Talk:College of William & Mary/Archive 1

message: I just read that the local hangouts at William and Mary are called deli's instead of what they more closely resemble; bars. A student there explains...
“Williamsburg has three main bars, although we like to call them ‘delis’, for reasons beyond my understanding. They are all right across the street from Old Campus, so they’re very convenient. All serve food, but mostly function as bars. The College Delly is your typical college bar, very popular with the Greeks (it has nice patio for warm weather), Paul’s is more of a sports bar and has the best food (it’s my favorite), and the Green Leafe is like a pub, including lots of weird beers. Lots of professors go to the Leafe, so if you like seeing your teachers blitzed out of their minds, that’s the place to go.”
It seems that not even the students know why
from the College Prowler guidebook, College of William and Mary - Off the Record
:The places are called delis because, well, they're delis. Their signs read "College Delly," "Paul's Deli," and "Green Leafe Cafe." All three of them have full menus and serve a large amount of food every day - I've worked in the Leafe's kitchen and my roommates currently work at Paul's. They do have variously nice bars, but they're hardly bars exclusively. --George 21:56, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Liquor laws vary enormously from state to state and from county to county within states... I'm thinking that perhaps in some parts of the country it's relatively hard for a "deli" to get a liquor license, hence unusual, and perhaps in Williamsburg and/or Virginia it's relatively easy, hence usual? Where I live, ordinary supermarkets do not carry beer... but they do carry non-alcoholic beer... but they card you at the checkout line when you buy non-alcoholic beer (!!!). (And by non-alcoholic I mean non-alcoholic, not 3.2% "near beer.") Dpbsmith (talk) 01:35, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Frankly, I think we call them "the delis" because it sounds nicer than calling them "the bars".  It's most likely a concession to the Colonial Williamsburg tourist ethos...the town doesn't want to say "we have bars that serve the College clientle", they want to say "the students eat at the delis."  Similarly, all the alcohol/food/entertainment establishments further from campus are taverns, not bars.  We're a tourist town, we have an image to keep up? -- stillnotelf has a talk page 05:28, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Bingo! Very interesting. Thanks! Dpbsmith (talk) 10:57, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Delis? 

message: The James Blair hyperlink is incorrect.
::That was true. I changed int link to the wrong James Blair to a new one (now red, needs article). Vaoverland 20:26, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: James Blair

message: Isn't the proper name "College of William & Mary"? Should that be fixed?
* No. From http://www.wm.edu/news/nomenclature.php:
**Formal Name: The College of William and Mary in Virginia
**Appropriate First Reference: The College of William and Mary
**Abbreviation: If an abbreviation is needed in headlines or TV chyrons, William & Mary or W&M would be appropriate.
**The Ampersand: The ampersand was used extensively in 17th-and 18th-century documents, specifically in a Latin copy of the original William and Mary charter. While it is used in the College's logo and is appropriately used in abbreviations in headlines (W&M), the ampersand should not be used in text. 
On an unrelated note, what's this "The college considers itself the second-oldest post-secondary school..."? Is there dispute of this? --BDD 16:47, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ampersand, 2nd oldest claim 

message: Okay, so what here counts as a notable professor? Someone recently added like 15 people, one of which is apparently Carl Carlson from the Simpsons, and some others are obscure british philosophers. If I get a chance I can check some of these names, but is this just suppsoed to be a faculty list, or a list of actually notable professors? I guess Carl Carlson would be pretty notable, since he is a cartoon character. Midas 14:14, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable Professors? 

message: This section is rather poor and needs to be cleaned up, the lyrics are inappropriate and should be replaced with a discussion of the songs and their history. TheChief (PowWow) 17:52, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Songs of The College 

