Talk:Sarah Lawrence College

Cuba Program

American University, in Washington DC, also has a program in Havana. Sarah Lawrence is not the only one. Check it out: http://www.auabroad.american.edu/enclave/cuba.cfm Slugokramer 01:35, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Pop Culture

We should probably move the SLC in Pop Culture section to its own page.

Didn't we fight this battle back in 2005? Who the hell moved the pop culture mess back ONTO the page in the first place? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.173.230.239 (talk) 16:33, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

There is a rumor that the X-Mansion from the X-Men comics is based off the Westlands House. Is there any legitimate sources that can validate this? For the record, the X-Men are based in the fictional New Salem in Westchester. Coemgenv (talk) 16:55, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Proposition for Major Revisions

I would like to really push this article into a better state of completion. Following are some suggestions:

• Create a separate page for the now-too-long alumni list.
• Expand the History section to be more balanced, thorough, etc. Perhaps move it to a second page as well.
• Above all, illustrate the article with photographs, etc. Again, I am an idiot when it comes to the copyright rules on Wikipedia, so any help would be appreciated. (Hilighter555 13:43, 2 February 2006 (UTC))

S.L. coeducational date

I challenge the statement, "Sarah Lawrence was founded in 1926 as a women's college and became a coeducational institution in 1968." President Howard Taylor was a friend of my father and we spent a weekend at his home. Later he called me and asked if I could recommend a man to be the first male to attend Sarah Lawrence. I don't recall the eact date, but I think it was around 1951. It was obviously before 1959. David Hogben, PhD 8-17-2009. drdavidh@verizon.net, 301-740-2356 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.108.0.117 (talk) 17:18, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

I think these are all good ideas. Also, I've been thinking about moving the list of Sarah Lawrence buildings to another page and replacing it on the main page with a more general discussion of the architecture on campus. As with the alumni, I think this list takes up too much space right now. --djrobgordon 16:09, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to go ahead with creating new article space for the alumni/faculty lists and for the campus descriptions. If there are any objections or suggestions, please do let me know. Hilighter555 11:17, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

!!!!!!!!It should be noted on the basic information about the college that its sister school is West Point (it really is! I've heard about the Sarah Lawrence/West Point mixers)

Sarah Lawrence only accepted GI's before 1968. The novelist Alan Gurganus, class of 1949, and later a member of the writing faculty, is an example. I am a graduate (1984) and there was no President "Howard Taylor"-- it was "Harold Taylor. If he was such a good friend of your Dad's Why can't you remember his name? —Preceding unsigned comment added by HowiePoodle (talk • contribs) 19:46, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Titsworth

How is Titsworth "appropriately" an all-girls dorm. Is that a stupid crack about the name. I'm changing it, but let me know if you have a reason why I shouldn't. --djrobgordon 01:30, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

There was no reason behind it, except that it's funny. C'mon, you laughed. --Hilighter555 10:49, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Pics

This article really needs pictures. Courier new 02:31, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Maybe I'll bring my camera with me to campus some day this week. I'm no professional photographer, but it's better than nothing. --djrobgordon 05:07, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree. I've done most of the work on expanding the information in this article, but I'm too far from the campus (I'm in Paris, actually) to take any photos myself, and I don't left from right about copyright restrictions on Wikipedia. Anything that can be done would be a huge help. --hilighter555 15:56 28 January 2006 (CET)

As of now I've taken pictures of Westlands, Bates, and the Tea Haus. I'm planning on shooting some more next week, so if there are any specific buildings, etc. that you think should be included, let me know and I'll see what I can do. --djrobgordon 23:31, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Possible?

Is it possible that you could get some pictures off of the internet? This article looks really bare. Courier new 04:48, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

It's not necessary to ask more than once in two days. --djrobgordon 05:41, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Sarah Lawrence in popular culture

Most of this section of the article is made up of incomplete sentences. J. Van Meter 23:14, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

So fix it, asshole. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hilighter555 (talk • contribs)

I would, Hilighter555, but I haven't seen all the films nor read all the books that are listed in the section. Perhaps someone that is more familiar with all the citations can have a go at it. J. Van Meter 17:08, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Bronxville?

Does anyone know why the article says (in two places) that Sarah Lawrence is at least partially in Bronxville, when that statement is false?

I recognize that Sarah Lawrence has a Bronxville mailing address, but that's not the same as actually being located there. (They could get their mail on the moon, they'd still be in Yonkers.) The strange thing is that Sarah Lawrence certainly knows where it's located -- their website suggests, more than once, that students with problems should call the Yonkers police, which is exactly what the Bronxville police would tell them if they called there instead. And yet so many people associated with the school continue to insist that it's located in Bronxville, either completely (which is false) or in part (which is just as false).

Although people who get involved in this issue seldom resort to facts, I'm going to do just that. First, take a look at the campus map from the Sarah Lawrence website, which I found at http://www.slc.edu/data/386/link/1299/SLC_CampusMapWeb.pdf. Then, take a look at the map viewer on the website of the Westchester County Geographic Information Systems (Yonkers and Bronxville are both in Westchester County) at http://giswww.westchestergov.com/westchester/emap/viewer.htm and navigate to the area under discussion. (To save time, you can look at http://www.WebFeats.com/SarahLawrence-Yonkers.gif, where I've copied the relevant area of the map.) Even a cursory comparison of the maps reveals that the entire campus is within the city limits of Yonkers (the area in gray), and that not one square inch of the campus crosses the Bronx River into Bronxville (one of the areas in white).

It's obvious to me that the article should be corrected, but I won't do that until I hear what others have to say. HMishkoff 21:03, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Here's the deal with the Bronxville/Yonkers thing. The oldest part of the SLC campus, which comprises about half of its present size, was originally the estate of one William Van Duzer Lawrence, who bequeathed said estate to SLC in 1926. That estate was located within the boundaries of Bronxville, a villlage which Lawrence was instrumental in establishing (LAwrence Park, for example, which is the neghborhood just north of SLC, was his idea, but that neighborhood has since been incorporated into Yonkers, but is now trying to secede to Bronxville b/c of its better schools). Over time, the boundaries of Bronxville shifted, but the Village of Bronxville agreed that the original estate should still be considered in Bronxville proper. The reason that the campus is simulateneously in Yonkers is because all of the property on the campus that extends beyond the original Lawrence estate, which now comprises some 40 acres, is in Yonkers. Therefore, part of the campus is located in Yonkers while the other part is in an exclave of Bronxville. Which is why SLC's *STREET ADRESS* is One Mead Way, Bronxville New York. Notice that this STREET is located in B'ville; it's not a P.O.Box (i.e., SLC ddn't just take out a POBox n Bville so as to have the more fashionable address, which is a practice many colleges are adopting these days (see Warren Wilson College, which is located in Swannanoa, NC, but receives its mail at a post office in the more fashionable Asheville, North Carolina). That street (Mead Way) runs directly through the campus and is technically Bronxville jurisdction. SLC pays the necessary property taxes to Bronxville and is partly admnistered by the same. SLC fights the necessary battles in Bronxville courts, usng Bronxville judges, etc. SLC encourages students to use the first responders and police of Yonkers because a) they're faster and larger and b) Yonkers doesn't hate SLC as much as Bronxville does. Also, SLC generally reserves Bronxville's emergency services for carting drunken freshmen girls to Lawrence Hospital, which tends to swamp their fleet. That said, the article needs no correction. Many arguments have already been fought over this issue.

