Talk:Texas A&M University/Archive 2

message: I begun to properly cite all of our references in this article as I rewrite every section. Hopefully this style can be used by everyone if they consider is userful. -- Hut101 03:37, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good call on ensuring proper citations for this article, but rewriting every section concerns me.  First, I don't think it's needed.  Some minor organizational updates are always appropriate as information changes, but complete rewrites seem unnecessary at this time.  Second, in my opinion, your edits have changed the tone of the Vision 2020 section to near the point of academic boosterism.  It's essential that this article be as objective and matter-of-fact as possible and that it not become a marketing piece.  I realize that probably was not your intention, I'm just letting you know that's how I read it (and it may just be me).  My advice though is to simply state the facts in plain English with citations and move on.  This page is a useful guide for future edits: .  I'll leave your edits and let you, other contributors, and/or a moderator decide if they should be changed or reverted; my vote is that they should be.  One other point...  each sub-section on this article is already fleshed-out pretty well (and the article is getting rather long).  Adding more information would be detrimental, in my opinion.  If you have additional information to add on Vision 2020, for example, create a separate Wikipedia article for it.  --Ntmg05 04:07, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with your assertion that what I write can be "bossterism", it's slightly difficult to be a student and not consider my school better. That I will work on and attempt to correct within my writing. As for expansion of each section; Wikipedia is meant to be an encyclopedia containing all human knowledge, which I’m certain, has been elaborated on considerably. Simply to exclude information because someone does not wish to scroll down is irrelevant but that’s just my opinion. I plan on moving Vision 2020 to the historical section once it's no longer an evolving situation. -- Hut101 04:23, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but you don't need to put the sum of human knowledge relating to A&M on a single page.  In this article, give a one or two paragraph summary discussing why something is relevant/important to A&M.  That should be sufficient for most sub-topics.  However, if you want to discuss a sub-topic in further detail, create a separate Wikipedia article for it and do so there. --Ntmg05 04:31, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

text: There are a few more references that need proper citation, but so far everything seems to be working correctly. Also, Ntmg05, great work on rewording those sections. -- Hut101 04:46, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Proper citation

message: Is there anyone who would be willing to help edit the History article. Best method would be for someone to edit the beginning while someone work from the end, sections about Robert Gates, Vision 2020, ... I would be willing to work on such a joint project if anyone is interested. --
:I did lots of work on the history section, but most of it is aimed at the Pre-1970 history.  The article still needs work for the post 1970 era.  Karanacs 20:09, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: History

message: Below is a suggestion for the Residential Life section:
"Housing on campus is split between two distinct sections, a north and south side. Lining the north dormitories span Crocker Hall to Clements Hall. Dormitories to the south of campus primarily center around the Commons, a gathering center of student activities and dining services. Also next to the Commons, is the Quad, dormitories containing the Corps of Cadets."
I'm hopeing for suggestions and improvements. -- Hut101 06:10, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well I went ahead and added it and then expanded on it. Hopefully someone who happens to actually live on campus can continue to contribute to that section. -- Hut101 03:37, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

text: An anonymous user vandalized the page. The phrase was promptly removed. --Blueag9 02:59, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Residential Life

message: Proposal for expanding Student Life section. Sections to be included could be Organizations, Residential Life (On-campus living), School Sponsored Activities, and Student Government? -- Hut101 21:57, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've based the structure roughly on the University of Michigan and its setup. -- Hut101 01:43, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've already made the changes and have attempted to add as much as possible but more is needed. -- Hut101 03:37, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Student Life

message: Should we possibly merge the separate history page back into this article about A&M. The history page is slightly more than twice the size of the historical information that is actually in this article. However, with maintaining a separate history page, the information will begin to diverge from one another. --Hut101 08:09, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I vote to keep them separate because in the main article the history needs to be an overview and relatively short and static. Otherwise it will cause the main article to be too long. It's not bad if they diverge a bit in content (e.g. more details in history article), as long as they don't conflict in facts. --Claygate 15:04, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merging History

message: The comment about the Washington Monthly rankings should be removed.  It is not a scholarly article, gives no information regarding its methodology, and, frankly, appears to be biased in favor of A&M.
::US News isn't a scholarly journal, the methodology is plainly stated, and of course it's biased in favor of A&M.  It wouldn't have gotten a 5th place ranking if it wasn't. --Ntmg05 04:34, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The details regarding the organization of petroleum engineering programs is irrelevant to this article.  However, the updated rankings do clearly show that A&M is ranked 3rd now, so the article should be updated. --Ntmg05 04:34, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Ranking Issues

