Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Syracuse University/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted by User:SandyGeorgia 17:08, 17 January 2009 [1].

Syracuse University[edit]

Nominator(s): OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions

I'm nominating this article for featured article because it has been substantially rewritten and referenced with proper citations. It follows the outline of a similar article Georgetown University which is an FA. It meets the standards of many articles about private and public universities in the US. It meets all of the criteria of WP:Featured article criteria. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 16:56, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Images - is this the reason for your username? If it is, remind me to rib you about how absurd an androgynous orange puffball is for a mascot :P Anyhow, this is going to take a while but File:Otto.png needs a FUR for this page as well as its main page. --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 18:17, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, hence my name. I'm going to have do an ANI for a personal attack against Otto. Oh, no wait, I hate that mascot. Back in my day (I'm older than dirt), we had much better mascots. This one is truly lame. But please, a dumb mascot is no reason to oppose this article. LOL. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 18:22, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A dumb mascot isn't a reason, them rejecting my application after I wrote the best goddamned essay ever is :P Anyhow, images:
Ah hah!!!! So you're filled with anger and hatred against the Cuse??? :D OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 18:52, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Syracuse University Seal.png - the seal is no longer used on the main Syracuse site, which they have redesigned; thus the URL is outdated. Under the 'replaceable' field, it says: "No, Fair Use doesn't apply" - huh?
  • File:Otto.png and File:SyracuseOrange.png - the syracuse orange typeface isn't really an issue as it's PD, but wouldn't it make more sense to have less fair use images by removing Otto from the infobox? He's got his own page where such an image can be found, and I would expect the content which justifies the image per NFCC is found in that article.

Just a note, if you actually remove the above as improperly free, please do something about the images on Commons rather than just removing them from the article (people seem to do that, but that just causes more issues down the road :P) I'll see about actually reading it sometime later. --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 18:38, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll work on those, but I have no experience or interest in dealing with the images at commons. I just uploaded my first image last week, and I wasn't even sure I did it right. IMHO, I'd delete every single freaking image. I'd rather read than look at pictures, but hey, that's my feelings. AND, I think you were talking about the Dome Ranger. Now that's one annoying mascot. For a University that has a top level athletics program AND one of the top communications schools in the country, you'd think they could get this right. I'm starting the Down with Otto movement!!!!! OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 18:45, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think the TV or radio logos are needed in the article. The Maxwell School image needs to be deleted on Commons and not speedy deletion here on enwiki. You can make a list of images here (or my talk page) to be deleted on Commons, and as an Commons admin, I can take care of them. --Aude (talk) 19:35, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
See, I don't know anything about this. LOL. I'm trying. And yeah, I never liked the logos there. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 19:38, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I took most of Mr. Fuch's suggestions (in the process, learning a thing or two about licensing of images), and removed suspect images. I also dumped that silly WERW and WAER logos. Not really necessary. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 07:33, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It looks much better, but File:Carnegie2a.jpg should be removed per the PD-US reason above, and what I meant about the seal is that the front page the image description page links to (syracuse.edu) no longer contains the logo, so another source for the image should be found. --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 13:12, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments - The only two big things I see are that the "Campus" and "Student life" sections are somewhat lacking in references. Also, the article says, "The Syracuse Center of Excellence in Environmental and Energy Systems is scheduled for completion in 2006." Was it completed? Also mentioned under #Downtown is the "Connective Corridor", which looks like according to [2] may be completed now. Otherwise the article is very well done. --B (talk) 20:22, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • OK B, this will crack you up. The Syracuse Center of Excellence in Environmental and Energy Systems has not been completed because asbestos was found in the building they're using. Excellence in Environment I suppose. It was supposed to be completed last month, but I can't find anything to confirm that. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 07:42, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Fixed both items. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 08:03, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have questions regarding some of the images' licenses - most notably CitrisTV's logo. I highly doubt that it is actually licensed in CC2.0. - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ guestbook ♦ contribs 21:26, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conditional Oppose 1a, 1b, 2b.
    • Information is haphazardly spread among various sections.
      • Alumni call outs appear in sections outside of the alumni section: fraternities, media,
        • I'm going to pushback here. Since I'm going to guess that about 50% of ESPN is made up of Newhouse grads,[citation needed] I think mentioning the number of notable alumni who make up sports programming in the US is important to the article. If you can suggest a way to do this gracefully, I'm certainly not going to stand in the way of improvement. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 06:45, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • The article neglects major topics.
      • Where is the information on the organization/administration? How many schools? Who's the president? Board of trustees? Accreditation? Endowment? What is the relationship between the faculty and administration? Addressing Utica College and SUNY-ESF would likewise be better addressed in a standalone organization section rather than in academics.
      • Important academic topics are slighted. What are the largest/most popular programs? What's the academic calendar? Chapters of notable honor societies? Is there a core curriculum required of all undergraduates? The emphasis in the introductory paragraph on admissions rather than general description is inappropriate: use the Carnegie classifications first and foremost and then mention admission information later. There's no discussion of the composition of the student body: graduate/undergraduate size, racial demographics, geographic origin, average admission scores, freshmen retention rate, graduation rates, etc. No mention of financial aid, number of student qualifying for Pell grants, or graduating student debt.
        • If you'll indulge me while I toot my own horn, you can write a whole academics section without a single mention of rankings in the prose if you want. University of Michigan does it as well if FAs are the only precedents that matter as well. Madcoverboy (talk) 22:38, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
          • OK, not to sound whiny, but Northwestern University stands on its merits without rankings. Syracuse, being a smaller and somewhat less well known school (except for the athletics programs), should have a bit more "oomph" behind what is written. It's hard not to brag.OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 06:41, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
            • Every school should be able to stand on its merits without rankings. I also don't understand what "oomph" is and why this article needs it, but other articles are fine without it. It may be hard not to brag, but most university FAs feel no need to do so nor should Wikipedia be in the business of promoting colleges. I would remind you of Wikipedia's policies on conflict of interest and neutrality (specifically, WP:MORALIZE, WP:ASF, and WP:BOOSTER). Madcoverboy (talk) 20:41, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
              • Excuse me? Stand on its merits? So, I'm supposed to just write, "Syracuse is just a great school." Rankings do matter. And I'd suggest you retract your borderline uncivil commentary. It's not fostering discussion. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 02:40, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • Ranking section delves into too much detail on some departmental/subdepartmental topics (digital librarianship? trial advocacy?) while neglecting university-level rankings like ARWU, Forbes, Center for Measuring University Performance, etc. I would recommend using Template:Infobox US university ranking I likewise think that emphasizing positive (e.g. Top 10) rankings while neglecting lower-ranked programs is non-neutral and gives undue weight. Rankings likewise appear scattered in other sections, such as US News appearing in the intro academics paragraph rather than the rankings paragraph.
      • History section neglects to mention anything on racial integration, vietnam era protests, and adaption to decling government support in 1980s/90s, modernization steps during the boomer echo/admissions frenzy (new student life attractions)
      • The faculty section is almost completely unreferences and has no central theme other than listing a few who's who. Information on national academy membership, notable national/international prizes would be helpful. I think merging faculty with whats left of research (after spinning library out) would also be useful. Relationships/partnerships with local, state, federal govt
      • The museum/library information needs its own dedicated section since I don't think are entirely appropriate in the "research" section.
    • Lack of references in the student life and campus sections. I would emphasize and contextualize the National register of historic places much more as this is substantially more interesting than the content currently there. Campus also provides no geographic context on relationship with Syracuse, size of campus, distance from NYC, modes of transportation.
    • The alumni section has instances puffery and peacockery and weasel words: "one of the most-influential", "pioneering", "one of the richest"
  • I think these issues can be addressed in due course and there may yet be others still, but the article shouldn't be promoted. Madcoverboy (talk) 22:33, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dabs; please check the disambiguation links identified in the toolbox. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:43, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • DAB = disambiguation. In short form, some internal links lead to disambig pages rather than the proper specific page. You can check with the dab tool in the toolbox on this page. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 02:16, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • Is it me or is toolserver down? I know yarrow's down... but are they taking the entire thing down to get everything else back online? - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ guestbook ♦ contribs 04:47, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        • Fixed. NO thanks to Jay Henry. LOL. By the way, it was Village of Lima, NY. I still don't get New York's obsessions with towns and villages. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 06:38, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments -

