This article is within the scope of WikiProject Edinburgh, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Edinburgh on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EdinburghWikipedia:WikiProject EdinburghTemplate:WikiProject EdinburghEdinburgh articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Higher education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of higher education, universities, and colleges on Wikipedia. Please visit the project page to join the discussion, and see the project's article guideline for useful advice.Higher educationWikipedia:WikiProject Higher educationTemplate:WikiProject Higher educationHigher education articles
I thought this bar was closed? Redwing 08:15, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
...but can we please refer to Tavish Scott as a "Liberal Democrat" politician, which is how I imagine he and most other people would describe him (and is the term generally used on Wikipedia, as far as I've seen), rather than "Liberal Demoratic". Unless the Labour politicians are to become "Labourite":-) —Whouk (talk) 01:27, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
I've changed it to "Labour/Liberal Democrat MP", thus avoiding the need to use the party name as an adjective... Shimgray | talk | 21:32, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
out of about 100 universities. the next sentence makes that seem like a positive thing.
What is the source for the university's motto "nisi sapientia frustra"? Googling that phrase (in quotes), this page is the only result. Searching the university website for "motto" doesn't find anything relevant. And if that is the motto, a translation would be nice. --Vclaw 23:27, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
I can't for the life of me remember where I found it now. I think it was from Googling, so the page it was from must have disappeared since. I can't find a source for it now so I've commented it out. —Whouk (talk) 07:29, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
(I'm posting this to all articles on UK universities as so far discussion hasn't really taken off on Wikipedia: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#University ratings. Timrollpickering 22:06, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
"Edinburgh Napier is in the top five per cent of universities worldwide, according to the THE World University Rankings in 2016.[1]". That is marvellous if correct, but the citation is for 2020 and gives a place in the "800-1000th" bracket, which doesn't evidently match "top five per cent". Explanation, please. Errantius (talk) 05:30, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
No, it wasn't. And if the article had been accessed on the date cited, it would have shown the 2017 rankings as that ranking group posts under the following year, i.e., it's 2020 and the ranking is posted as 2021. I edited it and linked to the wayback machine to provide proof in my explanation. I'm guessing some daydreamer mistook Edinburgh uni for this one, or it was simply a poorly crafted lie. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.64.64.198 (talk) 13:50, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
Image:Cdcs logo.png 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 Wikipedia: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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
As part of an ongoing process, I am updating the Edinburgh Napier University page for accuracy as many facts and figures have not been updated for five years or more. I am employed by the University in a communications capacity but I am restricting edits to matters of fact rather than anything promotional.
Thanks
Mrsquirrel
Mrsquirrel (talk) 14:38, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Edinburgh Napier University. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.