message: A Public Ivy is a term to refer to the nation's top public schools. The last published data referring to public ivy was in the year 2001. Texas A&M has improved dramatically since that time.  There is no debate the Texas A&M is one of the top public schools in the nation, which has surpassed numerous colleges in the original “Public Ivy” listings. Some of schools listed on the top colleges were: University of Vermont (us new ranked 93), Indiana University – Bloomington (us news ranked 72), A&M is ranked number 60 (the same as Ohio State). The original source is not an accredited source, for his criteria he simply states that public ivy is a public college which offers a superior education at a fraction of the Ivy League cost (US News tends to be the most respectable college ranking guide). Therefore based on the criteria used to rate the original public ivies, A&M exceeds all of those qualifications at this time. It is only fair to include A&M in the same listing as the other public ivies based on today’s data. Rankings change every year, it is our job to keep the website updated. A&M is considered public ivy in Texas by many from its high academic rankings in the 2nd to the most populous state in the nation. A&M is always ranked as one of the top three universities in Texas. Sometimes it is ranked number one, sometimes it is ranked two (after Rice), and at other times it is ranked (three).
Other's included A&M as a public ivy in this discussion based website:
http://www.collegeconfidential.com/cgi-bin/discus/show.cgi?4/51063
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/edu/college/rankings/brief/bestvalues/bvnatudoc_brief.php
A&M is ranked the 3rd to the best value for a public university in the U.S. after only the University of North Carolina – Chapel Hill and University of Virginia! The great value for the education is what coined the term public ivy. Again, I supported  the term for A&M to be called a public ivy. This is all that is required by wikipedia. This term is based on cost and education or should I say value. 
BTW, the top value in texas is at this site:
http://www.tamu.edu/tamunews/News/stories/06/012006news-11.html
Texas A&M is the top-ranked university in Texas and the Southwest in Kiplinger's 2006 list of the nation's 100 "best values in public colleges." 
Kiplinger's list is headed by the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. The only other schools in Texas or the Southwest included on the 2006 list are the University of Texas at Austin at 27th   and UT-Dallas, 66th.
By the way, how to I message someone? --- strstr01
::"Public Ivy" is a term coined by an author and refers to a specific group of universities that he designated.  While A&M may indeed exceed the rankings of those universities, that author nor any other known source has identified A&M as a public ivy.  Until that happens, it would be incorrect to refer to A&M as a public ivy. --Ntmg05 03:23, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Who is "many?"  Where do they say this?  Yes, I would like to see an article.  That's what I've been asking for all along.  If you can find one reliable source that includes the phrase "A&M is considered a public ivy," then it will be considered.  Until then, you're doing original research and determining on your own that A&M is a public ivy.  That is generally against Wikipedia policy. --Ntmg05 17:33, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Public Ivy 

message: I noticed there was a citation missing for the statement that A&M no longer stands for "Agricultural and Mechanical." So I searched the 'net in hopes of finding a valid source to verify it, and got these websites:
*Aggie Athletics (read definition for "A&M")
*Texas A&M Communications Advisory Board (read definition for "Texas A&M University")
Which site is more appropriate to use as a source? --Blueag9 16:25, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They're both official university publications, so either would be fine.  The second is probably more "official looking," tho.  At one time, there was also an explanation in the "About A&M" section on the main web site, but I don't know if it's still there and frankly I'm too lazy to even open another browser and go look.  heh. --Ntmg05 17:49, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A&M 

message: Hey, I added a little information about A&m' cloning program, not sure where I should place it. I thought it was interesting and added the the University's prestige since it was the first animal to clone a pet.
::There's a note about cloning in the "Notable Buildings" section, but I agree, this deserves more prominence than that.  A&M is pretty well known for its cloning research now...  perhaps a subsection on it in the "Research" section?  Thoughts on that? --Ntmg05 00:29, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Definitely an informative and interesting thing to add. I'd agree it should probably be put in the research section rather than the intro. -Texink 01:26, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I added some additional information pretaining the cloning research A&M does to the Research section. However, it still needs to be expanded with additional information about actual "research" as a result of cloning, and what current cloning is taking place. Hut101 07:50, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cloning cats 

