Talk:Trinity College, Toronto/Archive 1

message: Should the Lit have its own article? Wachowich 19:13, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Lit

message: The current picture of the college crest is quite pixelated.  What seems to be a slightly higher resolution version can be found on the Trinity College facebook group.  I would import it myself, but I haven’t the faintest idea how to import pictures.  Could someone with the necessary knowledge please do so. Wachowich 13:03, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Crest

message: The date given in the data box in the article reads as 1858, now if I am not mistaken, Trinity was founded in 1851.  The Strachan article attests to this as well as the fireplace in Strachan hall.  It is a universal law that roman numerals on a mantelpiece in a gothic hall are never wrong.  Wachowich 12:58, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Founding date

message: Alright, I've been moving fairly swiftly in editing the structure of the article. Now it's time for additional content. As far as I can see, the following areas are lacking:
*Administration and governance (structure, and the importance of student government, the TCM etc)
*Graham Library
*Quadrangle renewal project
*Residences (notice the complete lack of information about St. Hildas in general) [Edit: Just discovered that St. Hildas has its own article. I'm going to advocate the merging of the two, seeing as St. Hildas' primary function today is simply a residence building.]
*The LIT
Are there any additional suggestions, or objections?--Sycron 19:29, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree to merging St. Hilda's and Trinity articles; seems good.  Perhaps a little bit on appearances in films and general gothic-colonial flavour?  Neat tid-bits.  Also: University of Toronto Centre for Ethics is on the 2nd floor of the Larkin building; perhaps list Dean of Arts Derek P. Allen, as he is effectively the principal of the college, whereas MMcM is more like the president, as it were.  There is lots more to be done indeed, but progress is impressive so far. Shagmaestro 02:03, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Additions

message: If I'm not mistaken, only IR and Ethics are identified with Trin One...? Edward Wakelin 04:13, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trinity One 

message: I have added information on the history of Trinity College and of St Hilda's College, the College Song, Cheers, and other facts.  Why are they reverted??  Those are all based on facts.
SimonP, give me an answer!!!
:A couple of reasons. Firstly the content you added was fairly biased, written by someone very pro-Trin. Secondly it seemed to be a copyvio of , unless you own the copyright to that page you cannot add it to Wikipedia. - SimonP 23:14, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I am not the 65.93.174.50 who re-added the song and grace, but wanted to chime in with you, SimonP, about potential copyvios.  In addition to being distributed to students in the paper version of the link you cited, the song and the grace are widely distributed on papers without copyright information of any kind (I'm looking at one I was given as an entering div student this year).  While lack of copyright info does not mean the information is public domain, in this particular case I think that a strong argument can be made that this information is public domain.  Anyone eating dinner at Trin would hear the grace; the cheer is certainly widely known outside of the college.  The song--and more particularly, the introduction to it, inserted by 65.93.174.50, may be more worrisome. Mgriffin 18:30, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Mgriffin, I agree.  Episkopon stuff seems to be too high on the page, but the song and grace should probably be above it.  Do you know how to reformat the song? Also, as a former graduate my understanding is that the song is quite old and without known authorship.  Perhaps we should contact the college?  I'll do it if that kind of thing makes a difference. Leftoverboy 18:36, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  All my hard work 

message: The phrase arguing that Trin is "the smallest and most elite of the University of Toronto's colleges and throughout its history it has had the highest entering requirements in the college system" keeps being added into the article.  It seems strongly NPOV to me, though I might be persuaded that it has been perceived as such.  Can we who keep an eye on this page discuss what is appropriate, and come to some sort of consensus?  Mgriffin 02:34, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Historically this was the case, but I believe Innis College today has the higher entering average. - SimonP 19:34, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm quite pleased with the current two sentences: "Trinity is the smallest of the University of Toronto's seven colleges. Throughout Trinity's history, it has managed to maintain high entrance averages for incoming students."   While I think one could make an argument that the history of Trin has been to eke out some sense of being the elite college of UofT, your point, Simon P, strongly attacks the weasel-y "throughout its history."  My personal hobby-horse is the POV "most elite" that keeps being snuck back in.  I would love to hear people who disagree with me argue the point.  Mgriffin 21:06, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Smallest and Most Elite 

message: The infobox says 1,500 last I checked, the article says about 1,700, but I assume that includes divinities students.
Trinity College's official website says that there are about 1,600 (http://www.trinity.utoronto.ca/about/). But that site might be out of date for all I know. 
Edward Wakelin 03:26, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See here for numbers on the new website: 1,700 undergrads and 140 divs. Shagmaestro 14:40, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Number of undergrads 

message: I brought the endowment to $64.7mn, in line with a quick analysis of the 2005-2006 externally-conducted Audited Financial Statements (see here).  Formerly capital assets, current construction, and current assets had been included in endowment.  My justification follows:
According to Financial endowment, "A financial endowment is a transfer of money or property donated to an institution, with the stipulation that it be invested, and the principal remain intact. This allows for the donation to have a much greater impact over a long period of time than if it were spent all at once, due to compound interest." 
It is clear that capital assets (i.e. buildings, property, art, rare books, &c.) do not generate income, though they do indeed appreciate in value over time; capital assets are not a principal sum.  Construction-in-progress falls similarly.  Current assets ($2.7mn) refers to assets in the cash flow, likely including residence fees, food fees, and other short-term income that is either spent or redirected into investments quickly.
I think it is reasonable to restrict endowment to the $64.7mn held in investments, though of course I am open to argument on this point.  Please do not revert or change the article without discussion here.  Further, I recognise that my argument above for changing the endowment to $64.7mn is quite weak technically speakin -- i.e. I have made my case in writing very poorly -- but the issue should be able to hold itself up, hence my lack of effort. Shagmaestro 02:13, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Endowment