Talk:Imperial College London/Archive 6

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6

Golden Triangle in Intro?

Should the 'Golden Triangle' be in the intro? It is in the intro on many of the other wiki's LSE, Kings, UCL, and Cambridge. 68.170.67.14 (talk) 21:48, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

At the moment, the lead doesn't mention any of Imperial's affiliations or associations. Rather than thinking about the 'golden triangle' (which is an unofficial grouping without a defined membership), it would be better considering whether the lead should mention the Russell Group, the League of European Research Universities and the Global Alliance of Technological Universities. If the answer to this is yes, then we can consider whether that Imperial is generally considered one of the institutions in the 'golden triangle' should be included alongside its membership of those other groups. Robminchin (talk) 05:59, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 July 2022: endowment figure

change endowment figure from GBP 202.1M to GBP 562.8M (latest official figure from January 2022: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/about/leadership-and-strategy/college-endowment/Endowment-Fund-Holdings---31st-January-2022.pdf) DrKSquare (talk) 06:56, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

No. The figure of 202.1M is from the latest audited accounts and includes the assets that qualify as endowments under UK accounting standards. The other figure, which surfaces occasionally here, is what is in a fund that Imperial calls the Endowment Fund. This has always been much higher than the amount of endowments shown in the externally audited accounts and the number reported to the Higher Education Statistics Agency (which matches the accounts). It is clear that not everything held in the 'Endowment Fund' is actually an endowment. Imperial can, of course, call their accounts whatever they like, but when legally obliged to report their endowment the number they use is 202.1M. Robminchin (talk) 03:03, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
 Not done: Per Robminchin. Padgriffin Griffin's Nest 09:21, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

"Is known for..." statement removed from lead

I've removed a statement claiming that what Imperial is known for is "an emphasis across subjects on innovation and entrepreneurship". This appeared to be backed only by references to Imperial doing well in rankings of innovation. But rankings don't tell you how well a university is known for the subject of the ranking, only how it compares to other institutions on that measure. Rankings cannot be used to back up this claim.

Further, saying that this is what Imperial is known for is a claim by omission that it is not known for other activities, e.g. its research or its teaching quality. It is a statement that the subject of the article is primarily notable for the activity it is identified as being known for. This is, in the case of Imperial, patently untrue. There are a huge number of things that Imperial is known for – singling out one and putting it in the lead will always be giving undue weight to that particular activity. Robminchin (talk) 15:49, 18 August 2022 (UTC)