message: I fixed the whole article using the  and  format. I am unsure on how to properly cite each source using this format. If anyone knows of a page where I can get that information, please post it here. --Blueag9 19:44, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: Okay, the article cites two different enrollment numbers... one in the infobox and the other in "Academics." What's up with that? --Blueag9 04:15, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone fixed that, however, I've updated the enrollment numbers based on the head count on the 12th day of classes.Hut101 08:01, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Enrollment 

message: This is getting to be one of the largest Talk pages I've seen that wasn't archived. I don't know enough of the technical aspects to do it, but it seems high time that someone archived the discussion here ... it goes back to 2004 (!) and is now at 65KB long. Lawikitejana 07:05, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Johntex\talk 05:27, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Archive the talk???

message: Hello, I added a photo from a football game to this article.  I also created a page on the Commons to collect free images related to Texas A&M University.  Please contribute your photos (must be freely licensed) to this page. As the collection grows, it will be a great resource for all articles pertaining to the school and its traditions and history.  Thanks! Johntex\talk 03:20, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Images and commons

message: Can someone please archive this talk page as all topics have been addressed and it's now necessary to move on to new discussions. -- Hut101 07:08, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Archive

message: If any of you have any specific sites on campus where I should take pictures, let me know. I am planning to take pictures this weekend of Research Park, Northgate, and the Rec. Let me know if you can think of any others, or want me to take better pictures of the ones already on the page. Blueag9\talk 23:25, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you're planning to get some landscape shots, it'd probably be a good idea to wait til spring when there's more sunlight and color. PS, thanks for the barnstar. :) -Texink 23:38, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree it might be better to wait until spring for landscape shots however, there is a need for pictures of buildings on campus. A picture of the inside of Wehner Business School would be nice. New pictures of the MSC, and Arches. Also, if you could get pictures for subsections within the articles. Ex: Picture of Northside dorms and Southside dorms(The Commons) for the Student Life Section. Pictures of each notable building listed on the main article. Also a picture of The Association Of Former Students building would be nice for that article. -- Hut101 23:54, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Pictures

message: I find it sad that people from Texas Tech have nothing better to do than vandalize the A&M wikipedia pages. If this continues, I propose restricting edits on this page to registered users with a talk page only. Thoughts? BQZip01 16:48, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They are easy to discipline, just put one of those vandalism templates on their talk pages, and they'll stop. At least in my experience they did. --Blueag9\talk 03:20, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nice. I'll keep that in mind BQZip01 07:43, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent Vandalism

message: Looking at ut's page, they have a university of texas portal.  maybe we should have one for texas a&m.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.91.174.88 (talk • contribs) 02:46, 2007 March 29
:We're not trying to be like them...--Blueag9 (Talk | contribs) 15:43, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I love that, BQZip01.  Very true, and very funny! Karanacs 13:38, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why not? Aviation has one and so do others? However, for whomever added this, keep in mind that Aggies are resistant to change (see the top of my user page) BQZip01 16:39, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think we would have enough dedicated users to make a portal worthwhile. -Texink 22:08, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Hi, you should sign up for an account (takes less than 20 seconds) if you would like to help out. Also insert  onto your userpage when you get the account. --Blueag9 (Talk | contribs) 16:59, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Portal

message: So a featured article might be stretching it, let's try achieving good article status. The criteria is listed here.--Blueag9 (Talk) 08:44, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I expanded the history section in the main article, per Blueag's request.  I think we might also be able to merge the subsections on "Campus" and "Aggieland" and combine the "profile" and "rankings" areas of academics.  Any objections?  (I also think we need to have a revised to-do list of what to work on for the GA attempt.)    Karanacs 15:33, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I went ahead and combined these areas.  I really don't like the Notable buildings section, but I am not sure how to fix it.  I noticed that the Michigan page has a general campus paragraph (maybe our info about BCS and the size of the campus) and then subheadings for their various campuses.  We could possibly have a Main Campus and West Campus subsection and describe the various buildings that are notable within those sections? Karanacs 16:06, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If there's going to be a large scale reorganization of the site, I think it should be in accordance with the WikiProject Universities suggested outline.  --Ntmg05 17:51, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I think the rankings belong to their own section. Most of the other articles have their own rankings section. Speaking of rankings, does anyone have access to U.S. News? They are going to release their 2008 rankings soon. I'm pretty sure there are other ranked programs besides the Chemistry Department. In order to keep the rankings consistent, I think we have to mention other departments as well, and not just one.--Blueag9 (Talk) 00:59, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I compromised by putting the rankings subheading back, but now the section is directly underneath the profile.  I don't subscribe to US News, but I do worry that if we include too many rankings the section will get out of hand quickly. Karanacs 14:00, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Article status

