Talk:St George's, University of London/Archive 1

Name
This is now called St George's, University of London.


 * That's what the article says. I have my doubts whether this new title will last; it's borne out of jealousy for UCL and Imperial, and with a hint to QMUL. JFW | T@lk  23:08, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

Hmmm no, I have to disagree with the above, the name change was to reflect the true nature of St. George's, certainly there are a large number of Medical Students in house but there are also large numbers of Nurses, Physiotherapists, Occupational Therapist, Radiographers etc and the name change was to reflect the true multidisplinary nature of St. George's. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.82.51.28 (talk • contribs) 11:43, 9 November 2005

No the name change was a pointless bit of re-branding by a new boss, it wasted money when research was being cut and other facilities were being reduced (such as paying students some money back for travel to distant placements). There was a sense of lots of change in 2004-5 (around when I was leaving) and little of it seemed good, this included the renaming of the School Club - also pointless. Doctormonkey 22:04, 26 October 2006 (UTC) PS I did not post the above paragraph, it is unsigned by someone else

St Georges is great although with the influx of all the graduates, the moral has gone down a bit, namely with the view that they are old and boring and do not contribute anything to the Students Union. More damage than good was caused by a past graduate president who was in "power" for 2 years and at the end of his "era" was hated by most students. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.82.51.28 (talk • contribs) 18:00, 22 November 2006

I hated him before he started (not my post directly above)--Doctormonkey 14:13, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

The name change was in line with other UL colleges e.g. Goldsmiths, University of London and Royal Holloway, University of London.

Establishment
The establishment year of 1733 appears to be invalid, as that is the year that St George's Hospital was established, and according to the history page, "The Medical School was established 1834 in Kinnerton Street ...". As this is a full century later, I am sceptical of this articles statement that it "was the second institution in England to provide formal training courses for doctors (after the University of Oxford)". John Vandenberg 03:12, 2 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I think the problem is that almost all hospitals have always been involved in the teaching of new doctors (as apprentices to senior doctors) but when one can prove with documentation etc is another matter and when a formal medical school has been established is another. Confusion reigns, all hail discordia. Of course, everyone wants to be among the first, look at the fight to see who has been a Royal College for longest between the Royal College of Physicians of London, Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh, the Royal College of Surgeons of London etc--Doctormonkey 13:45, 2 December 2006 (UTC)


 * the history page says that training was conducted there since the beginning:


 * "In 1733 St George's Hospital was opened in Lanesborough House at Hyde Park Corner, and has trained medical students since then. Formal registration of apprentice doctors started in 1751."


 * But, that is merely the nature of human nature; we like to teach the next generation, and doctors in hospitals are no different. This article (as opposed to St George's Hospital) is about an institution of education, and in my opinion the first paragraph of this article is not worded accurately as no college was founded in 1733; the emphasis should be on the date that they formally trained apprentices (1751) or the date when they were a separate entity (1834).  The early history can be relegated to a section of the article. John Vandenberg 23:58, 2 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Change made in line with recommendations above to the intro but we should probably find a new source for the claim that it was the second institution to provide formal training after Oxford as that is not made on the History of St George's website and so is an unsupported claim at present--Doctormonkey 13:35, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

University ratings
(I'm posting this to all articles on UK universities as so far discussion hasn't really taken off on WikiProject Universities.)

There needs to be a broader convention about which university rankings to include in articles. Currently it seems most pages are listing primarily those that show the institution at its best (or worst in a few cases). See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Universities. Timrollpickering 00:13, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Sgul logo.gif
Image:Sgul logo.gif 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 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:35, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Merger
Maybe should put in a bit about potential merger with Uni of Surrey/Kingston/Royal Holloway. although there's been no decision yet, obv. a lot of objection from students As a graduate, I recently received a letter from the Principal saying that a merger with Royal Holloway was going ahead but that the links with Kingston would be maintained. Personally I think that this will probably spell the end of any remaining positive aspects to going to St George's over its competitors --Doctormonkey (talk) 19:52, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't think Georges would merge if they weren't confident that it was the right decision. It will be a 50/50 merger and so I don't think it will become Royal Holloway medical school.
 * Peter Kopelman, principal of St George's, said: "This is a historic day for St George's - one which will result in countless opportunities and benefits for students and staff. The combination of two institutions with international reputations for teaching and research in science, healthcare, social sciences, arts and humanities creates a university that will become the place to work and study in London."Teatreez (talk) 20:12, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Over the last 12 months SGUL has undergone significant internal changes, including the decision not to merge with Royal Holloway, University of London and a renewed focus on SGUL strengths in partnerships, business links, and specialised research and education. Changes include the establishment of three new academic divisions and six research centres. Benstitch (talk) 12:44, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Song
You thieving south londoners!

http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?s=c5174bc92417efcc03ff64b778b382b5&t=661092 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.176.105.57 (talk) 13:37, 13 May 2011 (UTC)