Talk:List of University of Edinburgh people

Alumni, or alumni and faculty?
Shouldn't this list be only alumni? If one wants a list of faculty, shouldn't that be at a list entitled thus? --Bob 07:29, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Alumnus says, "Recently, the definition of "alumni" has expanded to include people who have departed from any kind of organization or program." This list uses this expanded reading. — Michael Fourman 05:22, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Then it should be seperated out into actual alumni and former staff. --Bob 15:48, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

I guess you mean "graduates and former staff". I dont think that would make the article easier to digest, and these categories overlap. Each linked entry makes the status clear. I will add a clarification at head of article — Michael Fourman 20:48, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Tom MacMaster
Given the eminent status of almost all the people named on the list, Tom MacMaster does not deserve to be here. He perpetrated the hoax, pretending to be a Syrian lesbian Amina Abdallah Arraf al-Omari for personal gain, and caused a campaign to free "her" when he claimed she had been arrested by Syrian police. This set back the cause of the Syrian opposition, and LGBT community. Unfortunately, he has been editing Wikipedia with a variety of IP addresses and at least one sock puppet: Sockpuppet investigations/Joatsimeon/Archive and will seek to have his name here. I have removed it, and will keep a friendly eye out to try and stop it being added again. Abigailgem (talk) 09:07, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Table/chart
Hi, an editor changed one section of this article to table format, which didn't work for several reasons: It didn't work with the photos. It didn't match the rest of the article. It didn't match standard Wikipedia style for these alumni list articles. I'd like to also remind editors to fill out the edit summary when they make each edit. Thank you! Softlavender (talk) 01:31, 6 February 2014 (UTC)


 * The argument seems to stem from the fact that List of Harvard University people is styled like this (I don't doubt that the alumni added are legitimate). I notice that List of University of Oxford people and List of University of Cambridge members are both in the bullet style. Personally I think the photos add to the article, I would suggest that the info in the table is summarised and presented as for the other bulleted alumni. Only my opinion though, maybe it could be argued that for presenting facts, the table is neater?
 * I'd also just make a note that the Harvard list is far better referenced than this one - maybe this should be something to strive towards here? --Amkilpatrick (talk) 08:36, 6 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Since the info is so detailed, I now think the chart system is best for what has been added (assuming we want to keep that level of detail in the Medical section). In point of fact all the photos can be added back into the article -- they just need to be placed so they don't occur in, or run into, the chart section. I didn't have time (nor the immediate knowledge of who each person was exactly in terms of occupation and notability) to arrange them properly, but someone can soon, I'm sure. Softlavender (talk) 09:13, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Images deleted to make room for the chart
I've removed images (commented out below; to view go to editing mode) till we figure out which to move or delete. This number of images will not work with the newly added table/chart, so if the chart is going to stay, we should cull these images, or place some of them in sections lower down than the chart.

Removed charts which combine categories incorrectly
I've removed the following two charts from the article, as they were in the Medicine/Physicians section, but they do not refer to physicians, and in fact there are far too many genres in each chart to post them in the article. I invite the creator of the charts,, or anyone else, to divide up the separate entries into their proper categories/genres and re-post accordingly. Thank you. Softlavender (talk) 01:44, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Proposal regarding the chart system versus the bullet system
It seems to me that the bullet system is by far the preferred format in Alumni list articles across Wikipedia. It also seems to me that the creator of the charts in this article has pretty much only done physicians and other medical-related personnel. It also seems to me that the medical personnel charts are far too detailed and far too comprehensive to be included with the rest of this bulletted WP:List article, because they make the article very hard to read, and they obscure the bulletted sections, and they prevent the presence of images. For all those reasons, I propose that these medical charts be moved to a separate article called something like Edinbugh University medical people or List of Edinbugh University medical people or something like that, and that we link it from this article. I think this solves all of our problems, which seem to be growing, not diminishing. It is easily accomplished by reverting the article to the way it was on 5 February 2014. Does anyone disagree with this proposal? Softlavender (talk) 02:21, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

