Talk:University of Hong Kong

famous alumni list includes people not famous

I would like to suggest that the list of famous alumni from HKU includes alot of people who are not famous.

For example, Sun Yat-Sen should be on the list.

However, the rest of the list seems to include people on the legislative council, do we plan on changing the list every time there are new Council members?

Also, the inclusion of government bureaucrats such as the HK Monetary Authority head and the Hospital Authority head are questionable.

I think that most other great universities only include famous alumni that are world-renowned and have made some great impact to society as a head of government, author, scientist, etc. Bureaucrats and officials of little note that will soon be forgotten should not be included on a list of "famous alumni." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.245.178.135 (talk) 13:47, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Student Enrollment Number

The pamphlet titled, "Inauguration Ceremony for New Students 2005/September 2, 2005 Loke Yew Hall", states:

In 2004-5 academic year, the University had over 21,300 students (around 12,000 undergraduates and 9,300 postgraduates). Its student population included more than 2,500 non-local students.

Yet, in his introductory remarks (in the same ceremony), Dr. Albert Chau, Dean of Student Affairs, gave a student population number closer to the "14,000" offered here. Is the pamphlet information correct or in error and can this updated student enrollment be added to the page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.8.17.55 (talk) 05:35, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

On Hazing

HKU hall education (at least some) has been over accentuate "hall contribution" as a requirement of admission. Exemplified by the re-admission form adopted by Starr Hall HKU, you have to list and quantify contribution to hall. It is so ridiculous that you are required to reveal "how many time have you been to interhall competitions". The intensified atmosphere on materialistic hall contribution has bred the hazing culture. Some wardens of the halls believes that admitting students who contribute most is an incentive for cultivating hall culture. The reason is that hall memberships are essential for some students having very remote residence or even no residence in HK, so acquiescence of hazing is simply needed under the accommodation pressure. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sam Lo (talk • contribs) 22:42, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

While the hazing practice in the HKU residential hall may be "tame" (actually I'm not sure even about that) when compared to the standard practice of, say, American fraternities, in most Western countries freshmen had to ask before they would be hazed (say through pledging a frat), whereas at HKU everyone who lives in a dorm has to go through such process. So no I would not characterize the HKU practice as harmless fun when compared to their Western counterparts.

Hall education

I am told by some of my friends that academic staffs of the University are apointed to take up positions in each hall, it seems to me that the hall education in University of Hong Kong resembles some kind of collegiate atmosphere in the collegiate universities. Could someone add a word or two on that?

Yes, they are appointed as so, but no hall has the right to enrol students and all 10 university faculties are independent from the hall system. I guess the HKU hall system should be different from the collegiate universities, say, Oxford.

Interviews for admission to the LKS Faculty of Medicine in September 2006 were apparently conducted in Cantonese where the applicant was able to speak it.

edited because: 1) Interviews for all subjects were in Cantonese 2) apparently is not appropriate, if anyone disagrees then put a "citation needed" instead 3) Changed where to if, because it sounds like "Cantonese is forbidden in certain places, so the interview had to be conducted where the applicant was able to speak it".

It is very doubtful, at least to me as a HKU student, that interviews are conducted in Cantonese. That has never been the case as far as I know. And that the lessons are conducted in Chinese is also doubtful, because the employment contract of the lecturers states that they have to use English as a medium of instruction, though sometimes, they may use a Chinese word to explain some difficult English words. (Of course, Chinese language courses are not conducted in English.)

ranking of HKU

Please sign your comments with 4 tildas (4 of ~). I don't see what's wrong with mentioning the Times considering another ranking, the Jiaotong U one, is doing HKU's ranking a disservice. It is ridiculous and impractical to mention every single ranking for every university. The section as it stands now is satisfactory. Jsw663 10:49, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

"The Webometrics ranking of universities, however, is based entirely on the web-presence of the university (a computerised assessment of the size and sophistication of the website). As such it is unlikely to accurately reflect the academic performance directly, but will reflect the internet based activities of the universities."

This is also not the entire truth, according the website of webometrics: "If the web performance of an institution is below the expected position according to their academic excellence, university authorities should reconsider their web policy, promoting substantial increases in the volume and quality of their electronic publications."

