Talk:Wesleyan University/Archive 1

message: There is a good deal of special pleading in the article or, if you prefer, uncited crap. Let me give what I think is one of the best examples:
Because of the preponderance of female students preparing for college in that period, some of Wesleyan's alumni believed that opening the door to coeducation would eventually result in the student body becoming entirely female. Given that concern, Wesleyan ceased to admit women, and from 1912 to 1970 Wesleyan operated again as an all-male college.
And of course they didn't know how to impose a quota. Except to keep Jews out.
This is arrant nonsense. It is possible that in 1912 someone gave this absurd rationale (although with no citation it is impossible to verify that), but there was a very important transition in the nature of college in the U.S. at about this time, in that a college education became a key to entree into the American elite (previously, you usually had to either be born into it or make a fortune; an education as such didn't open many doors). Wesleyan was one of several colleges and universities that around this time became exclusively white and male. In Wesleyan's case, there was an additional reason for this: the school was aspiring more to be a "small Ivy" and less a Methodist school, and the Ivies were, at this time, not coeducational. Having women on campus made the school seem "not serious".
I don't have sources handy right now; I've certainly heard David Potts talk about this, and I imagine he's written about it; years ago the alumni magazine did some very good pieces on the terrible treatment of female Wesleyan students by their male counterparts in the period before the school dropped co-education. This shouldn't be terribly hard for someone to turn into something solid.
Again: I'm a Wes alum. I like the place. But a good encyclopedia article about a school should be an accurate warts-and-all portrayal, not a whitewash. - Jmabel | Talk 07:46, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: For an extreme example of how useless some of these citations are: I went to look up the citation for "Wesleyan's approach to education is individualistic and academically rigorous". It's labeled "Wesleyan University" and it leads to a "404 not found" on the Wesleyan site. So the citation for the school being academically rigorous is its own website, and by the way the page saying this isn't even there, nor is its name given so that there is any chance of finding where it might have been moved to. - Jmabel | Talk 08:05, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Special pleading 

message: Since a note was left a while ago asking for comment if the disambiguation hatnote is changed (referring to what is now an archived conversation), I thought I'd just leave a note with my reason for the change. The list of Wesleyan higher education institutions has been moved from Wesleyan to Wesleyan University (disambiguation). I am updating the hatnote while still keeping with the spirit of the original hatnote. -Mabeenot (talk) 17:21, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambiguation notice 

message: Has anyone noticed or does anyone care that Drawsome has unilaterally applied and will continue to apply the Drawsome "rules" to persons Drawsome deems not to be notable. 69.121.23.234 (talk) 23:18, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of Notables 

message: The article states, "there are many local religious groups in Middletown, including the only Hindu temple in New England," citing this site.  While this might have been true ten years ago, when the article was published (and I doubt it was true even then), it is most definitely not true anymore, as you can see from this list--List of Hindu temples in the United States. Should this line just be deleted?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.218.140.62 (talk) 21:16, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, I vote for deleting it.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.182.27.125 (talk) 05:33, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religious Life edit 

message: It would be really nice if someone who is physically there would take some photos, upload images to the Commons, and flesh out :Commons:Category:Wesleyan University. :Commons:Category:Middletown, Connecticut is also a bit thin. - Jmabel | Talk 17:39, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There are some nice photos already taken (not by me) on Flickr, here http://www.flickr.com/photos/brushbin/sets/72157605124795655/ Don't know where you want to use them (though I agree that more photos would be nice), but they're there for the taking. -76.182.27.125 (I'm on another internet line, but it's me)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.1.20.230 (talk) 02:13, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Just kidding, those aren't available for us to use. But I commented on one of the photos and asked for permission, so we'll see. -76.182.27.125 (talk) 23:51, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  The photographer has uploaded some of the photos to the Commons, and will add more in the future. Yay. He says we are free to edit their descriptions. -76.182.27.125 (talk) 04:15, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  More images for Commons? 

