Talk:University of California, Berkeley/Archive 1

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Reverts Discussion

Lyndon and Zoe, why are you reverting each other's changes? --Ed Poor

I don't know what Lyndon's motives are. All I did was to clean up some links and NPOV his comments that the Cal/Stanford football game is the most important game in the world. As it is now, the entry looks okay, so I'm happy with what's there. -- Zoe

I agree. I went to Cal and I'm perfectly happy with Zoe's version. Lyndon has no reason to keep editing it. -- Dante Alighieri

Tuition

What's the pricing structure at the university?--Jerryseinfeld 19:47, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

[Berkeley Fees] Semiconscious (talk · home) 06:14, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

From what I am told, it was FREE until Reagan was governor, and since then still going up. This point needs some historical research. A historical table would be most enlightening. The idea was to educate the most promising, regardless of background (ability to pay) GangofOne 06:42, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

I think there's always been phoney "non tuition" fees. I think its against the state charter to charge for tuition so they charge for things like electricity, landscaping, admistrative overhead, campus police, chancelor's groom of the stool, etc. These were MUCH smaller in the past. In the 60s I think they were about $150 per year by 1990 were about $1500. Now they're over $7000. The state legislature is usually Democrat-controlled though the governor is usually Republican so I wouldn't pin it on anyone other than politicians in general. Monetarily poor students usually get substantial financial aid (albeit much of it loans) so pretty much anyone can afford Berkeley. -71.112.11.220 15:33, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

The Graduate

If I'm not mistaken... even though the film took place at UC Berkeley, the Graduate was actually shot on the UCLA campus. It was only the street (Telegraph) scenes that were shot in Berkeley. -- chris (not a user yet)

Chris is absolutely right. You see street scenes of Telegraph Ave. and of course the Bay Bridge, but the on-campus shots were done in Southern California. Moncrief

USC, rather: the big dramatic zoom-out where he's sitting at a fountain, for instance, is the courtyard between the administration building and Doheny library. --Brion 10:19 Dec 2, 2002 (UTC)

-the fraternity house the main character lives in is also a UC Berkeley fraternity, theta delta chi

Alumni

I added in a list of alumni from the margins of the general catalog and ommitted anyone who didnt meet the 1000 person test. Apparently, (almost) no foreigners are on the list. Some of them, such as James Soong could be added. --Jiang 21:19, 10 Aug 2003 (UTC)

What about those who never graduated? Jack London attended Cal, but I don't know the exact years and I don't think he graduated. I'm going to add him around the ~1900 time frame, but I'm not sure of the years. RickK 04:35, 12 Aug 2003 (UTC)

There's another list at http://calbears.ocsn.com/trads/cal-famousalums.html. Perhaps there are people famous enough on that list and not on this one. --Jiang 05:07, 12 Aug 2003 (UTC)

The "Jack London" entry under "noted Cal alums," added by RickK, says that Jack London "edited the campus literary journal, The Pelican." I don't think this can be right. RickK doesn't seem to have an email address. What's the right way to deal with this? Jack London did attend University of California from 1896 to 1897"--but Russ Kingman's biography says that "there is no record that Jack ever wrote for student publications as he had in high school." Also, "The Pelican" was founded in 1903 according to http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/uchistory/general_history/campuses/ucb/studentpubs.html, and seems to have been a humor magazine--the literary magazine was called "The Occident." A similar statement appears on the Jack London page. I'm going to change both notes to say something like "Attended 1896-1897, did not graduate, not known to have participated in student publications." But, RickK, if you're reading this and do have a reference to his participation, please let me know. Haven't got the hang of Wikipedia markup yet so I'll just say my email is dpbsmith@world.std.com --Dpbsmith 28 Sep 2003

What a thrill. Just found out I was a student at Berkeley in 1971 sharing the campus with the future president of Iran (paraphrase: "If we nuke Israel, it will be totally destroyed, whereas if Israel nukes us Arabs/Persians we'll only be damaged! Hahahaha!") Oh, and whadayaknow, a future president of Pakistan was also a fellow student. Another country with a great human rights record.

Folks, there is such a thing as too much information. Somebody should go through all of these "impressive" lists (every single Nobel prize-winner ever associated with Berkeley, etc.) and pare them down to the essence.

Yeah, yeah, Berkeley's a great school, but you can convey that without bragging about every little thing. (AT) (April 22, 2006)

Need factual clarification

"researchers affiliated with the campus discovered all the chemical elements heavier than Uranium"

This statement is apparently echoed at http://www.berkeley.edu/about/history/ - "In the 1930s research on campus burgeoned in nuclear physics, chemistry, and biology, leading to the development of the first cyclotron by Ernest O. Lawrence, the isolation of the human polio virus, and the discovery of all the artificial elements heavier than uranium"

Looking at the periodic table, I don't think this is true. (See Unununium, Darmstadtium, Bohrium, etc.) Someone want to investigate this further? --Jiang 23:00, 10 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Wow. I can't believe after all this time no one contacted Berkeley about this! The entry here is correct, but Berkeley's website was not. So I contacted Berkeley's NewCenter and website manager about this, and the UC Berkeley history page now reads "...and the discovery of a string of elements heavier than uranium." Elements 95 and 107-111 were not discovered at Berkeley. semiconscious (talk · home) 19:04, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Merge of buildings