Rankings are often bloody bias and inaccurate. It gives the (often ignorant) general public false interpretation of a good/bad university. Universities placed lower down the ranks are perceived to be bad, is nonsense. It depends on the catagories which they are ranked on. Not, for example how many volumes of books they have etc.

Every university have their own strengths. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure out on most rankings, Harvard is always/mostly placed 1st; not because it is BEST school in all subjects but the amount of endowment it has for research and funding good profs. Rankings are mostly used for people to feel good about themselves. The best asset of a university is its' students not rankings.

There should not be "The" in the title

The title should be "University of Hong Kong", not "The University of Hong Kong". See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (definite and indefinite articles at beginning of name) --Neo-Jay 20:36, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

It is called THE university of HK according to their very own website.

Please read Wikipedia:Naming conventions (definite and indefinite articles at beginning of name): "The definite article should not be used for universities, even if the official name of the university uses the definite article... " --Neo-Jay 05:33, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Discussion on the "criticism" section

Is it wise to place so much emphasis on this section, and is it wise at all to keep such a section? Wikipedia is not a forum for discussing "hot topic," wikipedia is supposed to provide objective information to other wiki users. Furthermore, other wiki-articles regarding universite don't have this kind of subjective section on their pages. Justicelilo 05:23, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

~Actually I enjoy that section as it appears to be one of the few places in HKU culture where "criticism" is brought into public view. I feel proud of my university when I read such reflections as it functions to allow us to wrestle with what our university is exactly.

Ya, I understand your point. My point is that you can do that by making a HKU criticism website somewhere out there on the Web and place your discussion there on that Web site, then link the discussion on the wikipedia page. It is weird to see a university wiki-article, which is supposed to be neutural, focusing so heavily on "controversial" matters. I am not questioning the motive behind it, as it maybe well-intented. Nor am I attempting to obstruct freedom of speech, I am just questioning its appropriateness. Justicelilo 03:28, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I just moved this section up so people can discuss the matter. Also, I am noticing that there is an edit war happening on the "criticism" section. I believe that both sides should discuss the matter here, instead of engaging in an edit-war. Justicelilo 07:24, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

The neutrality of the "present" section is disputed

I now official raise the discussion of the method in which the ranking is presented on HKU page. While it is legitmate to put one school's ranking on wiki, it is inordinary to compare with the other schools. Representatives from the other schools are caught in a troubling position due to the current presntation on ranking. On one hand, information about their schools are used to support a statement, but the other schools are not given a chance to respond, since it appears unappropriate and dubious to do so; this is a violation of wiki policy on neutral point of view, 2.4 fairness of tone, and 2.6, let the facts speak for themselves. The correct form of the statement without being non-neutral should be:

"According to the Times Higher Education Supplement 2006 World University Rankings, HKU was ranked 33rd in the world and 3rd among universities in the Greater China."

If comparison is made, then it should try to be fair and neutral by providing information in a full and frank manner, however, that would defeat the purpose of a wikipedia page, since it will go into needless details regarding the issue, and it might make this section into a soapbox. It is pointless to respond to the statement by writing, "while HKU has higher overall ranking on one particular university poll, a number of its programs are ranked behind their respective counterparts in the other universities." However, it is the only way to remain neutral on a media. In general, one should note that it is important to stay on topic and only provide information regarding the object/subject that is being written, and refrain from provding details that are not directly representing the object/subject being written. This is a safe rule of thumb. For example, ranking data of another school is not directly representing HKU, and should not have a place on the HKU wiki-page.

Further information regarding wikipedia's neutrality policies please see: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view . Justicelilo 04:02, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

NPOV tag has been removedJusticelilo 07:24, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

The neutrality of the "criticism" section is disputed

Wikipedia is NOT a soapbox, see: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not section 1.4 for further information.

The recent editing of language regarding the english-decline issue by a certain user to "lessen the blow" also violates the neutral point of view policy on wikipedia (one can review the "history" of changes of the HKU article to find out what I am talking about). On the other hand, soapbox type of article invites this kind of violation on neutrality, such is the reason why one should consider to present recent issues regarding HKU NOT in this manner (that resembles a soapbox). It is wise to take note on how journalist writes objectively to raise attention towards an issue. It is possible to present all issues in the criticism setion without turning the section a "soapbox". Personally, I think these issues are interesting, but they should not be presented in the current form. Justicelilo 04:11, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Hku space logo.gif

Image:Hku space 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 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 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.BetacommandBot 04:44, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Some More Rankings

<redacted – copyright violation>

Any comments on this ranking?