message: Found this online, can we add it somewhere? 
Apparently only nine universities have black graduation rates above 90%, and Wesleyan (along with Williams, Amherst, and Wellesley) is one of only four LACs that can boast this. Seems like a pretty significant yet rarely-mentioned statistic.
http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=512166
Don't know where to put it but it seems significant enough to be on here somewhere... If there are no responses I'll stick it somewhere myself -76.182.27.125 (talk) 04:11, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Does seem worth getting in there somewhere, but I have no concrete suggestion. So far this is pretty week on history; it would make a reasonable coda to talking about Wesleyan starting actively to seek Black students in the 1960s (and some of the initial difficulties of that process), but that isn't even mentioned yet. - Jmabel | Talk 04:37, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  I see. History is in a separate article, and that matter is at least mentioned there. Perhaps this would better be taken up in that article, where it could have that context? - Jmabel | Talk 04:39, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Couldn't find any reference to Black students in the History section, so I worked it into the Rankings section. Used the opportunity to mention women at Wesleyan too. Also reorganized that whole section so we didn't have just one solid block of text mentioning various rankings. -76.182.27.125 (talk) 19:00, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Black Graduation Rate 

message: I moved the too long and too detailed history section to its own page. I then edited the main article with a link to the new 'Wesleyan University history' section, and severely cut back the history section in the article. 
Whether any of you think this is an appropriate way to deal with the history section, I did not expect user Jeff G. to a) revert the change, and b) send me a message accusing me of vandalism. This was not vandalism. Whether any one user would agree with it or not, user Jeff G. is wrong to cavalierly attack other users and throw around accusations. 
This is not acceptable behavior.Zog the Marvelous (talk) 02:13, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not at all sure this is a good way to handle this. The history doesn't seem particularly disproportionate to the rest of the article or to other articles on similar institutions. The portion of the history maintained seems rather arbitrary. And if we are going to do this, the factored-out article should presumably be titled History of Wesleyan University not Wesleyan University history. - Jmabel | Talk 04:42, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  History section 

message: If anyone is interested in working on adding more about the history of athletics at Wesleyan, there is a good article online: Suzy Taraba, Lavender and Ministers, Wesleyan magazine, Issue III 2008, p. 20-26. Looks mostly very well researched, though the claim to the first forward pass in American football seems dubious (there seems to have been one about a month earlier. Admittedly, the claim is specifically to the first "completed overhand spiral forward pass", and I have no idea if the earlier one spiralled. - Jmabel | Talk 22:07, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Athletics 

message: Hey.  I would greatly appreciate it if you could put mgmt as prominant figures that attended Wesleyan.  Thx. Calypsos (talk) 08:44, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Mentioned at Wesleyan University people#Music. - Jmabel | Talk 22:11, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: MGMT

message: This edit may be partly a correction, but it is clearly a mess: no summary, no new source, different numbers, and (unless things have changed greatly since I was college age and they've added a third SAT) combined SAT scores of 2100 are impossible. - Jmabel | Talk 02:17, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The SAT now includes a writing section scored out of 800 as well as the math and verbal sections, so the maximum score is 2400. I believe this change went into effect in 2004, so it's far enough out to be ingrained as "the way it always was" for some younger editors and yet recent enough to baffle editors like myself who operated under the "1600" system. Madcoverboy (talk) 05:26, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  SAT scores, etc. 

message: Pgagnon999 is only stalking this page in an attempt to start a flamewar. I encourage all posters to use caution.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.133.124.199 (talk) 23:44, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  User Pgagnon999 

message: Consider adding an image of the CFA complex.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.192.83.48 (talk) 18:25, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Things to add 

