Talk:Lucy Cavendish College, Cambridge
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||
|
The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view. |
The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
|
The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view. |
The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
|
I'm creating the cat
ready to roll as needed, to ensure uniformity with other colleges. Please move these links to the article page as they become useful. Ta, JackyR | Talk 20:01, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
Section headings
[edit]I've created a new section called 'Origins' and moved the other content to 'Other' - I seem to be lacking inspiration and can't think what else to call it! Please replace it if you can think of anything better. Squeezeweasel 01:43, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Criticism section
[edit]A Female-only college with no Criticism section? How cute! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.100.215.127 (talk) 19:55, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
- A criticism section is not necessary - where possible it is actually often better to integrate any criticisms into the rest of the article.--Shakehandsman (talk) 13:53, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
Repeated deletions of sourced content by Cambridge University IP
[edit]This article keeps seeing repeated deletions of very well sourced content by an Cambridge University IP address. No explanation has ever been given for any of these removals of content, the material removed includes notable information on admissions and on academic performance. I've previously added sources for some of the more constructive additions by the IP and also issued appropriate guidance on their talk page about their blanking of content and possible conflict of interest, yet this has no stopped the problems. If editors could discuss the content in question instead of wholesale blanking then we might be able to move forward. At present it is extremely difficult to make any progress seeing as no discussion or comments are forthcoming. Thanks.--Shakehandsman (talk) 20:06, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
- In the interests of fairness and to hopefully address concerns I've added similar content to all other relevant pages (e.g. St Edmunds). Therefore, I really can't see any possible reason for any of the content to be removed. I should also add that the use of misleading edit summaries really isn't helping matters.--Shakehandsman (talk) 20:21, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
- Well it seems we're making some progress now and the only content now subject to repeated mass deletion concerns the ban on male teachers. I've tweaked this from the previous text that stated male staff were banned. The source given shows male cooks and maintenance staff but not a single male academic that I can see, therefore as far as I can tell the point being made by the Lucy Cavendish editor is totally false and without any merit. If or when the situation changes, perhaps the editor can provide details of the male academic(s) they are employed at the college in a teaching or educational capacity--Shakehandsman (talk) 17:49, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
- Update, I found and added an additional source that suggests Newnham also bars male teaching fellows from the college, therefore I've tweaked the text concerning this. If people do have concerning about specific wording then please discuss the issue or at least just remove the inaccurate word/phrase intend of obliterating an entire section of notable material.--Shakehandsman (talk) 18:21, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
- Well it seems we're making some progress now and the only content now subject to repeated mass deletion concerns the ban on male teachers. I've tweaked this from the previous text that stated male staff were banned. The source given shows male cooks and maintenance staff but not a single male academic that I can see, therefore as far as I can tell the point being made by the Lucy Cavendish editor is totally false and without any merit. If or when the situation changes, perhaps the editor can provide details of the male academic(s) they are employed at the college in a teaching or educational capacity--Shakehandsman (talk) 17:49, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
Invitation to Women in Red's Role Models editathon on Women's Colleges
[edit]Please forward this invitation to all potentially interested contacts
Welcome to... Role Models meetup and online editathon Facilitated by Women in Red | ||
Apologies for cross-posting and sending in English
|
--Ipigott (talk) 12:00, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
External links modified
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Lucy Cavendish College, Cambridge. 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/20110707165021/http://www.artichokewebdesign.com/roomsofourown/history/lucy_cavendish.html to http://www.artichokewebdesign.com/roomsofourown/history/lucy_cavendish.html
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110927015027/http://www.lucy-cav.cam.ac.uk/media/college/documents/site-buildings.pdf to http://www.lucy-cav.cam.ac.uk/media/college/documents/site-buildings.pdf
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.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:22, 8 January 2018 (UTC)