Response: Do you have a source for your contention that SLC pays taxes to Bronxville and is within their jurisdiction? I'm very skeptical, but I'm always willing to learn. I could do the research myself, but I'm hoping that you could point me to a source.

Your point about their mailing address is a red herring. SLC's mail is processed by the Bronxville post office, so they have a Bronxville mailing address. It's really that simple. People living in other parts of Yonkers are served by the Scarsdale post office, and they have a Scarsdale mailing address. Some of these Yonkers residents may claim to live in Bronxville or Scarsdale, but they don't. All of these entities have geographical boundaries, none of which are in dispute (as far as I know). Your location within those boundaries is not affected by your opinion.

I'm not accusing SLC of being snobby or of employing any kind of chicanery, but the fact is that having your mail delivered by the Bronxville PO doesn't mean you're in Bronxville. The relevant section in the article could be changed to read, "The Sarah Lawrence campus is located in the Lawrence Park section of Yonkers, New York, and their mail is processed by a post office located in the village of Bronxville, New York, about a thirty-minute train ride north of Manhattan," but that would be silly.

I'm not surprised that many arguments have already been fought over this issue, but winning arguments (or outlasting opponents) doesn't make your facts correct. I've provided a map that seems to offer definitive proof that SLC is located entirely in Yonkers; you've provided information (about taxes and jurisdiction) that seems to indicate otherwise. I'm hoping that you can provide a source for your information -- and if not, I'm hoping that I have the time to track it down myself. HMishkoff 13:42, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Zip Code: Here's something that may help you get a better understanding of the Zip Code issue.

If you go to http://www.MelissaData.com/ you can register (for free) and then enter a zip code. If you enter 10708 you'll get a map of that zip code. All of the territory west of the Bronx River is in Yonkers. (You can't see the river on the map, but the Bronx River Parkway follows it pretty closely.) You'll notice that there's a good-sized chunk of Yonkers in that area, not just SLC. All of those people have a Bronxville mailing address. None of those people lives in Bronxville.

Remember, zip code boundaries are drawn by the federal government, and do not necessarily follow the boundaries of local geographical entities. (They often do, but they don't have to.) The fact that the federal government has chosen to deliver SLC's mail from the Bronxville PO does not change the fact that SLC is in Yonkers. HMishkoff 14:12, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Response

You're not reading the justification properly. What I said is that IF the College's address is as follows (which it is):

1 MEAD WAY BRONXVILLE, NY

THEN

the street address, which is the real geographic location of the school, is in Bronxville. The issue of which post office serves which address is moot. The point is that SLC's street address is in Bronxville, which is all the evidence you need to determine that SLC is in Bronxville. The College can't cheat and somehow change its street address to say "Bronxville" when the street in question in not in fact in Bronxville, so what more do you need? In other words, if your street address is 123 Main Street, Bumblefuck, Illinois, then you live in Bumblefuck (not Chicago, not San Francisco, not anything EXCEPT Bumblefuck). So that ends the story. I've gone to the additional extent above to provide several other reasons and explanations, and if you want evidence, you're free to do the research (since you're the one who wants the article changed). Also, why is this such a big deal to you? Do you think there's some big conspiracy to convince the world that SLC is in a city that it's not actually in? All of SLC's literature dictates that the school is in both Bronxville and Yonkers, and I'm inclined to believe that they aren't lying about that.

The Address: SLC's mailing address is certainly in Bronxville. In fact, if you look at the zip code map to which I pointed you, every home west of the Bronx River in zip code 10708 also has a Bronxville mailing address, but (as you've seen on the Westchester County map to which I pointed you) all of those people actually live in Yonkers. I could perform a similar exercise in northeast Yonkers, where many residents have a Scarsdale mailing address, but they live in Yonkers just the same. The point I'm making is that SLC's mailing address has literally nothing to do with determining in which civic entity they're physically located. I've demonstrated that with clear evidence on two maps (did you look at them?), you saying that it's not so doesn't change a thing.

And yes, you've provided reasons and explanations, but those are weak substitutes for actual evidence. (Frankly, they sound like "urban myths" to me, but I have not rejected them out of hand.) I was hoping you could point me to a source, to save me some time, since I assume you must have had some source for your conclusion. But since you've refused to do so, I will do the research myself (when I have time), as you suggest. (I enjoy doing research, this will be fun.) I'll report back on what I discover.

I haven't seen anything on SLC's website that says that they're physically located in Bronxville, but it's a robust website and I must admit that I haven't dug into it very deeply, that will be part of my research. But frankly, even if their site says that they're located in Bronxville, that wouldn't necessarily make it so. I could claim to live on the moon and to have invented peanut butter, but if I made those claims in an encyclopedia article, I suspect that someone might challenge those assertions. We're all entitled to our opinions, but we're not all entitled to our own facts.

And I can't believe that you would even ask why accuracy in an encyclopedia is "such a big deal" to me. Isn't it a big deal to you? I assumed that the truth was a big deal to everybody. HMishkoff 02:38, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Response

You have valid points, but here's where I'm comng from: The examples I've provided for you in justification of SLC's Bronxville address come from three years' experience working in SLC's administration. The sources for many of these examples are largely word-of-mouth from other college staff whom I'm certain are trustworthy. With that in mnd, it is difficult for me to produce evidence that SLC pays taxes to Bronxville, but I've seen with my own eyes the President's Report to the Board of Trustees in 2005 that shows these figures. This is an internal document though, and since I am no longer an employee of the College, I can no longer produce this evidence.

When I asked you why this is such a big deal, I was not accusing your commitment to accuracy; instead, I was a bit taken aback by your unilateral insistence on overturning 75 years of SLC's association as being a part of the Village of Bronxville. SLC s an enormous community of well-educated people, all of whom seem to agree that SLC is in Bronxville, both technically and traditionally.

Here is at least one instance wherein SLC's own literature makes reference to a Bville locale: [1]. Here is another: [2].

Nether of us is able to produce, or has yet produced, definitive evidence either to prove ourselves correct or to prove the other wrong, so we should find a middle ground. I would suggest using SLC's own language ("bordering the communities of Bronxville and Yonkers"). I find that this language can be a reasonable compromise between your position and mine so that we might end this dispute with an agreeable result.

Compromise? I noticed SLC's curious wording when I looked through their website last night. (When I used to work as a writer, we would call it "weasel-wording" -- a statement that appears to address the issue but actually cleverly avoids it.) If SLC is physically located in Yonkers, then saying that it borders on Yonkers is inaccurate. And I don't see the point in posting inaccurate information in an encyclopedia just to avoid an argument.

SLC is either an independent geopolitical unit (which it's not), or it's physically located in one or more geopolitical units. You say that SLC has some kind of arrangement that actually results in their paying taxes to (and being somewhat under the jurisdiction of) Bronxville, and I plan to do some research to find out if that's the case. If it turns out not to be the case, then why should Wikipedia continue to promote inaccurate information?

BTW, I'm not questioning your integrity, and I'm not suggesting that anyone at SLC who told you that the school was in Bronxville was lying. I simply suspect that you're mistaken, and I suspect the same of the people who gave you what I suspect is inaccurate information.

I suspect (hmmm... I'm using that word a lot... very suspicious...) that I haven't done a very good job of explaining the mailing-address issue. You might understand it better if you went to Google and searched for either:

• yonkers "bronxville mailing address"
• yonkers "scarsdale mailing address"

(Scarsdale isn't directly related to what we're discussing, but the issue is the same.)