Cory Hall - I don't see what's so special about this building. --Jiang 06:04, 4 Nov 2003 (UTC)
- Hm, there's also Soda Hall and Evans Hall. VV 07:29, 4 Nov 2003 (UTC)
- I dont support deletion of Soda Hall and Evans Hall (but dont oppose either). Those buildings are a little bit more well known. --Jiang
I think they can all be redirected and merged to the main UCB article. Cory Hall is probably the best one known outside of the campus as the site of two attacks by the Unabomber. --Minesweeper 02:21, 5 Nov 2003 (UTC)
- These kinds of "stubs" are not worth anything. If the person adding these really wanted to do something useful, they could have put listeed the buildings on the UCal Berkeley article. My guess is, that in the world there will be a dozen buildings (or rooms) with each of these names. Delete until someone serious can build the UCB article (or one about its campus) -- Marshman 02:25, 5 Nov 2003 (UTC)
- merge to main article and delete. DJ Clayworth 15:15, 5 Nov 2003 (UTC)
I have merged the content of Cory Hall, Soda Hall, and Evans Hall with University of California, Berkeley. Those "Hall" articles now redirect there, which I beleive makes them fine to leave. -- Infrogmation 19:17, 5 Nov 2003 (UTC)
- Google returns about 15,600 hits for Evans Hall. In the first 100 pages, in addition to the one at UC Berkeley, I found Evans Hall at Southwestern Adventist University, Philadelphia College of Osteopathic Medicine, Agnes Scott College (Letitia Pate Evans Hall), University of Wisconsin Oshhosh, University of Delaware, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Loma Linda University, Mississippi State University, Berry College, University of Central Oklahoma, Florida Institute of Technology, Connecticut College, Simmons College, Prairie View A&M University, Carleton College, University of Oklahoma, and Indiana Wesleyan University. I did not do searches for Cory or Soda Halls, but suspect I might get similar results. I don't think it works to make it a redirect to UCB. Either make into a large disambiguation page, or Delete.David Stapleton 16:13, Nov 6, 2003 (UTC)

Alumni/faculty lists & new articles

I've started Haas School of Business, Berkeley College of Chemistry, and Berkeley College of Engineering and have included alumni/faculty lists in those articles. This lists in this article are starting to get too long. Let's make those lists more detailed, and list only the very important/distinguished people (whatever that may mean) here. --Jiang 01:47, 16 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Regarding alumni vs faculty listings

November 19, 2003.

Hi jiang, I reverted your change.

As you mentioned, listing faculty alumni would make the list too long. However, these two are Nobel laureates. When a sloppy journalist or trivia game maker wants to write a question or article about how many alumni of Berkeley are Nobel laureates, they aren't going to be too careful -- they are just going to grab the alumni list and aren't going to register the fine print.

I'm not saying I am any less sloppy than other sloppy people. In fact, because I AM a sloppy person, I myself didn't bother to look at the faculty listings. Faculty come and go where salaries and opportunity knock; they are not beholden to any institution even if they have tenure. Today's faculty listing may be outdated tomorrow. But the alma mater never changes. It's as constant as a person's birthplace and birthdate. -anon

It's difficult to skip over the notes I added. All you have to do is read! The faculty list consists of anyone who was ever a faculty member of the uni, not just current faculty members. It cannot get outdated. It's more prestigious to be a faculty member than an alumni, that's why alumni faculty are listed there. --Jiang 08:27, 19 Nov 2003 (UTC)

And what determines whether someone deserves to be crosslisted? If you crosslist some, and not others, people will believe all faculty alumni have been crosslisted. The potential to miss some will be greater. --Jiang

"The faculty list consists of anyone who was ever a faculty member of the uni, not just current faculty members. " And what is considered "faculty"? Assistant professor, associate professor, research professor, courtesy professor, visiting professor, lecturer, visiting lecturer...? The "faculty list" would include TONS of people then, even professors who have taught less years than an undergraduate's 4 year stay, and have moved on to other institutions in search of different faculty politics or a higher salary or a better career for the spouse or the kids, or whatever. Just as an example, John Ousterhout (not an alumnus, just like George Akerlof) is mentioned in the main text, but he's currently not listed in the faculty section, and he's since moved on to the private sector. If the faculty list included such people, it would be ambiguous and misleading: Would readers understand that he's no longer at Berkeley? To clarify the listing, you'd have to list the years he served at Berkeley, and yegads, that's going to be lots of work.

"It's more prestigious to be a faculty member than an alumni, that's why alumni faculty are listed there." I always thought that a school's reputation should be based on the quality of its output (i.e., alumni), just as, say, a restaurant's reputation is based on the quality of its output (i.e., good food), and not necessarily on the names of the cooking staff. Do people remember West Point for the names of the generals and leaders it produced, or for the people on its faculty? But that's a viewpoint of the institution as a school, not as a research institution, so I can see your point that most people would like to be known by the company they keep.

"And what determines whether someone deserves to be crosslisted? If you crosslist some, and not others, people will believe all faculty alumni have been crosslisted. The potential to miss some will be greater." No answer; I'm going to sleep on it for now!

--anonymous, November 19, 2003.

