Talk:Wabash College/Archive 1

Archive 1

New Organization

So, I'm going to be reorganizing the Wabash College page in the coming days to better outline areas that need developing. My sandbox page has a proposed format. This expansion will take place as the wants and needs of my job require, but I'm hoping to have stubbed sections ready in a couple of hours. Digglethemoid (talk) 16:04, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Ezra Pound

In view of the abbreviated service of Ezra Pound at Wabash and the circumstances leading to his premature departure, as well as his later derogatory comments about his service there, perhaps the reference to him should be deleted. The only significance to EP's brief stay at Wabash is that he was forced out, leading him to the path that would make him the Pound who is significant.

One further note about the reference to Ezra Pound: To say that "Wabash faculty has included such influential intellectuals as poet Ezra Pound" is extremely misleading, implying that he was then the "influential intellectual" that he later became.

Re my previous comment: Hemingway's reference to Wabash, of which he had heard from Pound, is clearly, in context, ironic in-group humor. Why not delete all the puffery in this article?

This actually does seem signficant, although not in the way the original article made it seem. His being thrown out (and subsequent disillusionment with academia) did, as you said, lead him to become the "signficiant Pound." That seems, to me, to merit inclusion. 69.219.228.213

Academics and Mission

This article is far from neutral, it should be edited. to increase neutrality.

It is overly hagiographical, and the mission statement almost seems as if it were lifted from the school website. --Jpbrenna 21:40, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Most of this section has been pasted verbatim from the link that follows it. Official Wabash POV should be removed and the link left in place; an objective description of Wabash curriculum should be interpolated. --Josh a brewer 17:24, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Other Men's Institutions

What about St. John's University? Does that not count as an all-male liberal arts institution? --Cliedl 22:17, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Hampden-Sydney_College claims there are THREE four-year, all-men's liberal arts colleges in the United States. But it says here FOUR. So what's the right number? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.255.248.201 (talk) 07:58, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Deep Springs is a two-year college. Josh a brewer 04:07, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Notable Alumni

I undid the edit removing Andrea James as an alumn of Wabash. Why? Well, Andrea James was, in fact, an alumn of Wabash (I verified this with ole 'Bash directly), and does seem to foot the "notability" bill, and has an article here in Wikipedia. One may or may not like James, but that would not count as a reason for editing James out of the article. Xenophon777 19:18, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

It seems that it may be difficult to determine who should qualify for addition to the Wabash "notable" Alumni section. Personally, I agree with the including Lew Wallace and perhaps David Kendall, for example. But I don't agree that every alumnus who has been mentioned in the press, or even every alumnus with a Wikipedia entry should qualify as one of the notable alumni. ADH 15:54, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

I suppose I'm more concerned about the reason James was being removed. The two editors, not signed in, who removed James did not specify a reason, e.g., "notability," the reason you have given. Thresholds on notability are not clear, at least to me. My assumption was that either [a] someone was removing James' name as a simple prank; [b] someone was removing James' name because James is some sort of a spokesperson or other for the transgendered folks; or [c] someone, knowing 'bash is an all-male college, removed James' name thinking that an Andrea couldn't possibly be an alumn. You've said that you agree with the prior editor, but the prior editor gave no reason for the removal. Can you suggest why you believe that James does not reach the notability threshhold? Xenophon777 16:19, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Until this morning I had not followed the link to see who James was. My own instincts were not to allow the addition of "notable alumni" unless their name and/or the short description of their notability really jumped out at me. When I said I "agreed" with the prior editor - I meant that I agreed that there was no good reason to add another Notable Alumnus. I presumed that the previous editor had the same motives - but, of course, I had no way to know what his/her motives were.

I think that these lists start out as interesting, but then get less and less useful as more and more "notable alumni" are added whose names are not household words.ADH 23:28, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

While the notability standard applicable to the alumni list in toto is certainly a viable discussion (and it is my contention that if James doesn't make it, half the people on the list don't either), there seems to be something fundamental being overlooked here: James is not a new addition to the list. She has been there since October of 2006 without significant objection. There have been the occasional removals by anonymous persons, but I have attributed this to the same misunderstanding that Xenophon described (or, truthfully, to his darker aspersions, but AGF and all that).