I found this article to be especially informative:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D0CE4DF1130F933A05755C0A967958260&sec=&pagewanted=print

It's a 15-year-old NYT article that explores a controversy that erupted when a Yonkers official wanted the USPS to change the Bronxville and Scarsdale mailing addresses of Yonkers residents who lived in those areas that, like SLC, were served by those post offices. As you'll see, the residents in those areas were very concerned, in that changing their mailing addresses would actually affect the values of their properties! This is pretty astounding to me, but it's true: Even if your house is physically located in Yonkers, the fact that you have a Bronxville or Scarsdale mailing address increases the value of your property. In the case of SLC, I don't think that their reluctance to admit that they're in Yonkers stems from a desire to inflate the value of the property, but I do believe that having to admit that they're located in Yonkers would be a blow to their prestige.

You say that I haven't produced any proof that SLC is in Yonkers, but that's not the case. I've produced (1) a governmental map that clearly shows that SLC is in Yonkers, (2) a zip code map that explains why SLC has a Bronxville mailing address, and now (3) an article (and a method you could use to find dozens of additional articles) that explains the mailing-address issue in copious detail. You, on the other hand, have provided anecdotal evidence and some information about something you saw that indicated that SLC paid taxes to Bronxville. (Oddly, the links you provided do not say that SLC is in Bronxville.) That sounded a little harsh, I'm not dismissing your testimony out of hand, I do plan to follow up on it, and I'll report back to let you know what I found out. But I get the feeling that, even if I'm able to prove conclusively that SLC is in Yonkers, you'd still oppose changing the article to reflect that fact. I hope I'm wrong about that, maybe I'm just being overly cynical. HMishkoff 18:17, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Response

Actually, the only evidence you've provided is some internet map of Yonkers/Bronxville that makes no clear distnction between Sarah Lawrence's boundaries and the boundaries of Yonkers proper, as per my prior explanation that part of the campus is in Yonkers, and part is not; and an additional 15-yr-old article about some guy's housing dispute. This is hardly sufficient to overturn the 75-year assertion by one of the most respected colleges in the country that it is located in Bronxville. I've offered the perfectly reasonable compromise of using the college's own language, which is the most trustworthy resource we have, and you've refused. I will even go a step further: we can include the school's language in the introductory paragraph, with the supplement of a section further on in the article explaining the lacation dispute. I will stand by these offers, but will allow nothing further.

If you really wish to make a difference in the accuracy and effectiveness of the article (and you've made it clear that this is your priority), you can consider spending all of this energy on any of the following:

• 1. Need for pictures
• 2. Expansion of graduate programs section
• 3. Expansion and encyclopediazation of history section
• 4. Organizing the article and its satellite articles into appropriate categories
• 5. Expansion of student life section to include things that actually describe student life
• 6. Clean-up of SLC-in-quotes section, possbly moving it to its own page or combninng it with SLC-in-pop-culture page
• 7. Expansion of sources and works cited to bolster factual bass of countless other statements in the article
• 8. Clean-up of SLC-in-pop-culture sub-article (it needs to be an actual article rather than a list of pop culture occurances).

If you wish to sidestep these priorities and instead continue this little argument so that you can sleep better at night knowing that your one-man opinion of SLC's location has made its way onto a Wikipedia article, then I suggest you first convince SLC and the global media to change their own literature (READ: what you are presenting constitutes original research). There is no way that I will accept a WIkipedia article that presents information that is contrary to virtually every other reference to the subject matter, including the subject itself.

(About three minutes of googling produced the following media and scholarly references to SLC's Bronxville locale):

• http://www.city-data.com/city/Bronxville-New-York.html
• http://www.uscollegesearch.org/bronxville-new-york-colleges.html
• http://climatechallenge.org/actionmap/?type=state&stateprov=ny
• http://www.summeroncampus.com/main/CollegePrograms.asp?CollegeName=Sarah+Lawrence+College+&LocationName=Bronxville
• http://www.libdex.com/data/10/5177.html

(And the following books, which are just a couple among thousands):

• Westchester: The American Suburb By Roger G. Panetta
• Crabgrass Frontier: The Suburbanization of the United States, by Professor Kenneth T Jackson – 1987
• Many Masks: A Life of Frank Lloyd Wright, by Brendan Gill

And something else to consider: the town of Eastchester, into which Bronxville is incorporated, claims Lawrence Park as its own[3]. Lawrence Park is located adjacent to SLC, was founded by William Van Duzer Lawrence in conjunction to the establishment of SLC, and is located entirely within the geographical boundaries of Yonkers, according to the little map[4] you produced.

I would encourage you to do a quick Google book search on SLC. For every book you find that shows SLC as being in Yonkers, I'll show you fifty that say it's in Bronxville. In other words, your original research has no place in this article.

Facts as Popularity Contests: When someone mischaracterizes the situation as much as you have, I have to assume it's because you know that I'm right. For example:

• You say I've provided "some Internet map," when you're well aware that it's an official map from the Westchster County goverment.
  • (Response: I was not questioning the accuracy of the map. I said that it is not clear in its distinction between SLC's campus and Yonkers proper, i.e., this particular map is insufficient. For example, it shows Lawrence Park as being in the boundaries of Yonkers, even though Lawrence Park is in Bronxville [5]. Your map does not make all of the necessary distinctions. Just because it is a government map does not mean it is as detailed as it can be. The government is not always perfectly clear [6].)

• You say that SLC claims that it's in Bronxville, but I've yet to see even one statement from them to that effect. I haven't seen anything to that effect on their website, even in the links to which you steered me.

• The fact that I'd like to correct a single inaccuracy that I happened to notice does not obligate me to revise the entire article.

More to the point, facts are stubborn things, and do not lend themselves to popularity contests. You don't get to vote on whether or not SLC is in Yonkers or Bronxville -- it is where it is, not where you want it to be.

I'll continue to try to find a definitive answer to the question, despite the fact that you've made it abundantly clear that you're going to resist making any changes and don't especially care whether you're right or wrong. HMishkoff 22:12, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

---

I think they claim a Bronxville address because Yonkers has a much worse reputation (socieconomically, criminally, etc.) than Bronxville. Look at the kids that attend SLC--do you think their Wall Street parents would rather have their kid living in Bronxville, or Yonkers? I don't think it really matters. Can we agree that it's a very Bronxville-esque section of Yonkers?---

Research

I've started to do a little research -- not the kind that's against Wikipedia's policy, but rather research into published sources (which is the very basis of Wikipedia).

So far, without exception, every published source I've found that discusses whether SLC is physically located in Bronxville or in Yonkers agrees that it's in Yonkers. For example, here's a letter to the editor of the NYT from someone that I'd like to think is a knowledgeable source:

---

In response to The Lure of a Bronxville Address, we want to make it clear that Sarah Lawrence College is proud to be located in Yonkers and we are excited about Mayor John D. Spencer's economic development programs. Our postal address may be Bronxville, but we feel very much a part of Yonkers. In fact, we emphasize to our prospective students that we straddle two different localities: the suburban village of Bronxville and the city of Yonkers, which is rich in its cultural and racial diversity.