Note the word notable. We list them there only if they've become accomplished/famous. We just don't list any faculty. The title does not matter - it's what they did. Almost all the faculty on the list gained their fame for the work they did at Cal. I can only see the Unabomber as the exception. Notice any others? (What we put on this list should be limited; See #Alumni/faculty lists & new articles)

The prestige of a school may depend on its alumni, but we're discussing the prestige of the individual. And as you mentioned, being a faculty member at a research institution matters more.

Including the years they worked would be a good thing. Please do so.

And what does this all have to do with crosslisting? --Jiang 21:03, 19 Nov 2003 (UTC)

">And what does this all have to do with crosslisting."

I don't understand why you object to cross listing faculty and alumni on two lists on this single page, when you yourself are cross-listing the entries of the alumni on this page with the lists on completely separate pages such as Haas School of Business. As you said earlier, ">>If you crosslist some, and not others, people will believe all ... alumni have been crosslisted. The potential to miss some will be greater."

Crosslisting on different pages and crosslisting on the same page is very different. We do not run into space problems when people are listed on separate pages than when they are listed on the same page. The listings on the individual school/college pages are meant to be much more extensive, to accomodate people we would be reluctant to list here because of size issues. Someone listed here were definately be listed on the school/college page, but not vice versa. This should make perfect sense. --Jiang

"> but we're discussing the prestige of the individual."

Are we? This page is about the University of California, Berkely, not any particular individual. The original mission of the university was to educate students, not to enhance the reputations of the faculty. Do you really think that Congregational minister Henry Durant was thinking, "I want to establish a university devoted to helping our employees make a big name for themselves" ?

The lists are about famous people at Berkeley. The original mission is irrelevant. There are many many more alumni than faculty. Scarcity tells us that this would aid in the faculty's prestige. In addition, faculty can be seen as more connected to the uni (having spent more time there) than the alumni.

We cannot gauge that being an alumni caused that alumni to become famous. However, we can easily see that certain faculty established their careers at Cal. --Jiang

"> And as you mentioned, being a faculty member at a research institution matters more."

Actually, I did not say that. I said that I could see your point of view that most people would like to be known by the company that they keep. This does not imply that those people would like their names to be removed from their alma mater's alumni list. Note that the pages for Harvard, Yale, and the University of Cambridge, amongst others, do not have lists of faculty, yet these institutions have a superior research reputation to Berkeley and greater name recongition, especially in foreign countries. These pages do have lists of esteemed alumni, which would imply that being a faculty member at a research insitution does not matter more than being a member of the alumni.

The other college/uni articles are not as developed as this one. If someone decided to take the time to add content, they would have faculty list to. Wikipedia:WikiProject Universities is under development. The list in this article seems to be longer than the lists in the others.

Again, you miss the point. If you created an article on an obscure Harvard grad, it would immediate become a candidate for deletion. If you created an article for a Harvard professor, the article would probably be allowed to stay. It doesnt matter if a uni's prestige is developed by its alumni. It only matters whether its more prestigous to be a professor or alumni at a reknowned university. --Jiang

">Note the word notable. We list them there only if they've become accomplished/famous."

Tom Campbell is a former 5 term United States Congressman, and is the dean of the Haas School of Business. You wrote both of these pages. But you didn't put him on the Faculty List on this page. Is he not "notable" enough? Why not? And what about John Ousterhout? Thousands of programmers know about Tcl, and he's mentioned in the main text, but he's not listed on the Faculty List. I guess the point I'm making is that the Faculty List is quite optional and should be ejected, because even you can't maintain it properly. What hope is there for the rest of us? :) As you yourself say, "> The potential to miss some will be greater."

If you believe they belong, add them. If you add John Ousterhout here, add it to the College of Engineering page. I would populate that list more if I know exactly what degrees some of the people listed on this page got. I wasn't sure about Dean Campbell so I left him out. He's only been around this campus since 2002. --Jiang

My suggestion: In lieu of actually omitting the Faculty List, any notable alumni who are also on the faculty should always first be included in the alumni list, and thereafter, optionally (at one's disgression) included on the "Faculty List". My suspicion is that, in the future, the Faculty List is going to grow to an unmanageable size due to the ambiguous inclusion criteria, and will be eliminated or relocated, because nobody will want to go through the agony of maintaining it for correctness. The Alumni List is always going to be on the page.

- anonynmous November 19, 2003

What's stopping the alumni list from being populated with a bunch of obscure people? I don't see how the faculty list will grow to an unmanageable size, if the same doesnt apply for the alumni list. The faculty list will be limited as the not so famous faculty would be listed only in the relevant school/college articles. Both lists should stay the same length. It's easier to tell if a degree and year are in parenthesis after someone's name than it is find the word "professor" somewhere after one's listing on the alumni list. Alumni stand out more on the faculty list than vice versa. We could additionally italicize their names. --Jiang 04:32, 20 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I'm an alumnus of sorts -- attended Berkeley for a couple of years (but graduated from UC Santa Cruz.) And I don't see my name anywhere. That's unfair!

Seriously, just hit a few bright spots with all those names. Chamberlain, Calvin, Alvarez, Seaborg, Oppenheimer, Townes, Segre, MacMillan, (spellings right?), a couple more -- okay, I get it, big names in science.

The laser, plutonium, the Manhattan Project, the cyclotron, photosynthesis -- okay, I get it, big scientific discoveries.