(See also http://www.hku.hk/press/news_detail_5651.html)

--CBKAtTopsails 15:10, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

• This is not a discussion forum as per What_Wikipedia_is_not. This page is used for discussion for how to improve the article, not commenting on ranking of universities. I think you are spamming the discussion page with a very long and irrelevant list that u directly copied from a website. Da Vynci (talk) 18:45, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

additional references or sources for verification

How do I improve upon making more additional references or sources to verify for the Study Abroad Section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xcinja (talk • contribs) 06:41, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

• Well, first of all, the list of universities Hong Kong U has SA affiliations with should not be listed in its entirety. (A simple sentence stating that "HKU is affiliated with "X" # of universities spanning eighteen countries" should suffice.) You basically need to find articles (satisfying WP:RS) on the subject and support claims you've added into the article. If you want to review other university articles that have been rated "FA" or "GA" (Featured/Good Article), you may see the list of articles here: Category: FA-Class Universities articles, Category: GA-Class Universities articles. Modeling HKU's article after a FA/GA class article would vastly improve its current rating. Also review WP:UNI#Structure. - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ contribs} 11:40, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

• Well I found it directly from the site connected to HKU but not in an article, all of the information I've found is basically from the site directly so I'm sure that the facts I've found are correct and is the article really too long? because I put a lot of work into formating the Universities and I would've linked them to the site directly but the site is powered by javascript so it's the same exact site and wouldn't work so well being directly linked, si there anything else I should change or fix? and is there any solutions I could use to fix the problems I've created? ThanksXcinja (talk) 01:37, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it is too long. I mean it. When this tiny section (in terms of context) outstretches the actual content of the article, it's too long. I'll send a copy of what you have right now so you don't lose the work, but that list is coming off of the article now. - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ contribs} 06:19, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

anything else i should change? btw the putting on the signature was for my project which i haven't presented yet. I was told to sign there. sorryy. thanks for the help in editing. Xcinja (talk) 18:10, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

the negative criticism section

Must have references. Reinsert those parts of it for which there are good published 3rd party sources.DGG (talk) 03:50, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

application

i live in Africa.and i will like to pursue an under graduate degree in your university can any guide me how go about it..i can really need some help?????? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.198.104.118 (talk) 15:50, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

File:University of Hong Kong Logo.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:University of Hong Kong Logo.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 19:23, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Chinese names

• Hong Kong University Press or HKUPress - 香港大學出版社

WhisperToMe (talk) 00:42, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a directory.

The guidelines stipulate not to include all the programs and degrees offered by the University in the article since wikipedia is not a directory. But I'm not sure if those departments subordinate to each Faulty should be removed as well. It seems inappropriate to incorporate such information as several GA (e.g. Oxford and MIT) don't have their academic divisions listed in such exhaustive details. Biomedicinal (contact)

source for academic freedom row

• Joseph Lian Yizheng (Feb 18, 2015). The chief executive may lie, but the father does not

Copyright problem removed

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.hku.hk/press/press-releases/detail/10792.html and http://www.hku.hk/about/governance/governance_structure.html. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:23, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

History section

Is it really necessary to devote so much space to the Johannes Chan controversy? The coverage seems way out of proportion to other events in the history section and it is difficult to judge the historical significance of the event so soon after the fact. Maybe this information is better placed on the page of Johannes Chan himself. 61.244.137.12 (talk) 11:21, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

I've created a separate article for the event and will shorten coverage on this page to summary style shortly. Citobun (talk) 02:42, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on University of Hong Kong. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120415070820/http://hku.hk/hkumedia/818/bulkmail2.html to http://hku.hk/hkumedia/818/bulkmail2.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:17, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Whether to add {{WikiProject COVID-19}} or {{WikiProject Viruses}}?

It looks like several dozens of coronavirus species were found by HKU's PhDs, suffixed by HKU1, HKU2, ... etc on their taxon names. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:11, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

"Hku" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Hku has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 September 11 § Hku until a consensus is reached. Rusalkii (talk) 21:11, 11 September 2024 (UTC)