message: do you think it should be moved down the article some.  It is listed second on the academics page.  i would think other thinks should be ahead of it in order of importance.  heck, that is enough information for a separate vision 2020 page.  
lets just say if you were to tell a non aggie 10 things about a&m that would be important, i do not think vision 2020 would make that list.  a sentence or two should suffice.  
Merge undergraduate research with research.  makes the article more concise.
see my suggestions above with the new menu. . .. 
(oldag07)
:I like the idea of mentioning Vision 2020 in a sentence or two. Karanacs added the info to the history article, so we can direct the Vision 2020 wikilink there. Any thoughts on where we can add a brief one-two sentence summary of Vision 2020?--Blueag9 (Talk) 20:38, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: More editing suggestions

message: I find the flow between those two sentences there a bit awkward, is there any way we can rephrase the second sentence? That sentence has been there for a while now.BlueAg09 (Talk) 07:39, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Intro paragraph

message: Does anyone know what the copyright status is for a lot of the pictures in the Cushing Historical Images Collection?   I've written to them to ask, but haven't gotten a reply yet.  I know we can use the pre-1923 photos, but many of the photos are undated and don't list a photographer.  I'm unclear as to whether the others are in the public domain because they belong to a state agency or not.  Karanacs 14:54, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is a complex area and there may be no easy answer.  One thing I can tell you is that state agencies do not necesarily put their work into the public domain.  The US Government generally does, but even thn there are limits.  For instance, works of a US govt employee while on duty (and not classified or secret) are generally public domain. Works made by government contractors typically are not.  Some states follow this lead, but most don't.  I don't think Texas considers their works to be PD. Johntex\talk 15:07, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Please see also Work of the United States Government. Johntex\talk 15:18, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

text: And also Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2006_March_13#Template:PD-CAGov. Johntex\talk 15:30, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Each of the pictures have the following message under "Restrictions": "It is the users responsibility to secure permission from the copyright holders for publication of any materials. Permission must be obtained in writing prior to publication. Please contact the Cushing Library for further information."
I don't think any of the pictures are in the public domain.BlueAg09 (Talk) 21:35, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Historical Images

message: I have made my first major revision of a wikipedia page.  I added a paragraph to the texas a&m riverside campus page.  I was wondering if any of yall can peer review it to see if i did it right.  thanks.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riverside_Campus Oldag07 16:01, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Congrats, OldAg07 on your first big revision :)  Don't forget, for ease of linking, use   around the title of a wikipedia article and we can go right there. (ex Riverside Campus) Karanacs 19:07, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Simply nominate it for speedy deletion. I added some more info and links to the page. I think that the Department of Homeland Security did testing there for gates/fences/barriers that stop trucks. Lots of that was shown in the news. Any information that people have on that would be very appropriate on this page. — BQZip01 — talk 16:53, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Instead of speedy deletion, a better option may be to just replace the text with a redirect: #REDIRECT Insert target page here Johntex\talk 17:50, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: recent revisions

message: I have been trying to add a "hide" button to our template like the hide button on the big 12 template or the Association of American Universities one.  
we just have so much stuff on the bottom.  it would be nice if we had a way to minimize it.  it would look a lot less cluttered.  the code is confusing me though.  and id like to know your opinions on it.  Oldag07 04:35, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: template

message: do you think a sentence on bonfire collapsewould be good in the 1950-2000 part of the history section.  it is something people still associate with a&m heavily.
something like : 
"Tragedy struck Texas A&M when the popular A&M tradition,  Bonfire, collapsed during construction on November 18, 1999. 12 participants were killed and 27 were injured."  Oldag07 15:46, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It already has its place in the article, but a short blurb and link wouldn't hurt. — BQZip01 — talk 16:02, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Concur — BQZip01 — talk 16:15, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: bonfire history

message: We had a question in the peer review about how to properly cite some of the stuff in the popular culture section, as some FA reviewers really don't like references to myspace or youtube.  It is unlikely that we'd be able to find any additional sources for some of these.  My question...do you think it is important to keep the popular culture section, which basically lists ways that A&M is mentioned on tv?  To me, this doesn't really tell people anything about the university, and I'd rather take it out.   What do you guys think? Karanacs 14:48, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Popular Culture