Earl Warren, Robert McNamara, some major human rights violators (Presidents of Iran, Pakistan) -- okay, I get it, Berkeley has graduated movers and shakers.

Brevity is the soul of wit -- to steal someone else's line. (AT) (April 22, 2006)

NL parking spaces

Latest edit: "When one laureate was recognized, the administration, per custom, granted his request, which happened to be a permanent parking place; the solution by the administration was to mark a space NL with a sign underneath For department XXX use only; to prevent occupancy by another Nobel Laureate."

Where does it say that they grant these spaces "per custom" and only at the NL's request? Don't they automatically grant it? Where is the "department XXX use only"? It's not on the sign or on the asphalt.--Jia ng 22:54, 8 Feb 2004 (UTC)

NPOV:

Removed:

Among the traditional colleges found in a liberal arts setting one will find a number of scholarly and active institutions among Berkeley schools. The engineering college in close relationship with the computer science and mathematics departments offers one of the most rigorous programs in the nation, comparable to those at Stanford University, a geographic rival, and MIT. In computer science, Berkeley has had much success in securing funds and heavily invested projects for its faculty and graduate students in research and business development.

Its programs for computer science are grueling and intense but very fruitful in respects to Berkeley rivals MIT, Carnegie Mellon, and Stanford. Its position as the leader in mathematic and CS theory has attracted scholarly leadership and interest world-wide.

The professional schools at Berkeley, Haas Business and Boalt Hall Law School, have also held reputations as some of the most innovative and productive schools in the nation. Haas Business is especially known for its training of some of the most interesting management types even if its abilities to help its graduates land jobs are staggered by the impression of public education's mediocrity. Yet Scholarship still oozes heavily from the business school. The faculty are among the most gifted. The business school shares a unique relationship with Columbia University in which a divided MBA program is completed in residence between the two school schools and respective resident cities, and taught by a split faculty from the two schools.

Please make it NPOV by citing statistics, rankings, and authorities. Adjectives are not convincing. --Jia ng 02:01, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Bold

Please do not use just bold text to distinguish some items from others; use an asterisk, or make as separate list. Biol;d text is not "visible" to some text- only browsers, or audio browsers, or some search engines/ archives. Thank you. Andy Mabbett 11:15, 8 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Noted Cal students

So "Noted Cal Students" refers to anyone who attended but never graduated? Both Jason Kidd and Pei-Yuan Wei are no longer around. In that case, Jack London should be moved down. --Jia ng 04:11, 20 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Splitting alumni/faculty listings

This article has passed its limit. I'm going to move the lists to

We need to expand the wikipedia:lead section and perhaps provide more faculty/student statistics (the NL parking space photo will need a place to go). --Jia ng 23:34, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Cloyne Court Hotel

This was originally a separate article. Rather than list it on VfD, I decided that the folks here would probably have a better idea whether this housing unit is notable, worthy of mention, etc. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 23:42, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

P. S. The original version was amazingly overwikified. I think you have to see this to believe it. I just spent a good three minutes removing square brackets...

Cloyne Court Hotel is a former hotel and apartment house at 2400 Ridge Road on the north side of the campus of the University of California, Berkeley. It was built in the early 20th century by the architect John Howard. It was later purchased by the University Students' Cooperative Association and now provides accommodation for approximately 150 students. It is well-known by students for both its reputation as having poor levels of hygiene and tidyness, and for its large parties. It has a small lawn and 2 basketball hoops in its concrete courtyard. The interior is somewhat eclectic thanks to a variety of murals that have been painted on the walls by residents past and present. The house members elect managers from within to help run the house, from social manager to maintainence manager to recycling manager. The most senior positions are remunerated with reductions to their rent payments. The other residents are expected to complete 5 hours of work around the house per week to contribute to the upkeep of the house.

The school having the most alumni who go on to earn doctorates is Harvey Mudd College also in California (35% of their alumni) according to a survey by the National Research Council. Berkeley is high on the list (third or fourth) but it is not first.

Things to do

So what else in this article needs to be worked on or added to? I'm pretty happy with it so far, though perhaps the Sports and traditions section could be made more cohesive (like Columbia's). Also, may be Contributions to Computer Science might less isolated if it was framed in the context of a section on Berkeley's contributions in general? —Gku 23:58, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)

I'd argue that the Sports content should be removed to its own article -- it's long as it is, but honestly could gain much more depth, given Cal's storied sports background. But it's too much for the main article. Jsnell 00:35, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Perhaps some acceptance statistics? (Students who get in/number that apply)

Removed "Loyalty Oath still required today"

This oath is no longer required by all new employees. I know this because I am one, and have asked other new employees.

