Talk:Academic dress of the University of Kent

Merge proposal
I don't think this would be the best move - this started life as a section of the university article but was moved out when the article started getting very long. Merging it back in would restore the problems of length and flow on the main article. Timrollpickering (talk) 09:56, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
 * The entire article could be merged into one small paragraph in the article. I'm concerned that this article is not notable and should be deleted, but in order to save some of the information we could truncate it and put it back into the main article.— Noetic  Sage  17:08, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree - it is too detailed; it should be merged. Deb (talk) 20:18, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Just because many universities have some sort of academic regalia doesn't mean we automatically must insert all the details in Wikipedia. If some university's academic dress is itself notable or adds useful context to the university's own article, fine, put it in. But where it isn't and doesn't, as seems to be the case here, then it doesn't belong. I agree that this entire topic should be pared back to no more than a paragraph, and included in University of Kent. Ipoellet (talk) 22:59, 4 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Academic dress is far more diverse in UK institutions than US ones, where the common codes and subject colours mean that the main unique information needed for most institutions is only the institutional colours. Academic dress in the UK tends to be much more diverse (and the Kent flat hood design is one of the most unusual it has its own entry [a3] on the Groves Classification of Academic Dress) and is also worn more than just at the graduate's graduation ceremony - for instance at older schools teachers often wear their own AD for prize day and so forth. It is a noted subfield of study in its own right - see http://www.burgon.org.uk/society/library/biblio.php for many books that have been on the subject - and information on the dress of individual institutions is a distinctive feature of those instiutions. Timrollpickering (talk) 14:30, 7 February 2008 (UTC)


 * The bibliography linked to above is certainly a reasonable list of reliable sources supporting the notability of an article on academic dress, and indeed there is one. Whether the particular dress at any one institution is similarly notable is, however, a different question. Kent's hood may in fact be unique, but unless it is discussed in a reliable source like many of the ones in that bibliography, then Wikipedia does not presume it to be notable. Personally, I am extremely hesitant to take the Burgon Society as a reliable source - a highly obscure special-interest organization of very recent origin with few apparent links to the larger critical and research community doesn't suggest to me that it has a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. I have no desire to actively disparage the Burgon Society, and have no objection to using it as a supplemental source, but it shouldn't be used as a core source to establish the notability of a topic. Ipoellet (talk) 06:40, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Academic dress of the University of Kent. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081011075639/http://www.kent.ac.uk/cdo/congregations/dress/index.html to http://www.kent.ac.uk/cdo/congregations/dress/index.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081011075639/http://www.kent.ac.uk/cdo/congregations/dress/index.html to http://www.kent.ac.uk/cdo/congregations/dress/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:08, 3 October 2016 (UTC)