weak evidence on one commercial magazine. You said UW placed high on NA solar challenge, so what? So did Queens and they still hold the "OFFICIAL" record for the longest distance travelled. I don't think anyone is doubting whether UW's Engineering is a good school, but to write that in the intro is just asking for problems. Also, one cannot change it to be best in Canada because it is not a medical doctorate university therefore it cannot be compared based solely on Macleans rating.

Yeah nice try, talking about signing in, you had to come back and sign it. Nobody's perfect so don't bite on petty things. 24.57.131.188 18:04, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

I am basing the size on the information that is available from the U of T site (the copyright note seems to be wrong since the content on the pages are new while it says the note isn't). I'm inclined to believe the numbers they give are their last year's numbers. (First link demonstrates error in copyright note, second the figures) [1] [2] It's the most recent they provide and so that is the information used. If it changes, then the articles can be changed appropriately. Furthermore you are incorrect on the official record. Waterloo holds the official record for solar car distance[3]. Also Waterloo was the BEST placing Canadian team at NASC last year. [4] Queen's was far below. I also said "one of the best in Canada" which is quite different from best.

I never said I was perfect, but I do strive to be accountable. I went back and signed it (I was signed in and it can be verified on the page). This is the responsible thing to do for others to see. You refuse to register at all. There is a difference.Jeff 19:09, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Joining this site is up to me and is none of your business. Its got nothing to do whether one is responsible or not. There is no difference in the value of edits either. I mean who are you to judge me? Its also obvious you are new to wikipedia.

Also, how did you make sure the copyright is wrong? Just because you are "inclined to believe" does not make it accountable. The second link you provided also states is copyright is in 2002 and the info coincides with that year. "The centre for cellular and Biomolecular Research is a $100M facility, scheduled to open in 2005." If it was up to date, it wouldn't say scheduled. 24.57.131.188 20:46, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Unless you can find a source that can clearly show that UW is 'amongst the best' universities in North America, it is a non-NPOV. I imagine, if you guys were truly dedicated to keeping it in, you could find such a source. In terms of Enrollment, use this link to keep the numbers current:

http://www.analysis.uwaterloo.ca/docs/pi.php#pi Annihilatron (talk) 18:41, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Department Names

I changed the names to reflect recent changes by UW Senate. Please note that these ARE the official names and that the websites are going to be fixed over time. (Note the civil site already has changed parts). Jeff 13:35, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Removed Notability template

I have removed the {{Notability}} template. The U of W Engineering faculty is clearly a significant academic faculty. To cite only one source, collating other third party sources: University of Waterloo rankings and reputation. --papageno (talk) 18:29, 25 November 2017 (UTC)