I actually have arguments in favor of James' notability on some anonymous editor's talk page, but I don't think that's really at issue here. The simple fact is that if we are going to begin requiring consensus prior to adding alumni, there should be no ex post facto application save if all are subject to the chop. Even if this were the case, the discussion would ipso facto have to occur prior to any removals. Accordingly, I revert. -Ewok 13:29, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I would say that while James obviously is prominent in the GLBT community, Wabash College is in fact a college for men. Once one decides to no longer exist as a man they relinquish their right to be listed among the alumni of Wabash College. This of course leaves out the fact that Wabash does not alter the name a diploma should that be requested for reason such as James'. So, if the College refuses to change the name on the diploma and refuses to acknowledge that a woman has graduated from Wabash, who are we as alumni (hopefully we are)to contradict that. I will say until I am blue in the fact, we educate men, not women; and in a world where people are constantly seeking to make Wabash educate both we would all do very well to perhaps back off a bit about putting good 'ol James on the list. From a concerned alumnus.

Whether one likes James or not is irrelevant. James is a Wabash alumn. James' placement among Wabash's notable alumni does not imply anyone's approval or disapproval of James' lifestyle, choices, or anything else about the person. The fact that James may no longer be considered to be a man is irrelevant here. The fact that Wabash is an all-male school, and whether that is good, bad or indifferent, are irrelevant here. The only argument I've seen which bore any relevance to James' inclusion had to do with notability. The "concerned alumnus" who fails to sign his post does not raise notability, nor any other criterion relevant to the discussion of James' inclusion in the list. Xenophon777 01:08, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

(1) If your argument is based on your personal beliefs as an alumnus of Wabash College, then it is not sufficiently objective to warrant serious consideration in this discussion. (2) One's controversial position in relation to an institute like Wabash College increases his/her notoriety. It does not discredit it. (3) If notoriety is addressed absolutely, then few to none would ever qualify for a notable persons list. If notoriety is addressed relatively, then Andrea James as a transgendered woman is extremely notable as a graduate of one of the few remaining all-male colleges in the United States. (4) Removing a notable alumnus from this list because of personal ideology, rather than an interest in providing the world community with a complete and accurate assessment of the subject (Wabash College), constitutes an act of vandalism, and should be prohibited. Lemmiwinks.rex 07:42, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

I sympathize with the concerned alumnus who raises questions about Mr. James being added to the list based upon the gender reassignment procedure. He is correct in his assertion that the diploma issued by Wabash College has not been changed to reflect the new name. So in that light, Andrea James is not an alumnus of Wabash College. Whatever his may have been (I'm not sure) is an alumus, and so if Mr/Ms. James is to be included in the list of notable alumi, the name used should reflect the name by which Wabash College, in their official documentation refer to him. From my point of view, there is no merit claim. James is undoubtedly a leader in the GLBT community, and so on that alone he merits inclusion. That inclusion however, should take the form of James' birth name (the name on his diploma) and not the name by which he goes today. This is after all a school related entry, and as such all names should be the "official" names used by the school. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.32.237.171 (talk) 11:10, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

So, UCLA should put "Lew Alcindor" on its wikipedia entry instead of "Kareem Abdul-Jabbar"? Southern Methodist University and the University of Texas at Austin should list Laura Bush as "Laura Welch"? Of course not. The question isn't about gender. It's about naming. Wikipedia names people by their most famous names. (See WP:NAME) Andrea James is her most famous name. According to wikipedia naming convention, which should be the ultimate arbiter here, the name should stay, and it should stay "Andrea James."Josh a brewer 20:19, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm bewildered and amused by the folks who would seemingly like to remove James, not because they think James isn't notable (I might respect that argument...maybe), but--apparently--because they are put off somehow by the idea of a GLBT (did I get the letters right?) from all-male Wabash. I find no merit in the suggestion that James were not an alumnus by reason of the gender change. Also, for those with access to Wabash's online alumni directory, you will find that Wabash itself lists Andrea James as an alumn... and under the name "Andrea James"... Xenophon777 (talk) 04:36, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I think the Loyal Opposition here has pretty much done all they can to prove that the incessant removals of James are not good-faith edits. Personal prejudices and "we have always been at war with Eastasia"-style history-scrubbing are not good-faith contributions to Wikipedia. Future removals of James without new and compelling arguments therefor will be treated as vandalism. Ewok (talk) 16:41, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Maybe I should leave well enough alone, because I'm following up about 3 months late on this discussion... but I have to jump in. Andrea James listed as a noteworthy alum of an all-male college:

• Do I agree with his/her personal decison to undergo the procedure? Nope.
• Is it against my personal beliefs and morals? Yep.
• Is it against the morals of the alumni? Most likely.
• Is it embarrassing to some or maybe many or maybe even all who value what Wabash teaches? Evidently.
• Is it noteworthy? You bet your last entry in Wikipedia it's freaking noteworthy!