message: I am working to cleanup this article to meet WP standards. A lot of that I can handle, including checking out such obviously inaccurate statements as "In 2006, US News and World Report ranked William & Mary #6 of all public universities." I will try to verify the statement and correct the date, if at all possible.  
However, this article also needs a NPOV cleanup to comply with Wikipedia:Neutral point of view standards. As a resident of the Williamsburg area, I am very proud of and admire the history and accomplishments of W&M. However, Wikipedia articles should not be full of adjectives and adverbs which some would call the "sales puffery" of phrases like these:
*renowned lack of grade inflation
*prestigious league of Presidential alma maters
*its regal history
**WM was chartered by King William and Queen Mary with a royal charter, hence the regal history.  I'm not sure it's exactly NPOV, but it's certainly the only US college where one could use the adjective.  --Orang55 04:29, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I put the Public Ivy ref back into the lead. University of Michigan includes a reference to it being a Public Ivy, and it is a Featured Article.  Saying WM was one of the "more touted" public ivies was POV, but not just saying that it is one.--Bkwillwm 22:42, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, didn't see public ivy in the first part of the Michigan article, but I still think saying Public Ivy is POV and should be excluded needs some explanation.--Bkwillwm 22:49, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Whether or not it's POV, "Public Ivy" is still so very... meaningless.  A guy referred to W&M -- and a battery of other schools -- as a "Public Ivy." This was not some ground-breaking book -- in fact, until Wikipedia, I'd never even heard of it.  On every page on which "Public Ivy" is mentioned, it simply seems like a self-conscious, desperate attempt to shove near the Ivy League, a desperation that fine institutions such as W&M simply don't need and obviously shouldn't exhibit. JDoorjam 23:37, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I was kinda right about the Michigan page.  Public Ivy was mentioned in the lead when Michigan appeared on the main page (Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 11, 2006).  And I have heard of public ivies in many places outside of Wikipedia.--Bkwillwm 00:59, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Public Ivy sentence did indeed appear on the Main Page on January 11. This, and a few other areas led to U-M being listed as a Featured article removal candidate. Moving the public ivy comment out of the lead and adding a footnote has gone a long way to reaching an NPOV consensus on the article. — Lovelac7 18:59, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV

message: Hi Vaoverland,
Thank you for taking the time to clean up the W&M website.  It is a little wordy, but the underlying accuracy is intact.  
The #6 ranking you were curious about is indeed accurate (and has been for the last few years) as is the part about W&M being named the "hottest small public university" -- here are the verifying links.
US NEWS
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/edu/college/rankings/brief/natudoc/natudoc_pub_brief.php
NEWSWEEK
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8939242/page/2/
Good luck.
PS -- I am a history buff and am not biased about W&M, it's pre-Revolutionary history is unique and very important in the history of university education in the US.
(above was contributed from unregistered use) 
::What I was challenging was the statements, "In 2006, ... ranked (etc.)." Since 2006 isn't even here yet, the statements seemed suspect. I was able to determine that both claims were regarding the 2005-2006 school year, so I adjusted the wording to reflect that. Perhaps in the collegiate community, a school year is referred to by only the ending year, much as Class of '06. I have added your sources after each ranking claim in the article.
As I said earlier, I think the facts themselves give W&M lots of bragging rights, so I hope someone intimate with W&M will tone down the POV rhetoric such as "much-revered", etc., which tends to detract from the credibility of the article. I plan to continue to work on the structure and presentation, although I have a lot of other irons in the fire. Thanks (and I hope you will register as a WP user). Mark in Historic Triangle of Virginia, Vaoverland 20:00, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Response to questions about William and Mary rankings, etc. 

message: I have created a new article of the College's founder the Reverend Dr. James Blair. while researching it, I found the Cypher Society plans for improving his gravesite on Jamestown Island to be a very positive reflection on W&M, and included mention in the article. Any por/con feedback on the new Blair article would be appreciated!
Does anyone have a PD image of founder Blair? It would enhance that article. For that matter, the W&M article could use some photos, which need to be realeased for PD to be used. 
Mark in Historic Triangle of Virginia. Vaoverland 01:43, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: new article for James Blair

message: It is good to see others making continued improvements. Some additional guidance: 
When there are sections, the lead section of a WP article is supposed to basically and briefly summarize. I believe that the way this one got like it is was that someone added a lot to an originally smaller article, most of which is still in the lead. 
1. The lead needs to be condensed. It is OK to repeat the points and internal links below. In fact, when starting from scratch, I find it works best to write the lead last.
2. History is so much of the article, it needs subsections. Some of the text about the College which is current needs to be moved out of the history section, and moved into a new section. 
Keep up the good work. this article is improving. 
Vaoverland 00:27, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Continued improvements