I'm pretty sure you're wrong, but I'll check into it. It's on the same form as the patent agreement, which I'm sure you had to sign. It's obviously not enforced in the same way it was in the 1950s, but it is still on the books "Statement of the Oath of Allegiance." It may be that it is only required by certain classes of employees, though I'm not sure, but will check. --Fastfission 20:35, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

This is the form: Oath of Allegiance and Patent Policy. "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties upon which I am about to enter." I'm fairly sure this hasn't been changed, but I can check today with someone who would know such things (a manager at UCB). It's not just UCB of course that requires this—all of state government might—but the point still stands that this is a vestige of the 1950s policies. --Fastfission 20:43, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I checked with my friend, a manager at Berkeley for over a decade, and she said that nothing has changed about this policy; I see no evidence that it had changed except an anon claiming that they didn't sign the form (I suspect they did but didn't read it). I'm reinstating.. --Fastfission 23:35, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

(Off-topic remark) Reminds me of a story about a friend of mine who applied for a job at the University of Wisconsin in the late 1960s. At that time, and likely still, University employees were required to sign an oath of loyalty to the Constitution of the State of Wisconsin. Wisconsin is one of those states whose constitution is a slim volume of dense legal prose. He got to that part, and said, "May I see a copy?" "What?" "Can you give me a copy of the Constitution of Wisconsin to read through? I'm from out of state and I'm not familiar with it, and I'd like to read it through before I sign a sworn statement of loyalty to it." Needless to say no copy could be found on the premises. (And needless to say he signed it anyway...) Dpbsmith (talk) 23:12, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

As confirmation, I was a reader for UCB last year and I definitely had to sign the pledge. It was part of a sizeable pile of paperwork that had to be completed, so someone could have easily have been signed it without paying attention. I remember the pledge in particular, since I clearly recall thinking that it must have been an odd vestige of the McCarthy era. pamm83 22:31, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

its not required for foreign nationals (professors anyway) 71.112.11.220 17:39, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Humor

This whole section was removed. Some of the other UC sites have humor sections, why not Berkeley? - *University of California Lightbulb Jokes

Number of Cal graduates

Someone added the statement, "More people have graduated from Berkeley than any other university in the nation" today. Is there a reference for this claim? If one is not providided soon, I will remove this. Semiconscious (talk · home) 07:04, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

California Fight Song

The official fight song for UC Berkeley is actually "Fight for California." It's the song played when

Cal teams take the field
When the football team scores
That the Cal Band plays when they form the script Cal on the field
At the end of games (at the end of the first half in football and basketball)

"Big C" (currently listed as the California Fight Song in this article) is one of the more commonly used fight songs by the Cal Band (generally after a big play in football), but isn't really the fight song.

UCLA made slight modifications to "Big C" for their official fight song -- "Sons of Westwood."

Good info on "Fight for Cal" at: http://www.calband.berkeley.edu/calband/media/calsongs/fight.html

Another thing about the "Big C" song. The lyrics in the song as presented in this article used to read "Stanfurd" (the derogatory spelling of "Stanford" used by some avid Berkeley fans). An anonymous editor at 65.91.82.62 removed the one occurence and I removed the other one (thinking it had been vandalised). I looked at the history and it seems to have said "Stanfurd" since it was added. I believe it was taken from http://www.calband.berkeley.edu/calband/media/calsongs/bigc.html. The trouble is, now I don't know if the Cal Band site just published it as "Stanfurd", or whether it was originally "Stanfurd". I wouldn't think the use of the "Stanfurd" spelling was current in 1913, but I suppose it could have been. If anyone can find a definitive source of the original lyrics, feel free to change it back. Mike Dillon 22:29, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

However, if you go on the Cal Band site, "Stanfurd" is mentioned only in "Big C," "Stanford Jonah" uses the real spelling of Stanford. This makes it seem that "Stanfurd" is the correct spelling of "Stanford" in "Big C" --

This page is 33kB long. Copies of the songs do not belong here. They belong in wikisource. --Ji ang 09:37, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

I think that this source is official enough. I added a note on how "Stanford" is sometimes spelled "Stanfurd" as part of the traditional rivalry. --Ixfd64 08:10, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

On Being called "California"

UC Berkeley is not University of California, is not California, is not CAL. The UNIVERSITY SYTEM is the University of California which includes the whole TEN campuses. Let's end this common and wrong practice of refering to the oldest and "flagship" campus as a stand in for the whole UC system!

--a graduate of another campus of UC.

While your opinion is appreciated, the Wikipedia is about facts and whether you like it or not, millions of people refer to UC Berkeley as "Cal". The article is merely presenting the fact of the matter that UC Berkeley is known by these other names. Whether or not they are "erroneous" is not the place of this article to decide. Please find another forum to promote your opinion. Mike Dillon 05:17, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

P.S. I personally don't like the name "Cal", but that doesn't change the fact that it is a very common name for the school (especially in the sports world). Mike Dillon 05:18, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

what Mike Dillon said, but note that this name gained widespread usage at a time Berkeley was the UC - before your satellite school existed.--Jiang

UC Berkeley is commonly referred to as "Cal", usually in connection with athletics but not always. I can take pictures of many, many pieces of merchandise that the University sells with the stylized Cal logo on them (this logo is trademarked). Perhaps you don't live near UC Berkeley or the Bay Area and are not exposed to this colloquialism of the University's name? -- Joseph Lorenzo Hall 18:31, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Mike,

Thank you for the clarification and reminding me of my opinion. I am new to wikipedia and thought I was just correcting a common misconception. However, I don't appreciate snide comments such as Jiang's that mine is a "satellite school". Most of the other UC campuses are academic powerhouses in their own right. There may still (for the most part) be a pecking order of 1. UCB 2. UCLA 3. UCSD 4. UCD, UCI, UCSB 5. ... in terms of excellence but note that UCB does NOT have its own medical school. Even if UCB is likened to a "Public Ivy" it still doesn't have Medical, Pharmacy, Dental, Law, (Veterinary?) etc. schools all at once which is the case at Harvard or the University of Chicago, to name but a few. So one may say that for its stature, it is not TRULY a comprehensive university and not a stand-in for the WHOLE of CALIFORNIA. (Students of history will note that a Berkeley medical school was a possibility at one time discussed. Instead, the Regents voted to put "UCB's medical school" in San Francisco--UCSF.) Alumni of UCB might do well to acknowledge that there are other campuses of the UC and people who attended these schools. They should also be aware of what we from the "lesser UC's" often perceive as snobbery from those who went to "Cal". The continuation of this naming practice only perpetuates this snobbery.