message: Probably should mention former fraternities, such as Delta Tau Delta and Chi Psi (there are definitely others, these two leap to mind). 
Also, the current wording could be read as implying that Black and Latino fraternities aren't really fraternities; I'm not sure exactly how it should be reworded, but it should be. - Jmabel | Talk 00:41, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not against Alpha Delta Phi in any way, but could someone clarify how it is referenced as a "fraternity" under secret societies and fraternities of Wesleyan when it is considered co-ed?  I thought "fraternity" was usually understood to mean a social organization composed only of men. bigbplaya | Talk 3:25, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Historically, yes. They had an enormous fight with their national over this. The national refused to recognize the female officers: at one point, as far as the national was concerned, the "senior" officer of the chapter was the vice president, because the president was female. I don't have sources on this offhand. I attended Wesleyan in the 1970s, when this was a raging conflict. I'm sure that written archives exist that can be cited, but I live on the West Coast now. Someone who is on or near the campus could probably find the materials to do some research on this. - Jmabel | Talk 23:48, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Jmabel, while it's true that the issue of co-education of the Middletown chapter of Alpha Delta Phi went back into the 70s, there wasn't an official break until 1992, when the Alpha Delta Phi was split into the Society (which now allows co-ed chapters) and the much larger Fraternity (which only allows male chapters).  You can read more about this on the Alpha Delta Phi wikipedia page.  For now, I'm going to include a slight edit that suggests the current incarnation at Wesleyan is part of the Society, and it was formally a fraternity.  MadJoy (talk) 09:49, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fraternities 

message: Talk page archived here Talk:Wesleyan University/Archive 1. --Pgagnon999 (talk) 02:49, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Archived

message: These should be removed, they were added by Pgagnon999, a problem editor who has been trolling in wikipedia, the tags are placed there in the appearance of bad faith.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.247.3.210 (talk) 18:02, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Verifiability and Length tags

message: Removed patent nonsense:
:"Wesleyan is an elite college, being one of the handful that rejects far more applicants than apply."
Surely a unique achievement, if true. Jmabel 08:34, 22 Dec 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Admission rates

message: Kudos to whomever spent the time collecting the list of famous Wesleyan alumni.  I tried to sort them by field.  One of you (I am not a Wes alumnus and therefore leave you to judge) needs to do some editing, however:
# First of all, you either need to pare down the list or remove the adjective "famous," because an exhibited photographer, say, is not per se famous.  The author of a book is not per se famous.  Becoming a federal judge does not imply fame.
# Words/phrases like "renowned," "celebrated," "award-winning" (even if you cite the award) and "world's leading authority" do not belong (IMO).
# Instead of giving long descriptions of people (and if they're famous, why would you need to?), it would be good to create an article about them, even a stub, and put the information there.  Be sure to create a link back to Wes.
-Rjyanco 02:36, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: "Famous" alumni

message: Hi Rnanim, I'm removing your addition of Ohio Wesleyan because this article is about Wesleyan University. Wesleyan shares a common Methodist heritage with all the twenty-odd other "Wesleyans," and Ohio doesn't get any special status. It also really isn't relevent to this article whether Ohio Wesleyan is a selective institution, as this is about Wesleyan University only.
I've reverted, but don't want to start an edit war, so if you feel like changing it back, please say why in this talk page.
--Asbestos 20:14, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Whether to mention Ohio Wesleyan

message: Hi all, I've revamped the article, trying to make it more like other Wikipedia university articles. The sections are all still under construction, so sections that seem too short probably are indeed too short, but will be expanded.
I'll be expanding in the next few days, but feel free to add of your own violition, and, of course, to edit and correct mecilessly.
--Asbestos 05:02, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Look 

message: Wesleyan University in Philippines also has the name "Wesleyan University. Following the principle of least-surprise, we should make it clear whether it is the one in CT and or Philippines.
-John
Asbestos,
Please read the disclaimer for protected pages. It is not an endorsement of the current page. Please respect current arbitration policies. The use of 'Wesleyan University' is a legitemate ground for confusion and if you disagree, I'd be happy to refer it to arbitration. In fact, I will place a request in a few minutes because you seem to be involved in other disputes as well which you seem to "resolve" in your favor. Please feel free to post any comments on this page. 
-John
Dear "John",
thankfully others have stepped in to revert the damage you caused with your vandalisms, and I reverted the talk on this page which you kept deleting.
Since your IP cleary identifies you as User:Rananim, I'm going to ask that you cease this absurd change of tactics. Stop signing in as John69, stop not-signing in, and stop vandalizing these pages. If you had a real point to make, you would have posted it here and waited for a response before vandalizing this page. You didn't, though, and it took a couple of other users a bit of time to revert the havoc you wrecked (What on earth was with the WesUniversity page anyway???).
I'll add a disambig notice at the top of this article. The principle of least surprise states that one should go to the page they were expecting to go to first. As no-one had ever heard of this other Wesleyan until now, it is clear that WU would be the page 99.9% of visiters would expect to go to. --Asbestos 02:32, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see Wikipedia:Disambiguation and Wikipedia:Consensus. Please achieve consensus on any changes involving a lot of links before making the changes. - Nunh-huh 02:43, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