Just because the "powers that be" do not like a person anymore does not mean they can travel back in time and keep someone from attending a college. And aside from that, there is an entry for Andrea James in Wikipedia with eleven references. True, not everyone who has a page in WP should be linked to their college, but this is a unique enough topic that we would be remiss not to include it.--Paul McDonald (talk) 21:11, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Notable Alumni - more

This list is getting rather long. I propose that people suggest notable alumni here on the talk page, and that someone else decide whether to add them or not.ADH 15:29, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

the usual practice is that if they have an article in WP they can be added.DGG (talk) 19:48, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, but the usual practice also when that list gets long to make a "list" page.--Paul McDonald (talk) 13:26, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

John Campbell and the Centennial Exhibition

The man's role in the Exhibition is mentioned and cited within the first ten lines of that article, a wikilink to which is provided in the very sentence marked with a fact tag. A cursory inspection of the CE article reveals this. Also, fact tags are made with {{}}, not [[]]. Ewok (talk) 16:33, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Traditions

Should there be a section on the traditions of Wabash?

Here are other college pages that have tradition sections:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wellesley_college#Traditions

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purdue_University#Traditions_and_legends

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yale#Miscellany_and_traditions

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DePauw_University#Traditions —Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.32.216.107 (talk) 20:04, 17 March 2009 (UTC) "Digglethemoid"

Nonsectarian

The article claims the founders were committed to Wabash being independent and non-sectarian from the beginning. However, Gronert (pp. 25-26) discusses at length how the charter was finally won by a compromise wherein the trustees agreed that the college would be independent and non-sectarian. That was not their original position!

161.32.122.201 (talk) 20:07, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

"Highly Ranked"

Wikipedia's policy holds that subjective information be withheld from the encyclopedia under Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. All factual based content on the encyclopedia must have Wikipedia:Verifiability. Are their sources directly stating this (there must be multiple sources to support this in this case) ^The World 05:00, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Not having the the amount of leisure time on hand in order to continue this admittedly trivial discussion or read every applicable Wiki definition, I shall remove myself in the hope that World can return to his studies or enjoy some TWR. I will, however, point out that the term"highly-ranked" ceased to be subjective when cited as such by US News. It ranked the schools. It is a third party. It is a fact that a third party has ranked Wabash. The reference to US News appears later in the article. A reader may question whether or not US News is being subjective, but the fact that it has ranked Wabash as a top tier school for many years now is, indeed, a fact that can be included. I can't even imagine getting in on the Ezra Pound or Notable Alumni arguments. One would think that more information, when factual, is to Ibe encouraged. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.10.247.93 (talk) 17:24, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

OUT OF ORDER: It seems I can't edit in order when using my phone. The term I have been arguing for the past several changes is "highly-RANKED" not "highly-SELECTIVE." I did, originally, use "highly-selective" but changed it on all of my other edits. Perhaps the best term to use would be "top-tier," which is what US news used.

Done. Is this better? ^The World 04:34, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Yeppers, as they say. Now get back to whatever studies Butler (or whoever) has assigned you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.10.247.93 (talk) 04:49, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

I appreciate your contributions and your humor definitely does lighten up the discussion. I completely agree that Wabash is a highly-selective institution (as a student, why wouldn't I?). But also as a Wikipedian, I am forced to point out issues that go against the established policy. The arguments of alums tband Ezra Pound do have merit and quoting them is perfectly fine, but their opinions do not represent a worldly view of the college unfortunately. US News is a reliable third party source that definitely can be (should be) used as a source. My issue with "highly-selective" comes down to the word highly. Highly can be interpreted in many ways. The source itself only says the school is selective. This should be added back in. Wabash Always Fights! ^The World 02:32, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Proposal: Student Culture Super Section

Currently the article has sections on Fraternities, Athletics, and Student Government. I propose that the article be reorganized to have one overarching section entitled "Student Culture". Below this would go the aforementioned sections and new sections relating to Student Culture. Perhaps, a Student Traditions section? --Digglethemoid (talk) 20:50, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Check out the college and university article guidelines. Specifically, they include a "Student life" section:

Student life — This section discusses specific traditions of the college/university, like students' union activities, a student newspaper, fraternities, regular activities, etc. The heading may be changed accordingly in regard to the importance of sports, clubs, traditions, students' unions, etc. Mention the sports team(s) of the institution and what is notable about them; larger institutions may require a separate section for their sports programs. This section also includes residence life, student clubs and activities, and related activities. Per Wikipedia's notability and external linking policies, do not include minor or common activities or provide links to homepages. As before, do not attempt to include an exhaustive list of all student activities or present the list of activities as embedded lists.