message: The second peer review asked for an additional picture in the Academics section.  Does anyone have a picture that would show off Research Park at all, or know of any already uploaded images that we could/should use here? Karanacs 15:22, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I will still be on campus this summer.  weather is crappy today.  but ill take some pictures of research park.  Honestly i don't have anyway to upload my pictures.  I left my computer at home to get "work done" this semester.  been using scc computers, hence the changing ip addresses i have.  I should have it this summer.  btw, that rec center picture is ugly.  ill get a new one of that too.Oldag07 13:21, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:   btw, for the history, the campus masterplan would be a great picture to put up in the 2000-present picture.    Page 13 especially.  we should also right a blurb on the the campus master plan on the main page.  i am busy today. btw, am i the only student on this board. i know my name is "old ag"  but i won't be that until next friday.  i am still a student.  Oldag07 13:28, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Thanks for taking pictures :) Good luck with finals!! Karanacs 13:36, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

text:  i think the master plan won some awards too.  yea, we should write about it.  it is a big deal. . . .  ill do it after final if no one else volunteers.  
http://www.tamu.edu/campusplan/  
http://newsarchives.tamu.edu/stories/04/082704-4.html
http://www.thebatt.com/news/2004/08/31/News/Campus.Master.Plan.Wins.Design.Awards-707602.shtml
http://www.tamu.edu/home/spotlight/archives/construction.html
Oldag07 13:38, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The master plan is part of Vision 2020, and I think some of the info has already been included on the history page.  I don't think it is necessary to put it on the main page -- there is really nothing newsworthy about the buildings other than that they are new and more uptodate. Karanacs 15:52, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Images

message: The automated peer review complained about the length of the table of contents, and I agree that it is a little hard to read.  Would it make more sense to restrict the TOC tojust the top level headings, or would you rather leave it as is?  I vote for top-level only. Karanacs 15:52, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: i don't mind.  either way.  The banner on the side is kind of large in the first place.Oldag07 19:18, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Table of Contents

message: This article is very good, but not quite good enough.  Some issues that need addressing before GA can be awarded:
*Referencing issues:
**First paragraph of History:1870-1900 is unreferenced, additionally it contains a quote which is not referenced to a specific source as well.
**Traditions section is entirely unreferenced
**Athletics section makes several superlative claims and quotes several statistics which are unreferenced.
*In Pop Culture section contains some sketchy facts, such as "So and so wore a T-shirt in a random episode of a TV show".  These have to go as probably excessively trivial.  Also, the This American Life citation is unreferenced.
*Image issues: Some biggies here:
**The artists rendition of the observatory is copyright, and Fair Use only applies here (and this is EXPRESSLY listed by the liscencing tag on the image) IF the image was being used to discuss the work of art in question.  The article does not give critical commentary on the painting, it only gives critical commentary on the SUBJECT of the painting, which is not covered by Fair Use.  This has got to go.
**"Image:Academic Buildind and Sul Ross.jpg" has a copyright tag which claims that the copyright holder has released it for free use, but no source for the image is given, nor is there any way to verify this information.  Please update the image information page to give complete source and copyright information so the image usage can be verified.
**The Snoop Dogg image hardly qualifies as being used in "Critical Commentary".  Saying "Hey look, Snoop Dogg is wearing an A&M T-Shirt" hardly qualifies as critical commentary.  As such, that image has got to go.
There you go.  The hold will expire in 1 week.  If all of the above changes are not made in that time frame, the article will be failed.  Once all of the above fixes ARE made, please drop a line at my talk page, and I pass the article.  If you feel this hold was mishandled in any way, please see WP:GA/R to seek remediation. --Jayron32|talk|contribs 03:05, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please line out completed items (see below for details). — BQZip01 — talk 06:24, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA on hold

message: ===Summary===
First of all, great job on the basics. This article is slowly getting better day-by-day (then changed by some teasip with a grudge...then reverted to its glorious self again...). Please place a comment here if you are working on it and when you are finished correcting. — BQZip01 — talk 05:52, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, that was easy. Done. — BQZip01 — talk 06:22, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I have referenced this section. Karanacs 13:50, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