text: In general, if two things with identical names exist, and one is overwhelmingly the more common reference, the article of the overwhelmingly more notable thing will exist at that article name, with a disambiguation line at the top. Thus "Paris" in France is at Paris despite the fact that there may be a "Paris, Iowa". The situation here is, I think, analogous. That's certainly the reason it was set up this way in the first place. - Nunh-huh 02:47, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Disambig Page 

message: I do not want to unprotect and edit, so maybe someone could add Charles Olson to the literature alumni sometime. He's far more important a figure than many, if not all, of those already listed. Filiocht 12:22, Nov 8, 2004 (UTC)
:Will do, once this page is unprotected. Thanks! --Asbestos 13:06, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Alumni

message: I am glad that Wikipedia is a forum for freedom of speech and I am impressed with the 
depth and accuracy of articles contributed by everyone.  As a relatively new contributor,
I was surprised and offended that someone had added a graphic photo as a form of protest for some reason yesterday (11-8-04) to the Wesleyan U. page.  I suppose that people do get into disagreements and certainly in this free country of ours everyone has a right to make a statement to that end.  But come on y'all, let's keep Wikipedia G-Rated, or at least PG-rated and use this wonderful resource to benefit us all.  By the way, even Newsweek Magazine did a full page article on the success of Wikipedia in last week's issue (Cover Story was on Flu Shots)--check it out, very positive.  Anyway, I couldn't for the life of me figure out how to report the bad taste to the editors et al let alone delete it myself; so instead I simply removed the link from the Jeanne Crain article, which I've added to at length and monitor regularly(I knew her and attended her funeral with her family last December).  I was very happy to see that today (11-9-04) the link was restored to the now cleaned up page. Wikipedia Rocks!  All the best to everyone and thanks for the opportunity to share.
Sincerely, Bill Keane aka Keane4
:Huh. I had the image on my watchlist (since I uploaded the original), and it didn't flag any changes yesterday. Is there no way of seeing if someone comes in and vandalizes a picture?There is also nothing mentioned on the image's history. Is there no way of finding out who vandalized it?
:--Asbestos 18:53, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I reverted it and deleted the old revision, which was uploaded by User:ShiningMoon (doubtless a sockpuppet of some sort). Special:Contributions/ShiningMoon shows no contribs because his only edit - uploading the picture - has been deleted. — Dan | Talk 19:38, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thank you for removing the offensive picture and replacing shield . . . 

message: The Princeton Review doesn't give its Admissions Selectivity Rating out of 100. Its on a scale of 60 to 99. When this page is "de-protected" please amend it accordingly. (unsigned)
: When the page was unprotected, I added this. Someone else - a brand new editor - changed 99 to 100. Since I was just making this edit on someone else's behalf and don't know much about the Admissions Selectivity Ratings myself, I am not reverting, but if someone knows for sure, go for it. Citation would be especially welcome, since it seems this is disputed. -- Jmabel | Talk 08:03, Nov 17, 2004 (UTC)
::The original request was correct - i's from 60-99. You can see info about the PR selectivity rating here. -- Asbestos 09:57, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Admissions selectivity rating 

message: The advantage of the option two is not only is it more standard, it does not have to be changed every time someone comes up with a new university and demands that a link is added to the top of this page. Philip Baird Shearer 22:07, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: "34% of the class of 2009 identified themselves as students of color." Remarkable, if true, and an enormous rise from recent years (the previous class was 22%). Does someone have a citation for this? -- Jmabel | Talk 01:30, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Students of color 