MICHELE TOLELA MYERS President Sarah Lawrence College Yonkers

---

Although Ms. Myers muddies the water with her "straddling" comment (which appears to be metaphoric, rather than literal), you'll notice that she clearly states that SLC is "located in Yonkers" (that's a direct quote), and she signs the letter "Sarah Lawrence College Yonkers" (another direct quote). I have located several other NYT articles that also state definitively that SLC is physically located in Yonkers but has a Bronxville mailing address, and I imagine that further research will uncover more evidence of the obvious fact that SLC is in Yonkers.

Since I recognize that no preponderance of facts will convince you, why don't you call SLC and ask them? If you can pin them down past the silly "straddle" construction that they like to use, I'll bet they'll finally admit to you that, despite their historical and traditional ties to Bronxville (yada yada yada), the SLC campus is physically located 100% within the boundaries of the city of Yonkers. I recognize that, if you make this call, it will constitute "original research" and will not be usable as a source for the article, but maybe it will convince you that you are mistaken, and will allow us to work together to revise the article so that it both acknowledges historical SLC's ties to Bronxville and yet also acknowledges what appears to be the indisputable fact that SLC is located in Yonkers. HMishkoff 22:53, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Response

Excellent! We've finally come to an agreement. You have proven my point. C'est-à-dire, nobody is questioning that SLC is in Yonkers. We all agree that it is, and Dr. Meyers is quite right in asserting the college's presence there. The question is whether SLC is partly in Bronxville as well. And it is, which Dr. Meyersis careful to say as well (one cannot "straddle" any two places without being in both of them; I see no "metaphor" in this term and your assertion that the use of the word is metaphoric is heresay, and is insufficient evidence to counteract the several argumants that I have presented).

Secondly, YOU'RE the one who wants to change what the College, the article, and the undisputed majority of published sources in America have to say about SLC's Bville presence, so YOU make the call.

Thirdly, your silence in regards to the expansive arguments I've posted above will be taken as agreement with case. You have no case on this issue, so get one or stop wasting my time. I have offered you a generous compromise on the issue, despite the fact that you are clearly basing your assertions on murky original research, but since you refuse to negotiate, I can consider your proposal as being nothing more than idiocy and attempted vandalism.

Sources, etc.

I'm going to stop participating in this unproductive back-and-forth. (I mean that. If someone else want to have the last word, go ahead, I won't respond.) Instead, I'm going to use this as a learning opportunity. I know next to nothing about Wikipedia, other than the fact that it's a fantastic resource. And since it's also an important resource, I need to learn more about how to edit articles, as opposed to just reading them (which has largely defined my interaction with Wikipedia to this point).

For example: What do you do when you know that an article is inaccurate but you run into someone who defends the inaccuracy and refuses to let you change it? The immediate response is that I have to find sources to defend the revision. However, in this case, the sources that I have discovered are New York Times articles that I had to pay to retrieve. They're clearly valid and definitive sources, but I can't reproduce them without violating NYT's copyright -- and I can't link to them, because anyone trying to follow those links would have to pay to get access to the articles. It's a real dilemma -- and I assume it's only one of myriad problems that Wikipedia editors run into every day.

I'm not asking anyone to help me solve the problem of the pricey sources. Instead, I'm going to use this issue as motivation to learn more about how Wikipedia works. Once I feel like I know what I'm doing, the first thing I'll do is come back here and correct the blatant falsehoods in the SLC article. In terms of ascertaining how much I've learned, I figure that'll be my final exam... :)

(BTW, I have to say that one result of my research is that I've become very disappointed in SLC. As an institution of higher learning, you'd think that they'd be interested in promoting the truth. But every time they are forced to admit that they're in Yonkers, they always tack on some weasel-worded phrase that allows people who desperately want to believe that SLC is in Bronxville to continue to do so. Then they act like they're exasperated by the whole issue -- while the fact is that they're clearly and deliberately perpetuating the confusion. It's shameful behavior on the part of SLC.) HMishkoff 15:29, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Response

• I did not refuse to change the article. I offered you two very generous compromises (both of which you have very stubbornly refused, though the offers remain open).
• The sources you cite have never been produced. Your story about financial hardship does not change that.
• SLC has never claimed and does not currently claim NOT to be in Yonkers. They cite a location in both Bronxville and Yonkers. Your posting of Dr. Myers' letter is evidence of that. So make no accusations of dishonesty on that front.
• I am not in the business of propogandizing for SLC, so I don't give a damn if you're disappointed in them. I'm in the business of ensuring that this article is accurate. In fact, your "disappointment" in the College belies your bias on the issue, so I would propose that you should be barred from editing.
• You do not have to tell me that you know nothing about Wikipedia. I figured that out on my own [7].

Jesus. I don't check recent changes for a couple of weeks, and this is what I come back to? I've already had this debate on Talk:Bronxville, New York, and there's not much to be said factually that isn't already here, but I'll give it a try anyway. Sarah Lawrence College lies entirely in Yonkers, and has only two ties to Bronxville: it was, at one time, within the Bronxville village borders, and it is still served by the Bronxville post office. Mailing addresses don't indicate anything other than which post office an address is served by, and because of the number of tiny towns and villages in Westchester County, there are dozens of pockets here which are served by post offices in other municipalities.

Since I don't expect anyone to take my word for it, I took the novel aproach of double checking with the oofficial county map on the Westchester County website. If you'd like to check my work, check the Land Use box and the Universities/Colleges box. SLC will be the giant blue mass in the middle of the page. The Southeastern-most border of the property is Mead Way, and the Northeastern-most is Bronxville Rd. The Bronxville-Yonkers border is indicated by the dotted line that runs along the Bronx River Parkway (as well as the river itself). The Southeast border isn't actually relevant, since it's actually with Mount Vernon. As for the Northeast border, it's clear that all of Sarah Lawrence College is south of Bronxville Rd., and all of Bronxville Rd. is within Yonkers city limits. The only border being straddled is the metaphorical one Dr. Myers was referring to.

If any map can be seen as definitive, I'd think it would be the one published by the county. --djrobgordon 01:39, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

• P.S. I just noticed someone made the argument that Lawrence Park is in Bronxville. It is definitely not. I live in Lawrence Park, my landlord pays Yonkers taxes, and when I park illegally I get tickets from the Yonkers Police Department. --djrobgordon 01:42, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Location Correction

I've corrected the article so that it accurately reflects SLC's location in Yonkers. The language I've used is nearly an exact quotation from an official SLC document. In the interest of verifiability, I've provided a reference link to that source and to a similar statement on the official Village of Bronxville website. Since I've provided definitive references from both SLC and Bronxville that unequivocally state that SLC is in Yonkers, I'm hopeful that I've put this issue to rest. HMishkoff 21:15, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Removing "Quotations" section

A list of quotations about a subject doesn't really belong on Wikipedia (otherwise there wouldn't be WikiQuote). It does't help that all the quotes are very pro-Sarah Lawrence College... it kinda sounds like they're lifted from the college's promotional material. If the quotes can't be worked into the article itself, I propose that the section be removed. ~ Danelo 18:16, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Doing so now. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry 14:39, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Question for Jvolkblum

Although I'm certainly enjoying correcting SLC's location every time you vandalize it, can I ask you why it's so important to you continually try to relocate the campus to Bronxville? As you know (if you've checked out the references you keep deleting), both SLC and the official Bronxville website acknowledge that the campus is in Yonkers. Anything you want to talk about? HMishkoff (talk) 17:18, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

See the comment I left on Jvolkblum's page.[8]--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 18:25, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Problems with the lead paragraph

There are major NPOV and sourcing problems with opening paragraph in this version[9] of the article. I'm going to try to tone down some of the quasi-promotional language, and I will request additional sources. If you have any thoughts on how this paragraph can be improved, please discuss here.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 18:53, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Reply to HMishkoff re: applicable/relevant data

Im sorry you are having a personal issue with this. You are clearly committing 'vandalism' by repeatedly deleting the corrections I have made. yet you were first to accuse me of such wrongdoing? The fact that Sarah Lawrence is located in Yonkers versus Bronxville has no relevance or significance to the introduction. There is no argument over this anywhere on the page. Nor does the college make any issue over its location. Your reference is relevant/ applicable on the Bronxville town webpage, or in specific geographical or demographic contexts. The differentiation between the 'mailing address' location (municipality) & the 'physical/geographical' location (municipality) can be noted and discussed (if desired) in following sections, ie: Sarah Lawrence Campus. I am correcting this by including the schools address, Bronxville, New York 10708.