text: The only thing I couldn't find a citation for was that the football game is the most watched in the rivalry. Can someone else look for one, please? Karanacs 14:40, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't find a reference but i own this book: http://www.amazon.com/Backyard-Brawl-Inside-Blood-Between/dp/0609610538.  i don't have it with me at a&m, but i am sure i can find something on the rivalry to quote.  i can have it in a month or so.Oldag07 15:41, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a good idea, OldAg07.  I have that book at home and I'll look through it tonight. Karanacs 17:49, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Every sentence of the athletics is now referenced. — BQZip01 — talk 18:58, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This sentance: The most-watched event in the rivalry is the annual football game held the day after Thanksgiving has 8 reference tags.  I mean really.  Claims need a reference, but this seems excessive.  Please tell me you weren't trying to make a WP:POINT...--Jayron32|talk|contribs 00:21, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Absolutely not. I was simply trying to prove the given assertion, "The most-watched event." The attendance for each game is given through links on those sites (to the best of my knowledge it is not compiled anywhere else in one website; if it was I'd be happy to use it). I think some of the confusion arised from your vague assertion, "...makes several superlative claims and quotes several statistics which are unreferenced." If you had been more specific, I think we would have glossed over it. As it was stated, I think we were just trying to cover all of the bases. — BQZip01 — talk 03:35, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

text: In my opinion, only the 2 movies that were explicitly about A&M ("We've Never Been Licked" and "The Junction Boys") deserve any mention in the article.  I think that reference to these could easily be included in the history section.  I would remove all the rest. Karanacs 14:44, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I deleted all by the two movies about A&M and the FDT references (these guys were sought after for any drill team role and played the title role in place of the Marine Corps Silent Drill team (check the credits if you don't believe me). I thought that was pretty noteworthy considering they take almost 4 minutes to do a drill in their opening credits. — BQZip01 — talk 16:03, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  What about songs "fightin texas aggie" by dub miller, or that new song "we bleed maroon"?Oldag07 14:29, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I looked through the A&M images that have already been uploaded and the only one I saw that might fit in the research section is actually a night shot of the O&M building: Image:Williams-O%26M-Buildings-TAMU.jpg
Karanacs 14:55, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just replace it. We can always come up with better images later. — BQZip01 — talk 15:56, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I went ahead and deleted the image (we can't use it anyway) and replaced it with the other one so we can pass the review. We can always add another image in here later. Just make sure it will pass muster (pun intended). — BQZip01 — talk 16:11, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

text: BlueAg09 had already uploaded a version of this picture that he took himself and has released the rights to.  I substituted that image for the one with the strange licensing. Karanacs 14:48, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I got another of the academic building if you would like it.  i am going to run by research park and take that picture.  where is the obervatory anyways?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Academicbuildinga_m2.jpgOldag07 15:22, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The observatory is by the nuclear research station...on the far side of Easterwood Airport. Good luck getting there. How about a picture of the newest engineering building? — BQZip01 — talk 15:56, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sure.  ill live within walking distance of the brown chemical engineering building this summer.  didn't make the observatory today.  got a picture of the entrance of research park.  I also got some of the bonfire memorial.  not sure if you need any.  Like i said earlier, i don't have access to a camera card reader until friday at earlest.  I get a new laptop for graduation!  ill try to post by sunday.  you want any of the new training indoor training facility? Oldag07 19:53, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

text: First revision?Oldag07 01:05, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Let's not make any big changes right now while we are under consideration for GA status.  Information about the residence halls is also kinda generic -- most US universities have on-campus housing with the same type of governing structure.  If we decide to create a separate article about residential life, or the campus in general, we can definitely include this info, though. Karanacs 01:16, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: yea,  just been trying to finish that checklist on the top.  but yes, i think we are are making progress on the good article status.  i just read the Texas one.  it definitely needs some work.Oldag07 01:27, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA fixes

message: First of all, great job on the basics. This article is slowly getting better day-by-day (then changed by some teasip with a grudge...then reverted to its glorious self again...). Please place a comment here if you are working on it and when you are finished correcting. — BQZip01 — talk 05:52, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Summary

message: First paragraph of History:1870-1900 is unreferenced, additionally it contains a quote which is not referenced to a specific source as well. I'll take care of these references. It might take a few days, but I'll get it. If anyone wants to chip in, the more the merrier. — BQZip01 — talk 05:52, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, that was easy. Done. — BQZip01 — talk 06:22, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 1. 1st paragraph