ElKevbo (talk) 03:28, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Digglethemoid (talk) 16:12, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Notable people

Hi. The Wabash College alumni and faculty list has gotten to the point that it needs to be split off into its own article. See the following colleges as examples. Thanks! Corkythehornetfan (talk) 19:10, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emporia_State_University#Notable_alumni
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Kansas#Notable_alumni_and_faculty

 Done by Wookiepedian. Corkythehornetfan^Talk 23:00, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Rhodes

For a relatively small school, 8 Rhodes scholars (http://www.wabash.edu/news/displaystory.cfm?news_ID=10418) seems a lot - even over a long time. Shouldn't this be mentioned in the article?Kdammers (talk) 02:26, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

I'd like to see a table showing the number of Rhodes, Fulbrights, etc. by relevant year. I will reach out to Susan Albrecht to see if she has that easily accessible. Rob Shook (talk) 10:19, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Wabash College/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

This article has some NPOV issues and flirts with (at times sloppily makes out with) academic boosterism. Also, some alumni are occasionally deleted without explanation. Poor Andrea James seems to bear the brunt of this. --Ewok 17:55, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Last edited at 17:57, 13 December 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 10:07, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Wabash College. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151109231238/http://www.naicu.edu/member_center/members.asp to http://www.naicu.edu/member_center/members.asp

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) 17:31, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Co-curricular activities

To be complete, a section should be added to include WDPD, Glee Club, and other co-curricular activities. Rob Shook (talk) 10:15, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

History: Presidents

With only 17 presidents in our history, a table of them would seem both consumable and in order. I envision a two-column table - any other ideas?

Presidents of Wabash College

Name	Date
Dr. Andrew T. Ford	1994-2007
Dr. Patrick E. White	2007-2013
Dr. Gregory D. Hess	2013-2020
Dr. Scott E. Feller	2020-present

Found the list at https://www.wabash.edu/aboutwabash/past

Rob Shook (talk) 10:46, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

What exactly are readers supposed to learn from this table? "College has had presidents" doesn't seem like a very compelling or informative fact to present to readers. ElKevbo (talk) 13:39, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Great question; some (as noted in the relatively "light" history section) are mentionable, and likely linkable, on their own merit. 70.113.37.216 (talk) 18:51, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Proposal: Annual National Rankings Worth Mentioning

It is standard practice that university and college articles display annual rankings bestowed by prominent third-party reports from verified sources like the Princeton Review and U.S. News and World Report. Currently, the status of the "National Rankings" topic on Wabash's page is anemic at best, and unimportant at worst. I propose the inclusion of rankings pertinent to the institution's notability, in regards to other peer institutions. As a paid advocate, I am refraining from making these edits directly. However, I will indeed advocate on the college's behalf by making this case below.

Rankings from independent third-party reports – services that rank colleges by their cultural aspects and intellectual efficacy for consumer benefit – ought to be included in this section, so long as they provide information relevant to those seeking knowledge of the institution's performance in recent years, as judged by these third-party independent reporters.

Below are my suggested inclusions:

1. The percentile rating of the college in view of all other colleges and universities, according to these third-party reporters' dimensions and methods for determining rank.

Ex: "The Princeton Review's 2021 College Guide to the Best 386 Colleges ranked Wabash College within the top 13th percentile of more than 2,500 U.S.-based four-year colleges."

2. Rankings amongst peer institutions by region or type, or other categories determined by these independent reporters that assist consumers in choosing from among like products and services from these institutions.

Ex: "Wabash was ranked joint 54th among National Liberal Arts Colleges in U.S. News & World Report's 2021 Best Colleges Rankings."

3. Rankings that have been bestowed for multiple years within the last ten years.

Ex: "Wabash College has also been ranked #1 for Best Alumni Network for two years running in 2019 and 2020."

4. Rankings at or above the "Top 25" of any of their published lists, as this provides cultural differentiation pertinent to viewers of this article. This may be best accomplished by a table, as there are often at least ten or more such rankings for this particular article.

Ex: "In addition, Wabash College was ranked #8 for Professors Get High Marks, #11 for Best College Theater, and #17 for Great Financial Aid"

I welcome further suggestions. -- Adam M. Phipps (talk) 21:22, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

I recommend bringing this up at WT:UNI to see if (a) anyone there would like to offer comments and suggestions and (b) there is any appetite on standardizing this project-wide (I recommend only discussing U.S. institutions; they probably have a much more complex ranking ecosystem and the rankings available for each country probably differ significantly even though a few are international in scope). ElKevbo (talk) 21:37, 9 December 2020 (UTC)