message: I added a section on this, but it's very incomplete. I focused on the years when I was there and participated in these activities (c. 1992) and included a couple links to archived Hermes articles. I hope people will add to this and fill in other periods, including when the policy was first adopted and other times when it has been questioned. Sigrid 22:53, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need-Blind Admissions 

message: The article stated The university is also known for its robust film studies department. "Robust" is silly and inappropriate -- and POV -- in this usage. "Ambitious" perhaps. "Extensive" perhaps. But not "robust." David Hoag 19:34, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: "Robust" film studies?

message: Why does this article sound like it was written by the admissions office? hmm, i wonder.  So snooty and pretentious, i can't believe i went there. —This unsigned comment was added by 24.154.21.6 (talk • contribs) 16 March 2006.
: Pretty typical of articles about colleges and universities, as far as I can tell. But if you have suggestions: this is a wiki. Have at it. - Jmabel | Talk 05:33, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Glowing bias

message: I agree with whoever pointed that this wiki page sounds like an admissions statement, particularly with the name-dropping of Oxford and Harvard University - however, more importantly, the whole content of this wiki page does not reflect the character of Wesleyan at all. For instance, it talks about the CSS/Film/Astronomy program, when in fact Wesleyan's also known particularly for its East Asian Studies, Economics, life science programs and summer research (which many of Wesleyan's NESCAC peers mention in their wiki pages). Furthermore, it does not explain Wesleyan very well particularly to prospective students, as it merely consists of a laundry list of all of the academic majors at the school. It makes no mention of the recent campus constructions, Wesleyan's endowment initiatives, academic advising system (honors thesis, gen-eds, three broad concentrations), atheletics, presence of international students, and major student groups and campus life. For the absence of all of these signifcant things, this wiki makes Wesleyan come off like an generic mainstream liberal arts college for New England middle-upperclass who are more liberally inclined which is simply not a true reflection at all.
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 129.133.139.92 (talk • contribs) 25 April 2006.
:Then feel free to edit it yourself.  It's a wiki, after all, that's what it's for.  Squigish 21:13, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Admissions-Talk 

message: Would someone who is currently around Wesleyan and has a digital camera please take some photos, upload them, and add them to the article? Thanks in advance. - Jmabel | Talk 06:02, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need photos 

message: Unfortunately, an overzealous booster of Ohio Wesleyan University has commandeered many foreign language Wesleyan University pages, leaving no room for pages about this school. One can only speculate as to the motive. Regardless, if anyone knows how to rectify the problem, (in the various languages,) please do so. Unfortunately, I only speak two languages, and Wesleyan U. already has pages in those languages. 24.2.244.245 05:34, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Foreign Language Pages

message: So far I've found
* es:Universidad de Wesleyan
* ro:Universitatea Wesleyan
* da:Wesleyan-universitetet
* fr:Université de Wesleyan
* id:Universitas Wesleyan
* is:Wesleyan-háskóli
* tr:Wesleyan Üniversitesi
* af:Universiteit van Wesleyan
* nl:Universiteit van Wesleyan
* sv:Wesleyan
* fi:Wesleyanin yliopisto
None of these should be discussing OWU. — Asbestos | Talk  (RFC) 15:19, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Number of pages 

message: "In 2007, it was ranked 10th among the top liberal arts colleges in the country by US News." US News may call this the 2007 rankings—I don't know—but clearly this did not happen "in 2007". Also, the claim "Thirty-two percent of the class of 2010 identified themselves as students of color" is referenced to a PDF about the Class of 2009. - Jmabel | Talk 02:42, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crystal balls 

message: The anonymously added Google Earth Campus Map leads to something downloadable, of a file type I'm unfamiliar with. I personally am not willing to download it to my machine to make sure it's OK. Does someone else feel like being the guinea pig? And what exactly is the file type? - Jmabel | Talk 05:05, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Google map 