ADDITIONAL THOUGHTS: The charts were created without discussion/consensus and without regard to the format of the rest of the article. This is against Wikipedia policies, not the least of which are not to change the format of part of an article in contravention to the format rest of the article, and not to massively change the format system of an article without discussion and consensus. I think these are additional reasons to put the charts in a separate article. Softlavender (talk) 02:35, 7 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Agreed, creating a new List of University of Edinburgh medical people article seems like a sensible suggestion, presumably the bullet list could be kept at this page. I'm not so sure a simple revert would be enough, but it would be a good starting point for sure. Amkilpatrick (talk) 13:52, 7 October 2014 (UTC)


 * OK, I did this now before any further additions are made to the article. Obviously, bulletted additions which were added from 6 February 2014 till today (13 October 2014), will largely have to be reinstated (but not as charts, please). Thanks. Softlavender (talk) 01:50, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Bulletted names which were added between 12 February 2014 and 13 October 2014 will largely have to be reinstated
Due to the need to revert the article to its original form prior to the addition of some charts, any BULLETTED items which were added between 12 February 2014 and 13 October 2014 will largely have to be reinstated. We realize this is inconvenient, but any help making the re-instatements is appreciated. Here is one source for the names, but only look at the bulletted names, not the chart names:. Softlavender (talk) 05:57, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Note to Captain108
Note to : Please see the various discussions on this Talk page. Please do not remove items from the list. We have moved your charts to a separate article, as they did not conform to the rest of the article. It's OK that there are duplications between the two articles, but do not remove bulleted names from this list. Please make sure that all of your edits conform with Wikipedia policies. Please do not change or revert cited material unless you provide a reliable source citation. It's OK to separate medics and biologists, but it's not OK to remove bulletted names from the list. Thank you very much. Softlavender (talk) 21:13, 15 October 2014 (UTC)


 * My charts have been moved to a separate article. I am ok with that, however I am very concerned as the medics list on this page is very incomplete. Putting medics and biologists as the title will confuse readers as the list of medics is perhaps a small fraction of the real list. If we are to move the medics list to a separate article we need to move all of them, not just a majority of them. My edits were intended to make a separate list for biologists and direct the medics list to this separate article.


 * I have every intention of improving this article by placing all sections under a table. I have always found that the brief title given about each person listed in these articles is not enough. More needs to be explained about their accomplishments in life. I have tried to emulate Harvard's alumni list however I just haven't had the time to make all these changes yet. If anyone would like to help me on this project I would be very grateful.


 * However, you reverted my edits which added 2014's laureates in medicine to Edinburgh's alumni list. It is very clear that Edinburgh has 20 nobel laureates. Please re-add these alumni. Captain108 (talk) 21:41, 15 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Captain, please review what I wrote above. To repeat: It's OK to separate medics and biologists, but it's not OK to remove bulletted names from the list. Also, it's not OK to change the format of an article without Talk page discussion and consensus. The consensus so far is that this article should not be in chart form. So please do not proceed with your plan, although if you want to make separate sub-articles as with the List of University of Edinburgh medical people in chart form, that would be fine. You are free to add any bulleted items to the list. If "It is very clear that Edinburgh has 20 nobel laureates", then you need to provide a WP:RS citation to that effect, or a footnote listing all 20, with links to their Wikipedia articles for verification. I made the mass deletion of all of your edits because that was the most efficient way to deal with the problem, as carefully weeding through what you had done would have been too time-consuming. You are free to add or differentiate whatever is appropriate, but you are not free either to delete names or to change cited material without verification. Thanks. I hope that's clear. Softlavender (talk) 22:04, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of University of Edinburgh people. 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/20150710163946/http://www.ushistory.org/Declaration/Signers/wilson.htm to http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/signers/wilson.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150607151155/http://www.ushistory.org/Declaration/signers/witherspoon.htm to http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/signers/witherspoon.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:25, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of University of Edinburgh people. 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/20150526060737/http://www.ed.ac.uk/schools-departments/economics/people/academic-staff/prof-john-moore to http://www.ed.ac.uk/schools-departments/economics/people/academic-staff/prof-john-moore

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 20:52, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
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. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:53, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Gordon Childe 2.jpg