First: Please sign your postings so I'll know for certain who I'm talking to. Thanks!

I don't have a personal issue with this, just a factual one. The SLC campus is located entirely within the boundaries of Yonkers, which is just another way of saying that SLC is in Yonkers. I've provided references from both SLC and Bronxville, so I assume that you'll agree that the physical location of SLC is not in dispute. (If you want to settle the issue in your own mind, look at a map.) That being the case, I don't understand why anyone would have a problem noting SLC's location in a Wikipedia article. The location of any physical entity is relevant and significant (an essential characteristic, in fact), there are thousands of Wikipedia articles (about companies, schools, etc.) that mention, early on, the geo-political entity in which the subject of the article is located. Why is so important to you that SLC's location in Yonkers be hidden or buried? I don't get it.

The paragraph that I crafted about the "Bronxville campus" is already a compromise, it succinctly sums up the situation without being confrontational (and if you'll read some of the discussion about the issue, you'll know that it can get heated). The language is nearly an exact quote from an official SLC document. I cannot understand why anyone would have any problem with it -- but since you seem to, I'm hoping that you can explain it to me. HMishkoff (talk) 17:35, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Reply to HMishkoff re: applicable/relevant data

RESPONSE: The College has an address of '1 Mead Way, Bronxville, New York, 10708', so for all intents and purposes, and from a practical standpoint, the location of the college is Bronxville. If one is interested in researching the college, applying to the school, or contacting the school with a request for information, the accurate location and address is essential. Wouldn't you agree? The underlying issue of location as it relates to geographical accuracy is indeed important in relevant discussions, but is not of primary informational relevance to this page discussing the school. As Wikipedia tries to spell out in its guidelines for 'opening' paragraphs, a concise description is key to creating an A+ article.

Your insistance on pointing out this location distinction is confusing. The functioning address/location of the school is only hidden/buried by your argument. Apparently it is of some deeper, personal importance to you? It is of personal importantance to me that opinion based data not be confused with factual data. I find it to be of even greater importance to ensure, whenever possible, the accurate use & application of information. Information can be manipulated and facts can be included, ommitted or combined to gain more opinion-based results. That shouldnt happen and thats where this arises as an issue for me.

The debate over town/village boundaries is commonplace, especially in Westchester County. Bronxville has several surrounding cities (Yonkers, Mount Vernon)that are served to some degree by the Bronxville 10708 zip-code yet are not in fact part of the Village of Bronxville. Many residents of Bronxville find particular issue in sharing their 'elite' mailing address with sections of the more diverses, less affluent and less desirable cities next door. As a result, great effort is made by many to ensure the distinction is made whenever possible so that the 'desired' image of the town remains intact.

The boundaries of a place, as well as the meaning of those boundaries, are essentially social constructions which people/institutions name and define in anticipation of specific consequences. The neighboring areas of Mount Vernon and Yonkers that share same zip-code essentially 'cheapen' the village with the inclusion of assumed lower-income properties. Both municipalities have average markedly lower property values and income levels when compared to Bronxville and the rest of Westchester County. These averages are not effected by the zip-code 'overlap', nor are any other demographic statistics or measurements. The only true effect is on the public opionion of those who are exposed to the information. Realtors often advertise a property as located within a certain area (such as Bronxville) when it is actually just outside. Residents also may strive to manipulate boundaries in order to improve their standing in the larger social world, laying claim to participating in the daily round of activities corresponding to a given community (ie. Bronxville). These are all relevant topics when discussing the actual monetary value of a given property, the municipal services covering a property or more abstract issues such as addressing the importance or relevance of 'place' in society etc.

The campus of Sarah Lawrence is located in a desirable residential area of large, expensive homes and high household incomes. The Lawrence Park West section of Yonkers is as desirable a neighborhood as Lawrence Park in Bronxville, and often considered to be more aethetically appealing. In this instance there is no competition to bump up the status or affluence of the area by attaching to neighboring Bronxville. The two exist independently. The presence of Sarah Lawrence is, if anything, a positive to both communities . . . serving as a 'buffer zone' between Yonkers and Bronxville as well as serving to preserve the wooded, residential character of the area. The bulk of the campus consists of large, period homes that have been adapted to meet the needs of the college. The school itself is one of the most, if not the most, expensive private colleges in the country and has a history and legacy of prestige in social, economic and intellectual circles. Most students are from affluent families, paying full tuition to attend the school. Because of the large size of the City of Yonkers, the Village of Bronxville takes-on some of the postal burden by serving some of its outlying areas. Therefore the ultimate reason that there is an overlap of the 10708 zip-code is for practical reasons.

I happen to live in the Lawrence Park section of Bronxville and find it to be a pleasant community overall. I have a large home and am very happy with the high real estate values that the village commands. Regardless, I do take issue with regards to the racial exclusivity of the village, and all the underlying efforts made to maintain the (desired) 'us' vs. (undesired) 'them' image. I trust my observations and ideas on this subject bc of my professional experience. I run my own realty firm in Manhattan, Im a sociology professor at NYU, and I work for a NYC based think tank.

JVolkBlum

I understand that SLC has chosen to use Bronxville as their mailing address. (This is a choice, BTW, the mail would be delivered just as well if they used a mailing address of Yonkers with the same zip code.) But there is no dispute that the entire SLC campus is physically located in Yonkers. It doesn't even adjoin any other community -- when you're on the SLC campus, you're in Yonkers, and when you leave the campus in any direction, you're still in Yonkers. In other words, SLC is in Yonkers.

I also understand that SLC has long historical and traditional ties to Bronxville. But that doesn't mean that it's in Bronxville. It's in Yonkers. You say that there is some debate over town and village boundaries in the area. I don't believe that to be the case. Can you cite any references for this? Everything I've read leads me to believe that the town and village boundaries in that area are quite well defined.

You also say that "The boundaries of a place, as well as the meaning of those boundaries, are essentially social constructions." To this I take emphatic exception. While there may be places where this is true, it is certainly not the case in the area around SLC. Yonkers and Bronxville have precise legal boundaries. You can get maps from the local governments that define those boundaries, and I'll bet that they don't overlap. SLC is located entirely within the legal boundaries of Yonkers. This is not my opinion. This is a very simple fact.