message: The paragraph on CSS is now very confusing. A parethetical phrase sits there very oddly: it makes no grammatical sense. - Jmabel | Talk 07:58, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  CSS redux 

message: This was recently cut; it may have been a bit overwritten, but something about this belongs in the article: - Jmabel | Talk 02:36, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Does Wesleyan have any sororities? It didn't in the 1970s. Wesleyan fraternities circa 1970 were among the first to allow women as fraternity members; Wesleyan's Alpha Delt chapter was nearly kicked out of its national over this. In the mid-1970s, I believe, DKE, Chi Psi, and Psi U were the only all-male fraternities; I'm not sure offhand whether DTD had women living there, but they were members. Now that would be worth mentioning, and is entirely omitted. Offhand, though, I don't have anything citable, and I have no idea of the current state of this. I know there has been some back-and-forth. Someone on the campus, with access to sources such as back issues of the Argus might want to take this on. - Jmabel | Talk 23:57, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There are a couple of sororities at Wesleyan, but they lack housing of their own. Delta Kappa Epsilon, Beta Theta Psi and Psi Upsilon are all at least nominally co-ed right now, in addition to Alpha Delt and Eclectic, which are actually co-ed.Francisx 03:32, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

text:  What about Chi Psi? And are the sororities all-female? Anyway, sounds like you know your way around this; do you have anything citable? And, if so, can you write something on this? - Jmabel | Talk 07:32, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Chi Psi lost its charter in 2000 or so and no longer exists (the building is now a Freshman dorm). There are about a half dozen historically black and hispanic fraternities and sororites on campus that do receive university support, although I'm not familiar with the details. I believe some of those are single sex although they lack any housing of their own. In addition there are a number of single-sex sororities that (1) lack University recognition and (2) lack permanent on or off-campus housing.--Francisx 00:28, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Seems that all of this deserves a couple of paragraphs if someone can find something citable. I'd be interested to know whether Chi Psi lost their charter from their own national or from the University; also, whether refusal to go co-ed figured in that. They were notoriously misogynist in my day (early 1970s), known on campus as the "animal frat" before the film Animal House came out. - Jmabel | Talk 08:39, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you want to put somethign together, be my guest. The reasons for Chi Psi's demise are long and boring. Apparently at some point in the 1970s, the fraternity went through a cash crisis, and sold itself to the University in exchange for a long term lease with an option to buy the building back. In 2000 or so, right around the end of that lease, the fraternity got into a fight with its national affiliate, disaffiliated itself, was unable to raise the cash to buy back the building from Wesleyan. Wesleyan used the disaffiliation as an excuse to end the fraternity rather than renew the lease, and today the building is a freshman dorm.Francisx 01:28, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Apparently Alpha Delt is no longer officially a "fraternity":  - Jmabel | Talk 08:43, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sexuality, fraternities, sororities 

message: I added a sentance about there being a large percentage of international students, as well as a large amount of students who study abroad to the Student Body Section. If someone knows actual numbers that would be great. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.181.230.32 (talk) 18:28, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If there are a large number of international students, that is a development within the last generation or so. Numbers (preferably historical, not just current numbers) would be much better than a vague remark. - Jmabel | Talk 01:08, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

text: A citation of what this is based on will be helpful. I just looked at the website and I wasn't sure what the person who inserted this sentence had in mind. Wes2011 18:20, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

text: It's about 6-7% international students. I think you're mixing it up with the number of students of color, which is about 33% of the student population(quite a lot). Go check out the class of 2010 profile on the admissions website.Ychennay 05:28, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  International Aspects 

message: Does anyone on campus have pictures that they can upload? A lot of other colleges and universities articles are decorated with images of their buildings and campuses... I'd love to see a shot of foss hill or college row.Ychennay 04:18, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I just stumbled onto this page today and I wanted to drop a line - the images in this article are fantastic! Great work, whoever took them. --Midnightdreary 00:09, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures 

