Talk:University of Southern California/Archive 1

message: Half done fundraising programs at several Ivy calibur schools setting their aims at over 4 billion have already surpassed this mark.
:Can you cite it?  There's no such evidence available.  Columbia and Stanford have announced the start of $4+ billion drives, but they have not concluded.  There appears to be a lack of understanding on what constitutes a funding drive.  Also, please read the headers of talk pages and consult the introduction to how to use Wikipedia for further help. --Bobak 00:24, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I stand corrected. Several of the four billion schools, of which there appear to be four or five now, are just getting moving. 
To the anonymous editor of the inital comment, please keep comments germane to improving the article.  This is not a forum for discussion of issues relating to the relative merits of fundraising ammountsTrojan traveler 00:30, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: 2.9 Billion is pittance for fundraising

message: In the academics section....  there is a line which says 
:In 2005 US World News ranked USC number 6 university in the US.
What is that supposed to mean? its still Aug 2004 in this part of the world. At the least the sentence need rephrasing.Spundun 22:44, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ranking 

message: Okay, so now we've got these three competing sentences about USC and the community, all of which are POV and not supported by fact:
The neighborhoods surrounding the campus are among the most culturally vibrant and historically significant in the city.
:There's no way to define what is the most culturally vibrant anything in a city, and historically, the Thomas Jefferson / West Adams / Harvard Heights area are not particularly notable in LA history, as far as I know, aside from history related directly to the university. If anyone has any counterevidence, please post. 
Filled with neighbors, students, faculty, parents, and professionals who care about each other and their neighborhood, this culturally diverse, living laboratory of community collaboration has become the model for urban revitalization.
: I'd like justification that USC's methods have been widely adopted ("modeled") by other urban revitalization programs. Furthermore, it is well established that while USC and its community are not at war with one another, there is significant strain between them. For example, the debate over whether USC should attract higher priced stores to the University Village shopping center which would appeal to students, but be inaccessable to residents. Also, the debate over the University's acquisition of land for new buildings and student housing. Finally, I'd love to see evidence that parents of university students live in the area directly around USC.
Bordered by black ghettoes and plagued by safety concerns, USC has struggled in recent years to attract and retain quality students.
:Statistically, the neighborhoods around USC are 60-90% Latino, not black (Source: Allen, James P. and Eugene Turner. Changing Faces, Changing Places: Mapping Southern Californians. Dept of Geographic Studies: CSU Northridge, 2002.) Secondly, while crime is a problem, there should be a better and more accurate NPOV way of saying it than "plagued by safety concerns". (For crime stats, see: ). Finally, the 'quality' of students, as measured by incoming SAT and GPA, has been increasing recently, as is noted accurately elsewhere in the article.
For the time being I've removed all three passages, but I have left the bit about the community service work, which can be substatiated (though I'd again like a more accurate description of crime problems than "crime-plagued"). What can we say about the USC community and surrounding neighborhoods that doesn't portray it as a hellhole ghetto (which it isn't) and doesn't portray it as a multi-ethnic utopia (which it isn't)? --- Tyler 16:37, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: USC and Community POV Part II

message: The USC mascot is Tommy Trojan, NOT Traveler.  Check out  and look at the very bottom for proof.
:The bottom of this page says:
::Tommy Trojan: USC's mascot for athletics and the landmark statue in the center of campus.
::Traveler, the horse: USC's mascot for athletics ridden by Tommy Trojan.
:They're both listed as the mascot on this page. However, most other official university pages make reference only to Traveler. See:     etc. Search Google with the terms site:usc.edu mascot for more. The references to Tommy Trojan as mascot are almost exclusively related to the guy in the costume who was instituted just recently and only appears at basketball games.
:Basically, Traveler is the Mascot, and Trojans are the team name. This is a similar situation to Auburn University which has a War Eagle as a mascot and Tigers as the team name. "Tommy Trojan" is supposed to be the embodiment of the ideal USC student athlete, but he is not the mascot recognized by the university administration. -- Tyler 20:47, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mascot 

message: I am well aware that "Southern Cal" is a name that is discouraged by both the university and its students - see the note at the bottom of USC Trojans Football (as well as my efforts to stop that page from being moved to "Southern Cal Trojans Football"). However, despite the discouragement, people  (including media) continue to use the name. You can verify this with a quick google search. I quote from Wikipedia:Naming dispute:
:Bear in mind that Wikipedia is descriptive, not prescriptive. We cannot declare what a name should be, only what it is. 
Thus, as long as the name is somewhat commonly used, it should be noted. If you'd like you can note that it is contentious/discouraged if you can figure out a way to do that without interrupting the article too much, but the name itself should stay. Note however, that since it is a controversial name and not the name preferred by the university, it should not be used as the primary name used for USC in the title or content of any article. -- Tyler 21:41, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with keeping at the top, especially when so many sports articles use the term, but I've gone ahead and added a footnote to its usage and (despite?) the University's position (with reference, of course ;-) ).  --Bobak 16:08, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Southern Cal" 

message: I have a complaint to make.  I've submitted several relevant links for UCI students. One, being UCI Housing and the other Off-Campus Housing (presently removed) which points to a community website that is completely free and has been mentioned by CSUF's newspaper as a great resource for students.  Furthermore, I have read your spam page on the guidelines of posting links, and I feel that due to the fact that my link points to relevant information and has non-promotional language, I should be allowed to post my link. Many people are thankful that I have created iHomeConnect as way of helping people find housing. When people like you remove quality links like mine, you are restricting the exchange of information and taking the power out of the hands of the people and giving more power to corporate entities. Please stop removing my link, or I will seek legal action against those who continue to deprive Wikipedia users of relevant information by removing/blocking my contributions.
:UCI? CSUF? Anyway, stop adding commercial links and making legal threats. -Willmcw 03:12, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: LOL, especially since there's no legal claim to be made.  Bobak 18:49, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  relevant link under external links 