message: Traditions section is entirely unreferenced Let's get some references. With all those websites out there, it should be easy to find at least one reference. — BQZip01 — talk 05:52, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have referenced this section. Karanacs 13:50, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 2. Traditions section

message: Let's cite those "several superlative claims and...statistics." — BQZip01 — talk 05:52, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The only thing I couldn't find a citation for was that the football game is the most watched in the rivalry. Can someone else look for one, please? Karanacs 14:40, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't find a reference but i own this book: http://www.amazon.com/Backyard-Brawl-Inside-Blood-Between/dp/0609610538.  i don't have it with me at a&m, but i am sure i can find something on the rivalry to quote.  i can have it in a month or so.Oldag07 15:41, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a good idea, OldAg07.  I have that book at home and I'll look through it tonight. Karanacs 17:49, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Every sentence of the athletics is now referenced. — BQZip01 — talk 18:58, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This sentance: The most-watched event in the rivalry is the annual football game held the day after Thanksgiving has 8 reference tags.  I mean really.  Claims need a reference, but this seems excessive.  Please tell me you weren't trying to make a WP:POINT...--Jayron32|talk|contribs 00:21, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Absolutely not. I was simply trying to prove the given assertion, "The most-watched event." The attendance for each game is given through links on those sites (to the best of my knowledge it is not compiled anywhere else in one website; if it was I'd be happy to use it). I think some of the confusion arised from your vague assertion, "...makes several superlative claims and quotes several statistics which are unreferenced." If you had been more specific, I think we would have glossed over it. As it was stated, I think we were just trying to cover all of the bases. — BQZip01 — talk 03:35, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 3. Athletics claims

message: Let's quickly come up with some standards for Pop Culture so we can add references/delete excess. My humble opinion is for anything that references A&M for more than 3 minutes or 10% of the media format (whichever is less) or is an integral part of a plot. Thoughts? — BQZip01 — talk 05:52, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In my opinion, only the 2 movies that were explicitly about A&M ("We've Never Been Licked" and "The Junction Boys") deserve any mention in the article.  I think that reference to these could easily be included in the history section.  I would remove all the rest. Karanacs 14:44, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I deleted all by the two movies about A&M and the FDT references (these guys were sought after for any drill team role and played the title role in place of the Marine Corps Silent Drill team (check the credits if you don't believe me). I thought that was pretty noteworthy considering they take almost 4 minutes to do a drill in their opening credits. — BQZip01 — talk 16:03, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  What about songs "fightin texas aggie" by dub miller, or that new song "we bleed maroon"?Oldag07 14:29, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 4. Pop Culture

message: ====Observatory====
Image has to go. Anyone have a better image to throw in? If not, I'll delete it in a few days. — BQZip01 — talk 05:52, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I looked through the A&M images that have already been uploaded and the only one I saw that might fit in the research section is actually a night shot of the O&M building: Image:Williams-O%26M-Buildings-TAMU.jpg
Karanacs 14:55, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just replace it. We can always come up with better images later. — BQZip01 — talk 15:56, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I went ahead and deleted the image (we can't use it anyway) and replaced it with the other one so we can pass the review. We can always add another image in here later. Just make sure it will pass muster (pun intended). — BQZip01 — talk 16:11, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

text: BlueAg09 had already uploaded a version of this picture that he took himself and has released the rights to.  I substituted that image for the one with the strange licensing. Karanacs 14:48, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I got another of the academic building if you would like it.  i am going to run by research park and take that picture.  where is the obervatory anyways?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Academicbuildinga_m2.jpgOldag07 15:22, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The observatory is by the nuclear research station...on the far side of Easterwood Airport. Good luck getting there. How about a picture of the newest engineering building? — BQZip01 — talk 15:56, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sure.  ill live within walking distance of the brown chemical engineering building this summer.  didn't make the observatory today.  got a picture of the entrance of research park.  I also got some of the bonfire memorial.  not sure if you need any.  Like i said earlier, i don't have access to a camera card reader until friday at earlest.  I get a new laptop for graduation!  ill try to post by sunday.  you want any of the new training indoor training facility? Oldag07 19:53, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

text: First revision?Oldag07 01:05, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Let's not make any big changes right now while we are under consideration for GA status.  Information about the residence halls is also kinda generic -- most US universities have on-campus housing with the same type of governing structure.  If we decide to create a separate article about residential life, or the campus in general, we can definitely include this info, though. Karanacs 01:16, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: yea,  just been trying to finish that checklist on the top.  but yes, i think we are are making progress on the good article status.  i just read the Texas one.  it definitely needs some work.Oldag07 01:27, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 5. Image issues