message: I have just completed a major restructure, with new sections. Most non-duplicative content was retained. Editors familiar with the College are requested to review this work, and give me a chance to improve it (or do so yourselves). Now that I think it flows more logically, areas of interest we have missed or over-emphasized may become clearer. 312 years is a lot of history.  
One question I have is whether the notable alumni and and faculty lists should be presented in nay particular order.
Ready for feedback, folks. Mark in Historic Triangle of Virginia. Vaoverland 04:39, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Restructured

message: I really think we are "getting there" with this article. Two items which need attention:
1. Article could use some more post-Civil War pre 1980s history content. The last sentence in the history section is all we have. 
2. We still have not addressed the excessive use of adjectives and adverbs (see above section) which generated the NPOV flag. I was hoping someone close to the school could work on those, as the most significant (i.e. one or two) would be reasonable to retain, but the many instances in the current text take away from the credibility of the article. I will take a shot at this if no one else does.. 
One other comment, which is: It is harder to work with editors of WP who haven't registered as users. Please do. It is free, you don't have to reveal your true identity, and you won't be bombed with spam. See Wikipedia:Why create an account? for more reasons than you can shake a stick at. Most importantly, all your edits will be attributed to your User name.
Thanks for all the continued help. Vaoverland 20:44, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Continued refinements, additional needs

message: I was just notified that an article I wrote on Dr Blair will be featured on Wikpedia's Main Page for October 3, 2005. The main page item includes a link to William and Mary article. 
	Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article James Blair (clergyman), which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.
::Mark in Historic Triangle of Virginia Vaoverland 02:36, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Dr. Blair, link to College of William and Mary on Wikipedia Main Page

message: I was thinking about moving the list of alum to its own page to keep down the article size.  Any thoughts?--Bkwillwm 15:56, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Article size

message: This article has gotten pretty messy.  The order and break down of categories makes no sense and random facts have been inserted ad hoc.  I'm going to do a massive edit soon. Any thoughts beforehand?--Bkwillwm 03:32, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the Priorities are useful information in an encyclopedia.  I've been bold and merged them into the Wren Building article and provided a link within this article at the end of early history.  -- stillnotelf has a talk page 05:48, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I disagree, but I think putting the info. on another page and linking to it is a good compromise unless/until some other folks weigh in. WWC 12:31, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overhaul 

message: Is William and Mary called "The College" to distinguish it from "The University," i.e. the University of Virginia?" Dpbsmith (talk) 17:31, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, William and Mary's original charter said that it would forever be known as a college, so that's why its refered to as a college rather than a university (which WM is).  I think "The College" is a semi-colloquial term related to the charter.  I'm pretty sure that it has nothing to do with UVA being an univeristy or anything else about UVA. (I'm a WM student btw).--Bkwillwm 05:18, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "The College" and "The University" 

message: I'm a student at W&M, and I was unaware that "Alma mater of a nation" was the College's motto.  I thought it was an unofficial moniker that is used more by those outside the school than within it.  Any thoughts?
Dcteas17 16:19, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Mills Godwin coined the phrase, so it's at least semi-official.  Email someone in administration? -- stillnotelf has a talk page 20:07, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The "motto" is usually the words that appear as part of the seal. Seems easy to me: mention it in the lead section but don't claim it's "the motto." Unless of course someone finds a citable source that says that it is. Dpbsmith (talk) 14:32, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Motto 

message: Kiplinger was not saying W&M is particularly "affordable." Their table shows many public universities with lower total-cost-after-aid, certainly for out-of-state students. For example, compare W&M's out-of-state "total cost after aid" of $20,340 to Texas A&M's $13,864. Minnesota-Morris $10,603. In-state, W&M does better, but for in-state costs one would presumably compare against other Virginia university's and UVA's $4,272 is meaningfully lower than W&M's $5,070.
The rise in costs at public universities in just the past five or six years is nothing short of terrifying, and it a national scandal which is going to bear bitter fruit in a decade or so. I wouldn't characterize $20,340 as particularly "affordable," even if it is meaningfully less than private-school costs. 
In-state, OK, $5,070 isn't bad, but, dammit, that is not affordable for everyone and is definitely high enough to make some students pass on college, or drop out with cost playing a factor.
I wouldn't quibble with "affordable in-state tuition" if someone prefers that as a section heading. Dpbsmith (talk) 14:23, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Value for money," not "affordable tuition" 