message: There are 3 topics that I really think need to be added to this page.  On the subject of activism and university policy are chalking and gender-neutral housing.  Wesleyan was the first university to provide gender-neutral housing for incoming freshmen.  The university issued a moratorium on chalking in 2004, which was eventually converted to university administrators issuing a permanent ban on all sidewalk chalk.  Not only has the issue of chalk fiercely debated (both in the past and today), it was a large clash on the issue of free speech, which the ACLU assisted Wesleyan students in protesting.  Finally--there is no mention of the fight song, although on other universities' pages theirs are earmarked somewhere.  I include it here: "And it's fight for old Wesleyan,/ Never give in,/ Fight 'til the end/ when might and right shall win,/ so keep on fighting/ 'til victory crowns everyone,/ Fight, fight, fight, fight, for Wesleyan./ Go Wes!" 66.104.254.130 22:27, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Info to add (suggestions) 

message: Someone removed the adjectives 'highly' and 'most' when discussing the competitiveness of admissions, describing it as "empty promotional language". (Rbellin (Talk | contribs) (25,678 bytes) (again remove empty promotional language; feel free to remove similar language in other articles, but please, no arms-race mentality of copying the worst excesses of peer articles) )
But it is not empty promotional language. In the admissions process, most competitive and highly competitive are terms of art and describe different categories of colleges. 'Competitive' alone indicates a mid-level college. Wesleyan is ranked as 'most competitive' that isn't empty language, that's the official category name. Know what the hell it is you're complaining about before you complain about it.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.247.3.210 (talk • contribs) 
: Please cite reliable sources that document (a) the special meaning you claim "most competitive" has as a "term of art" and (b) its universally consistent application to Wesleyan.  What "official category" are you referring to, and who categorizes it this way?  It seems extremely unlikely to me that there is a well-accepted and well-known neutral ranking or categorization of this kind, but if you can document it, please do so.  Using the passive voice to dodge the question of the source for this "ranking" is unacceptable.  -- Rbellin|Talk 19:22, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: "Competitiveness"

message: Someone has repeatedly changed the caption on the picture with the Public Affairs Center and the library to indicate that the building is still called by its original name of Harriman hall, this is incorrect as the building was renamed the Public Affairs center in 1954 when its use was changed from a dormitory to an academic building.  The editor has repeated claimed that the building is still called Harriman Hall and that the program inside it is called the Public Affairs center, as a response I offer this direct quote from the school's website "The John E. Andrus Center for Public Affairs, otherwise known as the Public Affairs Center or simply the PAC, is both a building and an organizational framework for promoting collaboration and other common interests of the social sciences at Wesleyan. "  This quote is irrefutable evidence that the building is currently called the Public Affairs center, you can verify the quote on the official website at [].  I hope the editor will accept the evidence this website provides and discontinue making inaccurate changes.129.133.141.48 22:08, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "There's not a whit of substance behind it. (Though it does show that there are two people operating at your level.)" 
I'm the guy that originally labeled it PAC on the picture. There's not a whit of substance behind it? How about the fact that EVERYONE at Wesleyan calls it the Public Affairs Center? Everyone. Profs, students, administrators. Sure, maybe some obscure technicality means that it's still called Harriman Hall in the books, but I'd be willing to bet if you stepped on campus and asked where Harriman Hall is, no one would have any clue what you are talking about.Ychennay 05:35, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

text: That comment would make sense if this was an article about Friedrich Hayek, where knowing who the man is would be integral to writing a good article about him. But I'm afraid it's not. I'm sure there are famous people even YOU don't know. Doesn't mean I consider you to be incompetent as you imply with those snide little remarks regarding Wesleyan undergrads. If you're such stickler for accuracy, why don't you go ahead and ask the administration why they call it PAC, why the website calls it PAC, why the profs call it PAC?Ychennay 05:24, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Public Affairs Center 