I think I would be within my rights to point out in the article that many people believe that SLC chooses to use a Bronxville mailing address for its snob appeal. This would not be POV, I could provide many sources, including several New York Times articles (which you can easily find in their archives). However, I have refrained from doing so, not wishing to reflect badly on SLC. The construction that I've used instead (and which I'm about to restore, as soon as I post this), which is nearly a direct quote from an official SLC document, confirms SLC's location, but also explains its association with Bronxville. That construction was carefully crafted after a heated discussion (above) a little more than a year ago -- it's accurate, succinct, non-confrontational, and pleasantly innocuous. Unless you can come up with something better that's still accurate, I think you should leave it alone. HMishkoff (talk) 02:16, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

who is wrong here?

Im accused of some sortof abuse/wrongdoing because of edits I have made that I believe to be correct & tht are in agreement with the comments and changes of other members. As a result I recieved the following:

Sockpuppetry and blanking page discussion You appear to making exactly the same edits to Sarah Lawrence related articles that User:Jvolkblum was making. Please don't do this. I'm going to assume that are your unfamiliar with our WP:SOCK policy, but I suggest you observe it. Also, please don't blank discussion on article talk pages as you did here[1].--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 00:53, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

User:Nyjockboy2 Reply; I have read many of the comments on the discussion page and agree with much of what j volk blum has written. I dont agree with the comments, edits + re-edits of several other members, and think that they should be corrected. The emphasis on the Bronxville/Yonkers location in the first paragraph is a misplaced argument. The school is in Yonkers, and its mailing address is in Bronxville. The remaining info (ie. "it is common for to refer to the 'bronxville campus' . . . ") is merely an opinion that is being mis-referenced as fact. Therefore I too have edited this section so as to account for the validity of member arguments and to improve the Wikipedia encyclopedia.

You're right, the reference to Bronxville is an opinion. However, it is an opinion stated in an official SLC document, and is sourced as such. I could just as easily have said that SLC uses a Bronxville mailing address for its snob appeal, and I could have sourced that with several NY Times articles, but I did not. I could have also omitted any reference to Bronxville whatsoever because SLC is, after all, not in Bronxville -- but I didn't do that either. I think that the approach I took is fair, balanced, accurate, and reflects well on SLC. Now, back to your comment... HMishkoff (talk) 02:23, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I apologize for 'blanking' a discussion, as noted above. It was an error if done!!

• • it is apparent in situations such as this, that some members are abusing the priviledges of the site by assuming authority and passing unfair,biased judgements on others. Come on guys, give me a break!

Whos wrong here?

I am in agreement with nyjockboy2. His argument is a valid one and it can be applied to the actions of so many on this site. Who says that 'Thefatmanwhonevercameback' of 'hmishkoff' are at all correct in views or actions. And who gives the ultimate authority to them to correct edits which appear to be warranted and justified? User jvlokblume has offered justification for his edits/corrections yet they were changed. I believe his corrections are valid and increase the accuracy of the page. Another member agreed as well, making changes to improve the page. These were also changed. ?????? why?

I stumbled on this discussion accidentally while looking at the Sarah Lawrence Page and honestly couldnt care less about where the college truly is or isnt. Its a dumb issue for anyone to start an argument over. But after reading the various posts i have to say that since the schools address is Bronxville, NY, and since that address is used administratively to identify the school, Bronxville is the most relevant location to categorize the school under. This isnt an analysis of the concept of 'place' in American society, this is a concise introduction to the college and what its about.

For those who appear so confused by Jvlokblumes comments, I advise you look at the 'New York Giants' page . . . the description notes that the 'New York' team is from the NY metropolitan area, playing its games out of its stadium in East Rutherford, New Jersey. The point needs not be made that 'the stadium is located in New Jersey, however due to < . . . > the team alludes to New York in its name. Team members, management and fans commonly refer to the "New York team" when talking about Giants'. etc, etc. etc.

i am member : THE5BRICKS —Preceding unsigned comment added by The5bricks (talk • contribs) 02:37, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

You say, "because it is part of the Bronxville, New York, zip-code, the school has a Bronxville mailing address." However, the fact is that SLC chooses to use a Bronxville mailing address. The Bronxville PO will deliver mail addressed to Yonkers.

You say, "The campus is spread over 41 hilly acres in northeastern Yonkers, adjacent to Bronxville Village and Mount Vernon West." However, the campus is not adjacent to Bronxville or Mount Vernon. It's entirely surrounded by Yonkers.

You say, "Its a dumb issue for anyone to start an argument over." I absolutely agree! The sentence about SLC's location has remained unchanged since I wrote it a year ago. Why are you arguing about it now? HMishkoff (talk) 03:04, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Compromise (?)

Those of you on the other side of this disagreement have argued that (1) the reference to the "Bronxville campus" is an opinion and should not be in the article, and (2) the discussion of "place" (geographic location vs mailing address) does not belong in the article. I don't agree with either of those contentions, but I'll accept them in the interest of putting this behind us. Accordingly, I've revised and simplified the article in a way that is responsive to those concerns, I hope it will make everyone happy. If you still have any problems with it, please don't just revert it without leaving a note here. Thanks!

(Also, it would be helpful if we all signed these notes with four tildes, which Wikipedia converts to a username and datestamp signature. Thanks again!!) HMishkoff (talk) 12:56, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

HMIshkoff, it's very collaborative and generous of you to implement a compromise of this sort, but I am absolutely convinced that "those of you on the other side of this disagreement" amount to exactly one editor operating multiple accounts. If User:Jvolkblum, User:Nyjockboy2 and now User:The5bricks are shown to be different people, I would be very, very surprised. I reverted your compromise version because it broke all the footnote references and many of the wikilinks. If consensus--derived without the use of sockpuppets and meatpuppets--dictates that the lead should be changed, I can help you format it correctly, if necessary.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 13:26, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm going to make another change, incorporating the footnote references into the compromise I suggested. Let's see how that flies.

(BTW, I tend to agree with you that Jvolkblum and Nyjockboy2 are probably the same person, but I suspect that The5bricks is someone else, his writing style is very different [he's a much better writer], I'm guessing that he's a friend that Jvolkblum/Nyjockboy2 brought into the fray. I could be completely wrong about this [and it's not really relevant to the substantive discussion], but I think it's too coincidental that the wording of my Yonkers/Bronxville presentation stood unchallenged for a year and then suddenly three people objected to it at the same time. Possible, but unlikely.) HMishkoff (talk) 13:39, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I think that's fair enough. BTW, multiple accounts operated abusively by the same person are known on Wikipedia as sockpuppets. "A friend brought into the fray" for the single purpose of supporting an editor's argument is known as a meatpuppet. WP:SSP states that "For the purposes of upholding policy, Wikipedia does not distinguish between meatpuppets and sockpuppets." It really doesn't matter whether the three accounts are operated by one person, or by two people colluding to push their preferred view into the article--both instances would be considered equally abusive.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 14:04, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Im disturbed that my name is linked to the issue above. I dont know who the other users are that you are referring to. I have no reason to assume that they arent two separate individuals. The reason behind 3 separate users challenging the issue at the same time seems to lie in the fact that the discussion had become more 'heated', naturally drawing in other users to comment. -- The5bricks —Preceding comment was added at 14:38, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Hello. This was actually referenced in an SLC alumni blog, thus offering an explanation as to the 'peaked' interest in the issue. The focus on the legitimacy of certain users for their shared views seems rather excessive ( especially since I see that the question has been resolved to the satisfaction of all involved). USER: Jvolkblum —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jvolkblum (talk • contribs) 16:27, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

finally a compromise!