message: I do not have any experience with graphics/copyright/fair-use on Wikipedia, and so I'm asking that somebody with more experience tackle this issue (naturally, I'll watch the changes to learn).  I feel the graphic/coat-of-arms on the information box needs to be changed based on some observations.  All of the stationery, banners, and plaques that represent the college (I am a current student) do not appear in that format, but rather, show up as in the following page: http://www.wm.edu/it/images/wmimages/buscard.gif.  More graphics, including the one that currently appears on the page, are available here: Archive of W&M Images for the Web.  In addition, W&M's public relations nomenclature page indicates that "The College's primary identity is the College's wordmark "The College of William and Mary" combined with the coat of arms, which is placed to the left. Used together, the wordmark and seal make an excellent graphic when visual representation is needed."  Given this and the general observation that W&M seems to favor using the logo as in the image linked above (colorless and in that format), the image on Wikipedia's article ought to change to reflect that.  I'd do it myself, but as I said, I'm unsure about how to upload images and tag them properly.  Some help would be appreciated, as would any comments or opinions.  Thanks.
Daniel 00:49, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Logo/coat of arms 

message: Is anybody willing to retackle the information box?  One glance at the University of Virginia reveals a much cleaner-looking, better-organized information box.  Why not make W&M's in a format like this (and all of Va.'s public school sites, while we're at it)?  Thoughts?
Daniel 00:53, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Information box 

message: I am a current student and naturally browse the article frequently.  What I've noticed, however, is a gross expansion of the "notable professors" segment of the article that seems more based on authors deciding that their research professors or major advisors deserve mention on the article than actual notability.  I just re-alphabetized the list and erased some redundant information, but I want some opinions on the section in general.  Putting somebody there with the explanation "expert in (blank)" is not justification for mention.  College professors are innately experts in their respective fields.  I cannot explicitly comment on departments outside of my own (biology), nor do I want to presume to state who is notable and who is not.  However, some changes need to be made.  I added Bill Starnes because he recently patented and licensed technology in PVC stabilizers that will likely bring the college millions and perhaps revitalize the PVC industry worldwide.  However, I see many names that don't appear in the news, even in W&M's papers.  For instance, Anthony Zinni is most certainly notable as a political figure in the national spotlight.  Joseph Scott and Brian Holloway, on the other hand, don't seem to be so notable.  Are they masters in their fields (phycology and nanotube chemistry, respectively)?  Certainly.  That doesn't make them notable.  I feel that for someone to appear in the list, they should more than warrant an independent article on Wikipedia - if you want to add somebody you don't have to write an article, but they should at least merit one.  Opinions?  Anybody willing to help me tackle who is notable and who is not, and anybody want to justify those already on the list?  Thanks.
Daniel 01:19, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think a good set of criteria be that either A) the professor already HAS a Wikipedia article, or B) enough information is added with the entry such that a reasonable stub could be written.  If the professor meets neither, I say remove them from the list - If they deserve to be there they should have their own article anyway.  -- stillnotelf has a talk page 04:59, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree; however, I want to caution against one point.  I do not feel that enough information should appear in the section with which to write a stub.  The segment is supposed to be a list of notable professors, not a list of the accomplishments, criteria, and credentials of notable professors.  Enough information should be available to write a stub, I think, but it ought not appear in the entry itself.  Daniel 06:31, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Aha!  There is a guideline for this!  Wikipedia:Notability (academics).  -- stillnotelf has a talk page 18:40, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable professors section? 

message: Someone changed a weasel-worded "one of the oldest" to "the oldest." I'm feeling lazy right now, and don't want to track this down myself. I have no idea whether this is in totally-undisputed territory (like "William and Mary is the second-oldest college in the United States") or whether it is in highly suspect territory. I'm hoping someone can put in a good source citation for this. Is there a rival law school that claims comparable antiquity and, if so, which is it? Dpbsmith (talk) 17:17, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: "Marshall-Wythe School of Law is the oldest law school in the United States"