message: Why does one of the users keep removing the information about Alpha Delta Phi?? Wes112 23:36, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:POINT. You don't delete material from one article solely because the article on another, supposedly related, subject lacks those materials. And one sentence on the basic structure of some fraternity doesn't really constitute filling the article with unencyclopedic minutae. And please maintain a civil tone when using these talk pages. You've already come to the attention of the Administrator's noticeboard for your incivility and ad hominem attacks on editors you come into disagreement with, and that was nothing to do with me. I'm sure you can make a good case for removing this particular snippet of Alpha Delta Phi material, but please don't try do so in an unnecessarily argumentative and hostile manner, and please bear in mind Wikipedia policies (such as WP:POINT) when making your edits and edit summaries. --Aim Here 07:51, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I was referring to your edits in Kappa Alpha Society, which DO contain ad hominems. I don't actually agree that the sentence should go, merely that it might be possible for you to make an argument in favour of the removal, if you were willing to argue within Wikipedia policies, not against them. Instead of that, you seem to want to choose revert warring and trolling, as well as accusations of incivility, for which I see no evidence. The object of these talk pages is to build a consensus on what should belong in the article, and your attitude here seems to be an obstacle to that happening--Aim Here 13:24, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article POV bias 

message: Have others run into problems with an editor originating from 129.133.124.xxx? This IP has not been editing constructively on a number of Wikipedia pages. Has anyone had that experience? My hunch is that this is user:Ychennay Happy09 05:33, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My hunch is that maybe you should think a little bit next time before you make a false accusation. 129.133.124.xxx is also not even close to being my IP address, and you can go check that with a moderator or administrator or whoever if you don't believe me. Ychennay 06:12, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

text: As you can see from the above reply (and further up this Talk page), there is a persistent problem editor, prone to POV-pushing, personal attacks, incivility, and edit-warring, making occasional edits from IPs in the 129.133.124.x range.  Despite numerous cautions, this editor seems incorrigible.  I asked for a block at AN/I a while ago (Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive248), but apparently no admin agreed.  Since this editor persists in making nuisance edits and engaging in hostile unproductive Talk page behavior, I would encourage any interested party to relist this at WP:ANI again. -- Rbellin|Talk 16:52, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  IP 129.133.124.xxx 

message: :Image:Wescardinal.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 16:50, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Wescardinal.gif

message: There is a lot of student activism on campus that seems to be ignored by the article, maybe do research into the most significant social movements spearheaded by students --Alysscarlso (talk) 17:42, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Student Activism  

message: The article has many, many citations. Many of them are very, very old... as in 10+ years. Some are dead, some are unverifiable, and some are just plain outdated. I did some cleanup in the Rankings section, but the whole article needs to be gone over. Markvs88 (talk) 01:26, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I suggest checking each dead citation against the Wayback Machine, archive.is, Megalodon.jp, and/or Webcitation.org. If any one of those websites have an archive, change the URL to the archive and archive that URL on one of the other archival services, if possible (sadly webcitation.org no longer accepts new citations). WhisperToMe (talk) 15:28, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

text: Based on the issue you've raised here, the update template is not the correct one to apply, as it would seem to suggest that the content is in need of an update, rather than just the sources. I've replaced it with the "citations broken" one. Wikieditor19920 (talk) 04:24, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Update tag

message: See https://www.ctinsider.com/news/ctpost/article/Wesleyan-scraps-idea-of-opening-campus-in-China-14559922.php which talks about aborted plans for a China campus
WhisperToMe (talk) 15:29, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aborted China campus 

message: The Wesleyan Argus, the newspaper of Wesleyan University, is represented by a stub. It seems to make better sense to include it in this article. Ingratis (talk) 19:42, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a stub, but has room for improvement. This is the newspaper of a very prestigious liberal arts college, which has certainly had alumni go into high places in the field of journalism. A quick Google search and I've found plenty of sources that shows The Argus meets GNG. I will try and expand it tonight. No need to move. Pennsylvania2 (talk) 20:03, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I see you've added some content and removed the "Merge" tag. I'm still not entirely convinced that this merits a separate article (I'm not convinced by many of the articles on student newspapers, come to that), but you clearly think it does so I won't insist. Ingratis (talk) 18:10, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Wesleyan Argus