Talk:Oxford
<templatestyles src="Module:Message box/tmbox.css"/><templatestyles src="Talk header/styles.css" />
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Oxford Template:Pagetype. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Template:Find general sources |
| Archives: Template:Comma separated entries<templatestyles src="Template:Tooltip/styles.css" />Auto-archiving periodScript error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".: Template:Human readable duration File:Information icon4.svg |
Script error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".Script error: No such module "Check for deprecated parameters".
Template:Article History Template:British English Oxford spelling Script error: No such module "Banner shell". Template:Annual readership User:MiszaBot/config Template:Archives
Hidden Figures - Jesus College
Just dropping a note in case any page-watchers feel like creating an article for one of these women that Jesus College is celebrating later in the year: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Women_in_Red#Women_connected_to_Jesus_College,_Oxford Lajmmoore (talk) 21:14, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Oxford Panorama Suspiciously Like Image Generated Art
Hi, I was trying to read about Oxford and started looking through the images and noticed that the panorama looks suspiciously like an image generation algorithm. The walls and tiles of buildings look like they're made of playdough or melting. Most of the grass and bushes have a "smeared" quality. Portions of the image do not appear to color match with other portions of the image, and buildings appear to have been sloppily overlaid on each other. The entire image looks "cartoonish" or like it was drawn with oil paint.
I believe the motivation is like the same as much of the rest of the world wide web, easy achievements, notoriety, and praise, without actually visiting locations.
The picture in question is:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b8/1_oxford_aerial_panorama_2016.jpg
Araesmojo (talk) 03:12, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
- While I can see what look like compression artefacts the image appears to me, based on having lived and worked in Oxford for 40 years, to be entirely genuine. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 08:27, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
- It's not AI-generated, it's 8 years old. Instead, it's a stitched image, and very badly stitched one at that. It's such bad quality I am removing it from the article. Of course if other's put it back in then we can discuss further here. 10mmsocket (talk) 09:45, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
primary topic for the place
(This was mentioned previously in a discussion involving another university city, apologies to those who saw it already.)
It's a bit odd that nobody ever proposed Oxford the city to be moved away from the primary topic position in navigation.
- Clickstreams at Oxford show the link to the university - the first link in the hatnote - is by far the most commonly clicked link in that article. Each month we get around 4k identified clicks there, I checked the archive and it's fairly consistent.
- If we look at which words appear in books next to the word Oxford, the university is far and away the most common use case.
- Page views for the most sought after Oxford topics consistently show a large amount of reader interest in the topics other than the place. Where the city gets 50k a month, the university gets 100k, dictionary gets 30k, the publishing house gets over 15k.
This sounds like a deviation from the guideline where we state that historical age and being the original source of the name are not determinative. Yes, the town came first, but these days the university and all of its various products and offshoots are what matters most to the average English reader (worldwide).
Per WP:DPT let's link the other standard statistics:
- Not much is odd there. Apparently a lot of people read about the Oxford shoe, but it's decreasing over time (7k/month nowadays).
- The biographies generally seem to have low readership, though the featured article about the 19th-century assassin stands out (also had occasional traffic spikes). Again, these 3-4k viewers a month are also small compared to the university etc.
- About 300 incoming views come from the hatnote here, while another 300 come from the outside (search engines probably). We are then able to identify about 300 clicks elsewhere. This 0.3k is nothing special in comparison to the university-related stuff. It only contributes somewhat to the idea that the term "Oxford" isn't entirely unambiguous.
- Does show several references to the place in the first couple of pages for me, but they're mostly dominated by Oxford Handbooks.
Would anyone see a clear reason not to propose a move?
IOW shouldn't we show readers a list where Oxford, England is listed together with Oxford University at the top, together with possibly a few other items (per common topic guideline)? --Joy (talk) 07:39, 14 May 2025 (UTC)