P.S. I think you can appreciate the difference between prescriptive and descriptive language. We can leave the language of sports memorabilia and Bay Area residents cited by Joseph as they are in the realm of (local) ordinary language. However, I'd wager that the majority of residents in California refer to UCB as "Berkeley" over "Cal" or "California". Continuing this practice in a whole new medium (vs. on a radio broadcast of The Big Game or Bumper stickers), is another issue. It is better to have this issue confronted early before it is duplicated on the new medium of the internet and so spread to the world. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.254.1.234 (talk • contribs)

"Cal" is definitely in widespread use, not only by the students and alumni but by area media and the University itself. It is not simply part of "the language of sports memorabilia and Bay Area residents" but a significant part of UC Berkeley's identity. A quick browse of the Newscenter yields not only press releases like "Cal sharpening the Axe as Big Game approaches" and "Stadium, southeast campus plans fit Cal's ambitions in athletics and academics" but also "Cal admissions chief reaches out to Richmond High students" (Contra Costa Times) and "Cal student shows how easy it is to be 'green'" (Oakland Tribune). A SF Chronicle article (Fur flies fast and furious at college debate event) initially refers to "UC Berkeley" but then refers to "Cal" for the rest of the article (i.e., "In the next round, Cal faced UC Davis in a debate about...") "Cal" is also used to refer to UC Berkeley by numerous campus organizations and events, such as the Daily Cal (Daily Californian), Cal Student Store, Cal Band, Cal Day, Cal Performances, Cal Democrats, etc. The University itself states: "The school, known throughout the world as 'Cal,' is truly a prototype of a contemporary university." (About the University of California) As for the use of the word "California", UC Berkeley is definitely not the only flagship public university campus to refer to itself by the state name, especially in an athletic context--see the Universities of Michigan-Ann Arbor, Texas-Austin, Wisconsin-Madison, etc etc. UC Berkeley's athletic teams are nationally competitive, and "California" is the way it's referenced in media online and across the nation (e.g., Yahoo! Sports.) It's not really arrogance so much as a combination of tradition and seniority--at some point these were the ONLY campuses of their respective university systems, and it was the state name that differentiated each university from every other "University of ____" out there. I'd argue that the use of "University of California" to refer only to UC Berkeley is in the same vein; for example, the sign at the west entrance to campus simply reads "University of California." (I'll admit that, in an academic and everyday context, "University of California" more often refers to the system than the Berkeley campus.)

I'm sorry to belabor the point, but I think that--unless there's is more widespread disagreement--the current opening's phrasing is clearer, more accurate, and reads a bit better than Mike Dillon's compromise. This isn't an issue of snobbery or contempt for the other UC campuses, but, as Mike said, being accurate and factual. (For the record, UC Berkeley has a law school, Boalt Hall. For that matter, Princeton University doesn't have a Business, Law, nor Medical School, but that doesn't necessarily mean it is somehow incomplete.) -- Gku 11:14, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

How about something like this as an opening paragraph. If we can reach a mini-consensus among the people watching this page, I'll make the change:

The University of California, Berkeley (also known as UC Berkeley, UCB, or simply Berkeley) is a public coeducational university situated east of the San Francisco Bay in Berkeley, California, overlooking the Golden Gate. The oldest and flagship campus of the University of California System, UC Berkeley is a leading research university. Its graduate programs and faculty are consistently ranked among the best in the world. Because it is the flagship campus and was the only general education campus in the UC system for nearly 60 years, UC Berkeley is ~~sometimes~~ frequently referred to as Cal, California, or The University of California, especially in the context of the school's athletic and ~~alumni~~ spirit organizations.

Would that be a decent alternative for everyone? Mike Dillon 04:20, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

P.S. (again) The Regents didn't exactly "open" UCSF instead of a Berkeley medical school; instead, they took over an existing medical school (the Toland Medical School). I assume a lot of that was cost-related since incorporating an existing school must have been a lot cheaper, especially since it happened in the same year as the move from Oakland to Berkeley. Mike Dillon 04:27, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

That looks good to me. To clarify: I might've simplified the creation of UCSF a bit in my rant. You are right that an existing facility was taken over. I think from the accounts that I've read there was some politicking about where the med school should be located (http://history.library.ucsf.edu/themes/themes_splitcampus.html). All of this also occured before the Bay Bridge was even built!

Most of the UC campuses besides UCSF have their medical schools and the associated main university hospital quite removed from each other (except UCLA). UCI's Medical center is in Orange but the medical school is in Irvine. UCD's med school is in Davis, and the hospital more than 15 miles away in Sacramento. Given that the UCSF campus and Berkeley are about this distance apart, too, it is worth asking why it didn't happen that the medical school was formed at UCB instead. I suppose it makes sense to devote a campus to all the health sciences (except optometry) in one place at UCSF. --140.254.1.234 15:11, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

In response to Gku's observations.

