Jump to content

Talk:KAIST

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

To work on

[edit]

Notable alumni: KAIST have many notable alumni, would be great if someone can make a list of them here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Constfang (talk • contribs) 05:01, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A little bit broken English

[edit]

Some of the sentences are not that well written. For example, 'united with ...' can be better expressed by 'merged with ...'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hilkconue (talk • contribs) 03:50, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Needs neutral tone

[edit]

The introduction is not written in a neutral tone. The third and fifth paragraphs are egregious examples. They lack supporting sources and are rather vague in the claims. The fourth paragraph is better, though the date for the ABET evaluation needs to be included. WP:NPOV#Let the facts speak for themselves would be nice. YooChung 05:34, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was PAGE MOVED per discussion below. -GTBacchus(talk) 18:17, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

KAIST → Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology — KAIST is an abbrviation. To meet the Wikipedia guideline of proper names, this article should be under the full title. There already exists the page under the title of Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology with redirection to the KAIST. I decided not to move the article by myself not to cause any possible problems. Kerilka 14:36, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

[edit]
Add  # '''Support'''  or  # '''Oppose'''  on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~. Please remember that this survey is not a vote, and please provide an explanation for your recommendation.

Survey - in support of the move

[edit]
  1. Support Article title should use the full name. Common usage of the abbreviation can be mentioned in the article itself. YooChung 00:03, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support I agree. The abbreviation can easily become a redirect. Thedreamdied 00:07, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support abbrev -> full name is the way it should be. *Mishatx*-In\Out 05:46, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Survey - in opposition to the move

[edit]

Discussion

[edit]
Add any additional comments:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

'KAIST' Decides Not to Use Original Full Name

[edit]

From the KAIST website:

"The Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST) has decided to change its official name to "KAIST" in order to strengthen its identity and image as Korea's foremost academic and research institution and avoid being confused with research organizations with similar names.

KAIST's full name, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, will no longer be used officially. The decision was made through a series of faculty meetings.

Starting from Jan. 1, 2008, "KAIST" will be used as the university's official name in all documents, including research papers."

Because of this new development I moved the article back to KAIST. --EnOreg (talk) 10:49, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with article

[edit]
  • The article is more of a promotional text than an encyclopedia article.
  • The organization is not consistent with the standard Wikipedia guidelines.
  • The gallery is indiscriminate and unorganized.

Please address these problems before removing the {{advert}} and {{cleanup-restructure}} templates. Kiersta 08:23, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While the organization is much improved, I can't but help think that it reads too much like a brochure. The tone itself is not neutral at all, and there are too many details that tend to hinder a general understanding of many sections. It does look like the information in the article could make for a good article when organized and written appropriately, although there's a sad lack of third party sources. Kiersta (talk) 03:35, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Recent history

[edit]

Shouldn't the five suicides (http://www.worldyannews.com/news/articleList.html?page=1&total=176&sc_section_code=&sc_sub_section_code=S2N24&sc_serial_code=&sc_area=&sc_level=&sc_article_type=&sc_view_level=&sc_sdate=&sc_edate=&sc_serial_number=&sc_word=&view_type=) and the pressure to oust the president of KAIST (http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_national/498708.html) be included?Kdammers (talk) 09:02, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on KAIST. 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:05, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Rankings, standards

[edit]

It certainly looks impressive but... Is this material at all reliable? I come across people affiliated with KAIST who publish, shall we say, third-rate stuff (I am being polite) in third-rate journals, with yahoo email addresses. It is hair-raising to think this is the best uni in Korea! Either KAIST really is a decent place and people are falsely claiming to be affiliated, or KAIST is very much a mixed bag. 2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:49FB:85C7:A282:D3A5 (talk) 13:55, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 17 March 2024

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved * Pppery * it has begun... 16:14, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

KAIST → Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology – Firstly, there is a prior consensus upon the title of the article. However, the article was moved nevertheless. Secondly, Use the official name "Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology" — it is also the full name that is used in the footers of every webpage of the institute (the institute never changed its full name to "KAIST" only). We also have WP:TITLECON policy. We use Massachusetts Institute of Technology instead of "MIT" for the Wikipedia article title, even if the name "MIT" may be used often. This is also true for having California Institute of Technology instead of "Caltech" for article title. Cfls (talk) 20:44, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lean support (Edit: changed my vote to oppose per Malerisch's reply.) Although officially, I think WP:COMMONNAME (and child policy MOS:ACROTITLE) are what would govern the title here; these policies are usually so strong that they outweigh policies such as WP:TITLECON. Things like UNESCO and NASA are abbreviated (although admittedly they're not universities) under ACROTITLE. Under TITLECON, my guess is that "KAIST" is genuinely the common name; few English-language publications (such as The Korea Times here [1]) would use the full name every time. I'm Korean and tbh I forget what KAIST stands for lol
That said, I'm irrationally biased towards WP:TITLECON here. toobigtokale (talk) 20:16, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unlike "MIT" and "Caltech", "KAIST" is actually the official English name of this university, so WP:TITLECON is less relevant. The official English name was changed from "Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology" to "KAIST" in 2008: [2]. Per Ngrams, "KAIST" has been more commonly used since 2008, satisfying WP:NAMECHANGES: [3]. I see no reason to switch to a less WP:CONCISE name that is neither the WP:OFFICIALNAME nor the WP:COMMONNAME. Malerisch (talk) 11:33, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:KAIST&oldid=1215514920"