message: While the section on the Victory Bell is sourced by the USC athletics site, it is incorrect. The Victory Bell is not seen only twice a year. In fact, the Trojan Knights, who are the traditional guardians of the Victory Bell while it is in USC's posession, bring it to every home football game, as well as to other events, like freshman orientation. The six members of SigEp who originally stole the bell were also members of the Trojan Knights. IndustrialStrength 05:57, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Victory Bell 

message: The "Criticisms of the Administration" section keeps getting removed without explanation. That is not the Wikipedia way of dealing with things. If there are problems with the material then let's identify and fix them. -Will Beback 20:15, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticisms of the Administration 

message: I was the original poster of the "Criticisms" section and I am trying to understand the need to cite every single place indicated here when most of the article has NO cites at all.  The first sentence speaks in general terms saying "some" not "all" or "most" and then is supported by the various cites throughout the piece.  Most of the stated criticisms furthermore can be easily found with a not so careful reading of the coverage of these issues in the Daily Trojan and the Los Angeles Times.  No other section is asked to live up to this scrutiny especially the "that the University remained unscathed"/Riots section that has absolutely no verification.
I'd also like to repost my original response from above:
Response:
First of all the accusation that mentioning criticisms is somehow indicative of a "a left political agenda" is balderdash. Critics of the University policy (not the University itself, its mission, its positive roles, etc.) exist accross the political spectrum and often critics are critical because they care deeply about the institution and want to see it do well (i.e. "Dissent is the highest form of patriotism."). Furthermore, no institution can be completely "politically neutral." We exist in a world where politics is part of the daily dealings of any institution. We would be highly naive to say that an organization as large as USC is not involved in "politics" of any kind. The article as it stood before mentioned both positive and negative community, student, etc. reaction. Now it only mentions the positive. Furthermore, the Criticism of the Adminstration section was the best documented aspect of the entire article, complete with footnotes, etc., not like the "that University remained unscathed" section which is undocumented and loaded with biased language.
Furthermore, SCALE, one of the groups critical of some of the Administration's actions, is not a "Unsanctioned" organtion but is a fully sanctioned student organization. Check your facts before censoring.
:Balderdash?  You haven't disproven my own comments above when I have demonstrated I was a participant in SCALE and the minor quibbling they did.  Stop trying to gain a platform for these minor, minor incidents on USC's article.  If any of these arguments had amounted to a major footnote in USC history, then yes include them --but this attempt to shoehorn a minority opinion into a larger article to gain notability is ridiculous.  I'm sorry: One three-year-old LAT article and a smattering a Daily Trojan articles a major controversy does not make. --Bobak 16:24, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, and your comment on the statement "'that University remained unscathed' is undocumented" is misinformed: it was mentioned as part of Time magazine's citation for why they named USC the school of the year in 2000.  --Bobak 16:26, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

text: I concur with Sixtrojans that citations are necessary to backup those weasel words.  See my positions on why citation is necessary at Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources. --Coolcaesar 03:22, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticisms--excessive citation unnecessary 

message: I was thinking that it would be good if someone did a set of links like the University of California, Berkeley did at the bottom of that page were there are links to all of the other relative articles for the University.  I would have done this already, but am not sure how and do not want to mess up the page.  
Also, pictures are needed of the Galen Center, P.E. Building, Libraries, perhaps Parkside dorms, and the Alumni house.
Thanks for the input (remember to sign comments with the ~~~~), I think that's a good idea, but I'm not sure how to do the template either.  The University of Minnesota also has one, but not as nicely categorized as Cal (which I think would be better for a 'SC template). This comment, by User:Bobak at 2006-06-08 15:12 and 15:16 (UTC) was rendered unsigned as a result of a technical difficulty. -Splash - tk 15:32, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add links to other pages 

message: There has been a lot of vandalism on the site recently.  
Is there a way to stop it??
---Wd40gdw 23:06, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: comparatively speaking, the vandal attacks on the USC page have been tame and easy to revert.  The best thing to do is to keep an eye on the page (add it to your watchlist) and keep an eye on any changes using the history tab (very useful).  If something's done that's not right, revert.  Wikipedia's strength is its weakness (anyone can edit).  However, if people keep an eye on a few articles, they can protect them from anything major sticking around. --Bobak 00:03, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They've actually been pretty bad this afternoon.  If it keeps going I might suggest a semi-protect (no anons or new users would be able to edit).  --Bobak 00:25, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  grafitti 

message: I noticed someone tried to change the "Caucasian" and "Asian" in the demographic breakdown to "White American" and "Asian American" respectively (it was reverted by another user).  I agree with the revert because the names don't really work in describing the student body of a large university.  Why?  Simple: USC has an international student body that hovers upwards of 10%.  USC gets so many students from the Asia-side of the Pacific Rim that it maintains offices in Hong Kong, Taipei, Jakarta and Tokyo.  USC also has the largest number of UK international students of any US university (at least as of 3 years ago)... thus assuming that everyone in the demographic breakdown in American isn't nearly accurate. --Bobak 16:24, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Demographic name changes 

message: As I look at this page, I feel that is it coming along very well.  What do we think still needs to be added.  As I have mentioned before there are a few things, but they are things that I am not sure how or able to do:
*Add more pictures to break up the text.
*Do a "Summary Box" Like Cal has done.
What else could or should be worked on?
--Wd40gdw 07:12, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I just found out about the new George Tirebiter statue, that would make a nice photo! --Bobak 18:24, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Be bold ;-) (you can always note it in the edit history, and if people challenge, link to a source) --Bobak 01:46, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What needs to still be added or changed?