California is the most populated state in the Union. It will be so for the rest of our lives. It just keeps growing. Mostly because it butts up against the main sending regions of immigrants to the United States (Asia and Latin America). It is a state of the future. Why cling to a name for one of its oldest public universities (San José State is older) which is so rooted in the past?

With all this in mind, California's primary research university system is singular in the nation, as is the state. Sure, there may be other states with analagous quality "founder" universities: Texas, Virginia, North Carolina, Michigan. And among these, Michigan is projected to lose population relative to other states. With a lagging population how could a state expect to build up its "second" and "third" universities in its primary university sytem? All the while maintaining a "state" ,(MSU) or normal university system.

None of these public universities has a second, or third, or fourth...campus in their system even CLOSE to the stature of the other UC's that happened to be founded after UCB. That isn't to say that they might not down the road (Texas' case is complicated by having split its flagship with Texas A&M. But if they could ever figure out which is going to be their "second" campus, then they might be able to compare with the UC. They have favorable population trends.) In California, some of these UC campuses weren't as boxed in by development like Berkeley and so we can expect them to grow to even better universities.

I still think that if you were to go around the state and take a survey of what that university is called in the city next to Oakland the majority would say, be they longtime residents or ones getting off the boat, that it is "Berkeley" or "UC Berkeley". And consider the greater number of CSU graduates. What do they think about this school representing the whole of CA? Notice that there is no longer a California Angels baseball club (will there ever be an Oakland Warriors team?). I'll concede that UCB using "California" in signifying its campus is nowhere as elitist or confusing as the University of Pennsylvania using their moniker for a private university.

As for Princeton: you make my point. Princeton is usually considered a fine "undergrad" school. One of the best, if we can believe U.S. News. However, in my given field it hasn't really ever had one of the best grad programs. But really there are only two Ivy League schools. Ones that are completely comprehensive (and excellent), undergrad and grad: Harvard and Yale.

I'm aware of Boalt (and Hastings too). My point was that UCB doesn't have med and law schools simultaneously as does, say, UCD or UCLA.

To recap: UC Berkeley is close to the definition of a "Public Ivy". Or "a prototype of a contemporary university." As close as it can get with the conspicuous lack of a med school. Most of the other campuses: getting there, if not already.

"California": it is not. But we can see if anyone else out there similarly disagrees.--140.254.1.234 15:11, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Well, I think you made the point yourself about having a prescriptive versus a descriptive approach. Since the we all agree that the article should describe the situation, not prescribe what people should be doing when it is clear that it is not the current state of affairs, the issue is whether or not there is a consensus that the alternative version describes the facts of the matter more accurately or more clearly. Until that consensus is reached, which it clearly hasn't been, the article should remain as is. For the record, I'd like to be clear that the fact that I wrote the alternative doesn't mean I actually think we should change it; I could go either way. I just wanted to provide a reasonable alternative to consider if the facts warrant it. Mike Dillon 16:59, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

I could go either way on the change... It would be nice to see if anyone else sees this as a problem. The only way to do that is to wait and see if others have a similar concern. -- Joseph Lorenzo Hall 02:24, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

My only concern over the proposal is that it gives too much coverage to the naming conventions in the lead section. Perhaps we can keep the lead as is, but insert a footnote explaining all the different naming usages. We can expand this further, stating that "UC Berkeley" is used more commonly than "Cal" in academic settings, and that Rally Com explicitly opposes the use of "UCB" or "Berkeley" (for the same reasons 140.254.1.234 opposes the use of "Cal" or "California") so those variations are never used in spirit or sporting situations. This info should be included, but to leave it in the lead would make the lead lopsided. --Jiang 03:02, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

I agree that being more thorough about when the different names are used and by which groups is an improvement on my proposal. However, it should probably just be another paragraph that isn't in the lead instead of footnotes. So long as the description of the name usage is accurate, I'd say it is an improvement on the current situation where the article leaves room for the conclusion that all these names are interchangable in all situations when they clearly are not. Mike Dillon 18:18, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Continuing to grind my axe (which they won BTW)...

Berkeley's homepage is berkeley.edu. Try to put in ucberkeley.edu and you won't even get a redirect.

All of the other campuses use acronyms UCX.edu for their homepages (with the exception, for reasons unknown, of ucdavis.edu and ucmerced.edu). From what I can tell, only UCLA will give a redirect if you try to call up the uclosangeles.edu page.

I think this strengthens my case that the most commonly voiced name for that university in the city next to Oakland is: (UC) Berkeley.

So perhaps the names in the opening would move from the legal and official name: University of California, Berkeley / UC Berkeley to the more familiar and I'd argue the most frequent vocalization of the school's name: Berkeley to the widespread and unfortunate term (and mainly in sports/ alumni context): California, Cal, etc.

--140.254.1.234 01:28, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

California Golden Bears

Why in the world is this a redlink? Granted, the Sports section is an okay overview. But check out Syracuse University Orange. For shame! Somebody who isn't me, do something about it! Melchoir 03:58, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Apathy/activism

This paragraph:

Although there are claims that the university’s students have become politically apathetic and civically disengaged in the decades since the Free Speech Movement and Vietnam War, there are also counter-claims that today’s campus activism spans a broader range of causes (making it appear more dispersed) and utilizes new approaches, such as e-mail networks and electronic mailing lists.