message: Image has to go. Anyone have a better image to throw in? If not, I'll delete it in a few days. — BQZip01 — talk 05:52, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I looked through the A&M images that have already been uploaded and the only one I saw that might fit in the research section is actually a night shot of the O&M building: Image:Williams-O%26M-Buildings-TAMU.jpg
Karanacs 14:55, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just replace it. We can always come up with better images later. — BQZip01 — talk 15:56, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I went ahead and deleted the image (we can't use it anyway) and replaced it with the other one so we can pass the review. We can always add another image in here later. Just make sure it will pass muster (pun intended). — BQZip01 — talk 16:11, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Observatory

message: If anyone has the image info, please add it. Better still, if someone is on campus, please just go and take a picture, upload it, and we'll simply replace it. Otherwise it will be deleted in a few days. — BQZip01 — talk 05:52, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: BlueAg09 had already uploaded a version of this picture that he took himself and has released the rights to.  I substituted that image for the one with the strange licensing. Karanacs 14:48, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I got another of the academic building if you would like it.  i am going to run by research park and take that picture.  where is the obervatory anyways?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Academicbuildinga_m2.jpgOldag07 15:22, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The observatory is by the nuclear research station...on the far side of Easterwood Airport. Good luck getting there. How about a picture of the newest engineering building? — BQZip01 — talk 15:56, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sure.  ill live within walking distance of the brown chemical engineering building this summer.  didn't make the observatory today.  got a picture of the entrance of research park.  I also got some of the bonfire memorial.  not sure if you need any.  Like i said earlier, i don't have access to a camera card reader until friday at earlest.  I get a new laptop for graduation!  ill try to post by sunday.  you want any of the new training indoor training facility? Oldag07 19:53, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Academic Building & Sul Ross

message: Image deleted IAW with request. — BQZip01 — talk 05:52, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Snoop Dogg

message: btw, i have been trying to write an article on sbisa dining hall.  I remember in the past reading a good website on the history of sbisa.  however, now i cna't find it anymore.  been looking though libraries.tamu.edu, and i can't find anything there either.  there used to be a great website with info on the history of that building. oh wellOldag07 15:21, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Sbisa

message: i wrote a real rough draft version.  could you guys edit this.  
For non ROTC aggies, dorms are called "halls". http://reslife.tamu.edu  To encourage involvement, each hall has a democratically elected governing committee called "hall council".  Every on campus resident is considered a member of the residence hall association, the largest recognized student organization on campus. http://www.rha.tamu.edu-a.googlepages.com/   Two delegates from every dorm meet biweekly in an RHA meeting to vote on affairs pertaining to on campus residents.    http://media.www.thebatt.com/media/storage/paper657/news/2003/02/18/Opinion/Students.Misrepresented-514735.shtml In 2004 Texas A&M's residence hall association, the largest in the state, won school of the year at the Texas Residence Hall Association Annual Conference.  http://media.www.thebatt.com/media/storage/paper657/news/2004/04/13/News/Am.Honored.As.School.Of.The.Year.At.Rha.Conference-658466.shtml  Another organization that represents each hall is the National Residence Hall Honorary.  http://nrhh.tamu.edu/
The university also owns apartment style living area's, mostly inhabited by graduate students.  http://reslife.tamu.edu/ua/  Popular, off campus dormitories include: the cambridge, with also houses the woman's soccer team and the baseball team, and the Tradition on Northgate in with the football team is housed http://www.livethetradition.com/.  http://media.www.thebatt.com/media/storage/paper657/news/2003/10/24/News/Athletic.Teams.Score.New.Housing-538497.shtml
Oldag07 22:00, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: First revision?Oldag07 01:05, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Let's not make any big changes right now while we are under consideration for GA status.  Information about the residence halls is also kinda generic -- most US universities have on-campus housing with the same type of governing structure.  If we decide to create a separate article about residential life, or the campus in general, we can definitely include this info, though. Karanacs 01:16, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: yea,  just been trying to finish that checklist on the top.  but yes, i think we are are making progress on the good article status.  i just read the Texas one.  it definitely needs some work.Oldag07 01:27, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Expanded Residential life section