HMishkoffs most recent edit has eliminated unnecessary information, thus improving the opening intro to the page. It was good to see that user feedback was recognized as an integral part of the edit-process. That was my primary concern.

( I do think that the information removed from here would well suited under the 'campus' section of the page.)

POSTED BY USER: The5bricks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.215.173.132 (talk) 20:13, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

a question and an observation from No1Manhattanite

Im not sure how to add this individual in without screwing up what is already written *** A key individual to make mention of is Ian Lipkin - slc graduate/ scientist / discovered the West Nile virus

Observation: The debate over exact location has been an issue from the start of the discussion part of this page. The common consensus throughout appears to be that a change was warranted, yet the same user (HMishkoff) seems to have challenged the issue throughout. No wonder people have become annoyed! If you arent going to listen to the input of others, what validity do you have as a contributor and user?

Nonsense. As is clearly and explicltly documented in this discussion, I suggested and implemented a compromise based on specific inputs from another editor. HMishkoff (talk) 18:58, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

RE: user:HMishkoff - I dont agree with the authoritative, demeaning tone you use when responding to others on this discussion page. A more productive approach can be taken to communicate with others. No1Manhattanite (talk) 21:45, 7 February 2008 (UTC)No1Manhattanite

Let me see if I have this right: You jump into a conflict that has already been resolved, you question my validity as a contributor and a user, but you say that you don't like my tone? I make no apologies, it was a heated discussion on both sides, but it remained civil, and it reached a fair and amicable resolution.

The section immediately above this was created by one of the people with whom I had been disagreeing. If you'd read it, you'd see that he complimented me on the way I had resolved the conflict -- which was resolved until you decided to stir it up again. I don't know what your agenda is, but you have contributed nothing positive to this discussion. HMishkoff (talk) 00:23, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Come on man!!!! I just made an observation which I believe is valid and warranted. You are the one who began with the negative retort. I responded accordingly, expressing that your negativity doesnt help at all. You responded even more aggressively. This just seems in keeping with your interactions with other users and your contributions throughout the discussion. Anyone care to agree with me on this? I am not jumping into any resolved conflict. I am talking about the need for more effective, more open-communication. Please dont think that you can dictate to me what my intentions are. --No1Manhattanite (talk) 06:53, 8 February 2008 (UTC)No1Manhattanite

If you really believe that questioning my validity as a contributor and user (which is how you launched this exchange) was not negative, then you and I have very different definitions of negativity. If you don't want me to get defensive, don't make ad hominem attacks. HMishkoff (talk) 13:06, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

*** Unfortunately, my comment was in no was a negative attack on you, nor did it question your validity as a user. It was made to the other readers of the page and not to you. You chose to respond to me as if I had engaged you directly in some sortof battle. Just as you have made comments regarding other users, so have I. And so can anyone else if it is relevant and reflective of common dialogue. Your past comments include some where you directly question the character of other users, questioning their contributions, their intentions and their validity. Yet the slightest mention of your name by someone else and it becomes a personal jab at you. You want to have the right to criticize others on every level, yet any criticism of you constitutes an 'attack'? You clearly have some deeper issues which are manifesting themselves through patty confrontation. I wish you luck and hope you will be able to learn to take constructive criticism for what it is. I would like to move on and will not respond to any further comments from HMishkoff on this subject.--No1Manhattanite (talk) 15:41, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

First, your contention that your initial remark was not aimed at me is just silly -- you mentioned me by name!

I did engage in a heated discussion about this issue, but that was more than a year ago. When the issue was recently revived, I engaged in a discussion with jvolkblum that was animated, but civil -- until you stepped in. As I've said, if you want me to stop defending myself, stop attacking me.

(And BTW, if you're going to use multiple usernames, you should try to keep them straight -- on my user talk page, you've used both Nyjockboy2 and No1Manhattanite. I'm glad that you're signing your notes, but you should try to sign them with the same username each time.) HMishkoff (talk) 16:17, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I am happy that the aforementioned conflict was resolved and think EVERYONE should just drop these discussions. I do believe that No1Manhattanite is attempting in goodfaith to comment on an important point. Better communication / dialogue is needed if we want to contribute to Wikipedia as effectively as we can. --The5bricks (talk) 06:58, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

HI! I AGREE WITH THE OTHERS IN RESPECT TO THE 'HOSTILITY' THAT CERTAIN USERS BRING TO THE DISCUSSION. MY ADVICE FOR THEM: DONT TAKE EVERYTHING SO PERSONALLY! "IN WITH ANGER, OUT WITH LOVE". --HTranphuGirl (talk) 09:20, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

LOL!! That is my new mantra. . . ' in with anger, out with love'! priceless! Moving on > > the colleges academic structure is based on the Oxford 'don' system > this should be touched on / highlighted more throughout the academic section. --Jvolkblum (talk) 14:42, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Address

~ the address should be included in the article for the mere fact that it is relevant information. The 'location' of the school can and should be noted but it doesnt take precedence over the address ( nor does the address take precedence over the geographical location of the school ). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.201.103.138 (talk) 20:14, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

First, I think it's strange that you put 'location' in quotes in the above comment, as if 'location' were some kind of concept subject to interpretation. The 'location' of the school is Yonkers -- that's not my opinion, it's a fact, and it's supported by citations (which I restored after you removed them (not for the first time)). I don't have any problem with SLC's mailing address also being mentioned in the article (and I don't understand what you mean by "precedence," they're independent and unrelated facts), and I left it in after some rearrangement for clarity and accuracy. (Having said that, I have no idea if Wikipedia has any policy concerning mailing addresses, so someone else might remove it.) HMishkoff (talk) 20:43, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Neutrality?

A box on the article page says:

"The neutrality of this article is disputed. Please see the discussion on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. (November 2009)"

This is plainly false, there are no disputes whatsoever in progress on this page, involving neutrality or anything else. Note that I'm not addressing the issue of whether the article is neutral, I'm addressing the misrepresentation that the neutrality of the article is being disputed on the talk page. A quick scan of this page reveals only two small notes posted with the last year, neither of which discusses the subject of neutrality.

The box says not to remove it until the dispute is resolved, but since there is no dispute to be resolved, I think the box should be removed. I have no idea if there's an official Wikipedia procedure for removing unremovable boxes, but if there are no objections, I'll delete the box. HMishkoff (talk) 02:53, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Campus architecture

I removed the design pattern wikilink, as "Tudor", or any other architectural style, is not a design pattern. A design pattern is a solution to a problem in a context. "Light from two sides" is an example of a design pattern in Architecture. These patterns were initially documented by Chris Alexander.

Tudor, Colonial, and Greek Revival are examples of architectural styles. rhyre (talk) 18:52, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Notable Faculty--Please Fix!

