Talk:Stanford University

message: Hi there, I'm curious if any editors here have experience or insight into what the inclusion criteria should be for the student groups section. I'm most worried about the part that says, "other groups include..." which I understand to be a magnet for trivia. Obviously blue links are probably too high a standard. Is mention in newspapers sufficient?
Best, Liam M (talk) 17:41, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inclusion criteria for "Student groups" section 

message: An unregistered editor has begun an edit war to remove a section labeled "Jon Lonsdale" from the "Safety" subsection of the "Student Life" section. The removed material:
:In February 2015, Elise Clougherty filed a sexual assault and harassment lawsuit against venture capitalist Joe Lonsdale.Katie Benner for Bloomberg News. February 2, 2015 Benner on Tech: Parsing a Sexual Assault SuitEmily Bazelon for The New York Times. February 11, 2015 The Stanford Undergraduate and the Mentor Lonsdale and Clougherty entered into a relationship in the spring of 2012 when she was a junior and he was her mentor in a Stanford entrepreneurship course. By the spring of 2013 Clougherty had broken off the relationship and filed charges at Stanford that Lonsdale had broken the Stanford policy against consensual relationships between students and faculty and that he had sexually assaulted and harassed her, which resulted in Lonsdale being banned from Stanford for 10 years. Lonsdale challenged Stanford's finding that he had had sexually assaulted and harassed her and Stanford rescinded that finding and the campus ban in the fall of 2015.Emily Bazelon for The New York Times. November 4, 2015 The Lessons of Stanford’s Sex-Assault-Case Reversal Clougherty withdrew her suit that fall as well.
The editor who removed this material - twice - used the edit summary "removing section of individual only remotely affiliated with Stanford." That doesn't seem accurate to me given what the cited sources say and how prominently the reliable sources link this to the university.
Unless there is further discussion or a more legitimate reason is given for removing this information, I plan to restore it as the provided rationale doesn't hold water. ElKevbo (talk) 23:52, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the editor's stated reason was not valid as the activity described is quite clearly Stanford related. A more valid argument might be it is too minor (WP:PROPORTION).   It might be better framed as an example within a description of Stanford's policies and their enforcement.  This would probably fall under Administration and Organization in a new subsection on policies (Founding Grant, Fundamental Standard, Honor Code, Administrative Guide 1.7.2 Consensual Sexual or Romantic Relationships In the Workplace and Educational Setting, Policy on Campus Disruptions (and the firing of H._Bruce_Franklin though a fuller description of that might be in the History of Stanford University article)).  --Erp (talk) 05:09, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit warring to remove sourced information 

message: There's an AfD with an outcome to merge Stanford University School of Earth, Energy & Environmental Sciences to here, given that that now-closed department formed part of the Stanford Doerr School of Sustainability, might that not be a better target (given that it is more specific)? Any objections? Klbrain (talk) 14:44, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: It is true that Sustainability would be a better target for a redirect than the main article. On the other hand, nothing has been done to create the redirect that was called for in the AfD; the School of Earth etc. is still a full article of its own. What should probably be done is to move all the information from the "Earth" school article over to the "Sustainability" article, with a redirect. That will be a lot of work and I will consider it later. -- MelanieN (talk) 16:43, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alternative target for AfD merge 

message: For some reason, one Stanford school - the School of Engineering - redirects to this main article rather than having its own article. Here, it has a huge section in the Administration and Organization section, unlike the other schools which have their own articles. As a result, this main Stanford article article is clogged with masses of information about the School of Engineering, its history, every dean it’s ever had, right down to the names of faculty and awards they got. No way does this belong in the main article; it should be an article of its own like all the other departments. There is more than enough material for an article. I intend to split it out into Stanford School of Engineering. By my count, that would remove 16,000 bytes from this 213,000 byte article. I will wait a few days in case someone here objects. 
There is also a much shorter section here, also in the Administration and Organization section, about the Graduate School of Education. IMO it doesn't belong here. I need opinions about whether to try to split that off into an article and expand it. All the other schools have their own, well developed articles, but the section here would need a lot of expansion to become an article. MelanieN (talk) 17:01, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, now I see why this is here: it's because of a Merge result at an AfD last August: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stanford University School of Engineering. Someone did go ahead and merge the entire School of Engineering article into the main Stanford article. It turns out there were several other "school of" Stanford articles that were AfD'ed at the same time, also with the result "merge to Stanford", except that nobody carried out those merges and they are still freestanding articles. Before I put this together I noticed that the other articles had a tag at the top saying they were supposed to be merged, and I took the bold step of removing the tag. You don’t see this kind of bloat at the articles of comparable universities such as Harvard (ten academic faculties, each with its own article) or Yale (fourteen constituent schools, each with its own article). I don’t know what people were thinking at that AfD, but I am going to overrule it and return the School of Engineering to its own page. -- MelanieN (talk) 20:36, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I have moved it back to its own article. Turned out it amounted to 31,000 bytes! Big improvement to this article. I still need to figure out how to handle the School of Education. -- MelanieN (talk) 21:19, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

text: I have removed the School of Education from this article, setting it up as a freestanding article and expanding it. Now the clutter is gone and each of the schools has their own article - as is the case with comparable universities like UC Berkeley, Harvard, Yale, etc. MelanieN (talk) 21:16, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The School of Engineering material in this article 

message: The article says that programs were abolished in 2020 there, yet I still see Cantonese classes offered on the course catalog https://language.stanford.edu/programs-languages/chinese/cantonese and press coverage about how Cantonese classes are offered and fulfilling the language requirement https://stanforddaily.com/2022/10/12/cantonese-course-now-fulfills-undergraduate-language-requirement/. Could someone look into this? 2600:1700:368C:110:F92C:B630:24A7:ECC5 (talk) 16:04, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Good catch. Stanford got some push back and had enough interested students to justify offering Cantonese.  I've removed the item though I do think the section on teaching and learning may need to be expanded. Erp (talk) 03:54, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cantonese programs at Stanford 

message: I recently created a draft for the Stanford Internet Observatory. Any help would be appreciated. Thriley (talk) 22:12, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Draft:Stanford Internet Observatory]]