Any sources? Who made those claims? Who made those counterclaims? Surely there's an article in the ~~Berkeley Barb~~Daily Californian or somewhere that could be referenced? Dpbsmith (talk) 00:19, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

The Berkeley Barb went out of business about 20 years ago. GangofOne 00:32, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

O tempora, O mores. Dpbsmith (talk) 01:07, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

I wish now I'd saved them instead of using them as fishwrap. Sic transit gloria mundi. If anyone wants to fatten the stub I wrote on the Barb, go ahead! Antandrus (talk) 22:30, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Rewording and moving "ranking" statement

Re Wikipedia:Avoid peacock terms I've reworded the phrase

Berkeley is consistently ranked as the best public university in the United States and is known for the distinction of its faculty, libraries, and research.

and moved it to the proper subhead, "Ranking and reputation."

"Known for the distinction of its faculty, libraries, and research" seems to add nothing; what else would a university's distinction be based on?

The phrase "best public university in the United States" seems to me to be worded so as to emphasize "best" while minimizing the qualification "public," hence somewhat promotional in tone. Dpbsmith (talk) 21:25, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

On peeking at the U.S. News rankings, I have to wonder whether it's really neutral to suggest that Berkeley is somehow in a different category from the likes of UVa, University of Michigan, and UCLA, even if it does edge them out "consistently." Dpbsmith (talk) 21:34, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't think anybody will miss the "public", personally. I originally kept things fairly vague not to be peacocky but to avoid both relying on any given ranking system and to avoid anything which implied Berkeley was necessarily the best at anything (avoiding the problem of whether it is really better than the other major publics). But anyway, do as you please... --Fastfission 22:23, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

I think "consistantly" and "best" are fair. Although it only edges out UMich, UVA and UCLA by a small margin in the US News undergrad ranking, every other major ranking puts it vastly ahead (NRC Rankings 35/36 programs in top 10... UCLA only has 12, Michigan 14, and UVA isn't in the upper tier; US News grad rankings have all of Cal's programs in the top 5, and the various world rankings place Berkeley leaps ahead of the others, so all in all I think it's a safe assumption)ckoala84

Classes as large as 999...

"Berkeley's largest classes of 800 are smaller than many private schools that have classes as large as 999."

I think we need a source for the "many" private schools, particularly with that very oddly precise figure of 999, inserted by 69.107.68.132 on 16:05, 23 December 2005 without explanation.

Nor am I completely sure what's the point. Surely by the time a lecture class exceeds a few hundred it can't matter much whether it's 500, 800, 999, or 3000? Assuming of course that the lecture hall is designed so everyone can see and hear... What matters at that point surely is whether there are sections, the quality of the section leaders, and how much access the average student has to the professor outside the lecture? Dpbsmith (talk) 12:27, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

The 999 was added to show that large classes are not unique to large public universities, but perhaps it could have been substantiated better

"Location"

I removed this text:

Berkeley is not an island. As most students of the university can attest, the campus is located in the roughest neighborhood of any UC school. Homelessness and misdemeanors are commonplace, especially in the areas to the south and west of the campus.

Aside from the fairly unencyclopedic and tautological first sentence (has anybody asserted it is in fact an island?), I'm not convinced by the claims that follow. Seeing the crime stats for Berkeley does not tell me anything about they compare to other UC neighborhoods (and what counts as a "neighborhood"? UC Riverside is not far from some fairly bleak areas itself if I recall) which is what is required to make such a comparative statement like "roughest". Homelessness is not itself a crime or necessarily a crime level indicator, either. Misdemeanors do not indicate "roughness". Anyway at the moment it is in my mind a fairly unsubstantiated and meaningless statement. I doubt that "most students of the university" can actually attest to the relative crime rates of other UC schools -- I'm betting that "most students" can't even correctly name the other UC schools or really know where they are in the state. I'm happy with including a section on local crime rates, types of crimes, comparisons with other UC campuses, but at the moment this looks a lot more like POV than actual facts. --Fastfission 18:29, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

No University is an Iland, intire of itselfe; every University is a peece of the Continent, a part of the maine. I don't know whether academic knocking is as much of a competitive sport as academic boosting, but UMass knockers would claim the national honors for UMass Amherst. Dpbsmith (talk) 21:06, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Hello Fastfission, I don't have a problem removing the comparison to other UC campuses. But some comments about the urban setting would be of benefit to this article. Would you like to take a stab at this or would you prefer I try again? Regarding Riverside, please compare the stats at http://police.berkeley.edu/annual_report/2004/riverside/reported_offenses.html to those at http://police.berkeley.edu/annual_report/2004/berkeley/reported_offenses.html in order to see that Berkeley's neighborhood is worse. -BGU

Featured article candidate

Just in case you hadn't noticed, this article was nominated as a featured article candidate. I personally don't think it is ready, but you can voice your opinion on the page I just linked to.

It does have some good suggestions for improving the article, particularly regarding the pictures used in the article and the overabundance of short "paragraphs". Mike Dillon 20:09, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

UC Berkeley ROCKS