The list of faculty under "notable people" seems somewhat random. What makes the faculty listed particularly notable? In the interest of full disclosure, I am a current faculty member at Sarah Lawrence, so I'm certainly not going to suggest who does and does not belong on such a list. But I do think there needs to be some reasonable criteria. In addition, the discussion of former faculty is a bit odd: Joseph Campbell wasn't just "offered" a position on the faculty--he taught there for 38 years! SarahLawrence Scott (talk) 01:28, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Update: A year later, and the list is increasingly peculiar. It lists at least two faculty who are no longer with the College as if they were still teaching there, and has no discernible reason for who is or is not included. It would be wonderful if someone could rewrite this list.--SarahLawrence Scott (talk) 17:21, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Bronxville/Yonkers

Because it's been a contentious issue, I thought I should mention that I changed SLC's address to "Bronxville/Yonkers" because that's what it says at the bottom of their home page (to which I provided a reference). I looked through the archives, it appears that SLC began to use that construction sometime in February 2011, but I didn't notice it until earlier today. HMishkoff (talk) 02:26, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

2019-2020 Scandal

A big scandal is in the news, now that the guy named in this article [10] has been arrested and charged with federal crimes. AnonMoos (talk) 13:03, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

I was also wondering why there was no subheading about the sex ring running from the college dorm for ten years. It seems notable. Juju (talk) 00:13, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

While the scandal is relevant to the article, I think it's in the wrong place. Doesn't seem to fit with the 'history' section, and could perhaps be reworded a little for the sake of tone. As a subheading it might belong later in the article, I don't think this scandal is the most notable thing about the college. Butterflyedition (talk) 16:45, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Not sure why the sex scandal is almost the lead article at the top of the page, before the college's significant academic history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.76.33.10 (talk) 13:38, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

Because it's part of the History, and that section belongs where it is. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 21:09, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

promotional

What can be done to rewrite this page to be less "like an advertisement"? I have to say I'm not sure I really understand what's more ad-like about this page compared to other college articles, but let's try to fix whatever is wrong to remove the tag.

To begin,the entire 2.2 International Programs section should be delete! It's marketing copy. Can be redu ced to one sentence (locations) and added somewhere else. Lmlmss44 (talk) 20:26, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

"Sarah Lawrence College: Campus" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Sarah Lawrence College: Campus. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 11#Sarah Lawrence College: Campus until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. SWinxy (talk) 20:18, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Larry Ray section be removed and split off to it's own article

• The content Violates WP:NPOV
• Larry Ray, was illegal subletting from September 2010 to June 2011.

• Most of the crimes took place at the Manhattan Apartment not on Sarah Lawrence campus.
• The former students left in 2013 and Larry Ray was not arrested until 2020, so most of the crimes took place after they left Sarah Lawrence.
• The Sarah Lawrence administration has stated they were not even aware of Larry Ray's presence on their campus.

1keyhole (talk) 20:49, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

I disagree. This should be mentioned in this article. I see no POV issue here. It started on campus, with someone who was illegally living there, and it involved students. The various sources make a clear connection to the school. It's irrelevant when he was arrested, or that the school was not aware at the time. We're not claiming the school was aware. Meters (talk) 20:58, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

The relevance of the year of his arrest becomes pronounced when considering that the former students in question had already been disassociated from Sarah Lawrence College for a span of seven years. 1keyhole (talk) 21:10, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

It's irrelevant when he was arrested because it does not change what actually happened. The man was illegally living on the campus when he started a sex cult with students. It wouldn't matter if he had never been charged. Meters (talk) 21:16, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Let's examine each of your points.

• "The content Violates WP:NPOV" is a reasonable stance for you to take but it's one that you need to support with convincing arguments and evidence - it doesn't stand alone as an objective fact.
• "Larry Ray, was illegal subletting from September 2010 to June 2011." That is not a valid argument for removing the information from this article. This article is not controlled by the college or those who like it.
• "Most of the crimes took place at the Manhattan Apartment not on Sarah Lawrence campus." This could be a reasonable argument for moving this material into a new article.
• "The former students left in 2013 and Larry Ray was not arrested until 2020, so most of the crimes took place after they left Sarah Lawrence." This could be a reasonable argument for moving this material into a new article.
• "The Sarah Lawrence administration has stated they were not even aware of Larry Ray's presence on their campus." That is not a valid argument for removing the information from this article. This article is not about what the college's administrators know, do, or approve - it's a broad encyclopedia article that is supposed to include lots of relevant, important information as supported by reliable sources.

To me, it seems that we need to determine if there is enough information in reliable sources to warrant creating a standalone article. If there is, it may be a good idea to create that article and move much of this information out of this article and adding a link to that article. But even that would not justify removing all of this material from this article. ElKevbo (talk) 22:29, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Agreed. There is more material in this section about the later outcome than there should be, but that's not a reason to blank the section completely. Meters (talk) 02:05, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

None of the references provided state the crimes began on campus.

NYtimes States that the forced labor began in late 2013 and the sex trafficking began in 2014. 1keyhole (talk) 07:13, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

So? The article does not claim that that these things did happen on campus. It states that in 2010 Ray "resided in the on-campus apartment of his daughter" and "while there, Ray started a sex cult in which he presented himself to students as a psychologist and spiritual advisor." The various references make a very clear connection to the school. with titles including "Sarah Lawrence Sex 'Cult' Leader Convicted of 15 Crimes, Including Sex Trafficking and Extortion", "The Stolen Kids of Sarah Lawrence What happened to the group of bright college students who fell under the sway of a classmate’s father?", "How Lawrence V. Ray Was Able to Form a Sex Cult at Sarah Lawrence College", "How a dad moved into his daughter's dorm at Sarah Lawrence College and turned it into his own cult", "What We Know About the Sarah Lawrence Trafficking Case", "The Bizarre Life of the Man Accused in the Sarah Lawrence Sex Case", " "How Did Larry Ray Run a Cult at Sarah Lawrence?", and "Lawrence Ray Sentenced For Years-Long Predatory Crimes Against Students At Sarah Lawrence College And Others". Meters (talk) 19:58, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

You're basically saying that you want to include this material because the media dubbed it The Sarah Lawrence sex cult, which is not a valid reason for its inclusion in this article.

I suggest we do a request for comment since we are going around in circles. 1keyhole (talk) 20:15, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Don't try to put words in my mouth. You want to remove the material. Your removal has been contested. Your supposed reasons for removing have not been accepted. Give us some valid reasons why this should not be covered in this article. You need to get consensus to remove it, or it stays in. Meters (talk) 20:27, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

This is clearly DUE significant content for the college at which he procured the victims. For a dozen reasons that were discussed in mainstream coverage of events. SPECIFICO talk 20:32, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

I can tell you all that from an outsider perspective, I came to this article to see how the topic of Larry Ray and his cult of Sarah Lawrence students was handled on the Wikipedia page for the school. It was suspicious to me that it was not notably included at all. It feels like a clean up job by someone or more than one someones who are acting to protect the reputation of the business (the college) over telling the truth. Know that when this happens it is more disgusting, not less, for the institution. If you want to include the argument that it is not related to the college, you should represent that case with citations on this article. And include alongside it the VERY COMMON narratives that do hold the partly college responsible and point to issues in campus culture to explain how this happened, which can and should also be cited. Even if those narratives were probably false, which is debatable, they are out there. They are part of a notable controversy concerning the college. They should be addressed in a “Controversies” section or at minimum discussed clearly and at sufficient length to cover the event within the history. 2600:6C44:44F0:B210:18D9:50F7:31E0:4F81 (talk) 11:05, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

1keyhole, it appears the discussion is complete, there is no consensus to remove the content from Sarah Lawrence, and I agree with the points made by Meters, ElKevbo, SPECIFICO, and 2600:6C44:44F0:B210:18D9:50F7:31E0:4F81. If someone can find sufficient sources for a standalone without removing the Sarah Lawrence content, have at it, but I have yet to find sufficient information for such. Quaerens-veritatem (talk) 04:20, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

I resubmitted my draft earlier https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Larry_Ray_(cult_leader) 1keyhole (talk) 07:01, 8 October 2024 (UTC)