  • Current ref 1 (Syracuse Univeristy Chronology....) needs a publisher.
  • Same for current ref 9 (Eastern College Athlecit...)
  • http://govt-comm.syr.edu/community/unimethodist.html deadlinks
  • Current ref 10 (Gapin, WF...) is lacking a page number
  • Current ref 11 (Greene, John Edward...) is lacking a page number
  • Current ref 12 (Gorney, J. ...) is lacking a page number
  • Current ref 13 (Baron, Karrie...) is lacking a page number
  • Current ref 14 (Syracuse Univeristy History ..) is lacking a publisehr
  • Current ref 19 (Deppa...) is lacking a page number
  • Current ref 20, (Yen...) is this a magazine/newspaper article? It's lacking a publication if so.
  • Current ref 24 (Office of Admissions..) is lacking a publisher
  • Make sure all your magazines/newspaper titles are in italics. Use the work field to get this done.
  • Current ref 38 (Syracuse University Faculty..) is lacking a publisher
  • Current ref 43 (Syracuse University Research..) is lacking a publisher
  • Current ref 50 (Syracuse Univerity Map...) is lacking a publisher
  • Current ref 53 (Welcome to Syracuse..) is lacking a publisher
  • Current ref 57 (Student Association...) is lacking a publisher
  • Current ref 58 (The History of Syracuse Univeristy Fraternity ...) is lacking a publisher
  • Current ref 59 (BIG EAST...) is lacking a publisher. Also, should BIG EAST be in all caps?
  • Current ref 60 (SU Athletics..) is lacking a publisher
  • Current ref 62 (Pages int he History of Elmira..) is lacking a publisher
  • I also note the large number of references that are from Syracuse University itself. I merely point this out for other reviewers to take into account.
Otherwise, sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:34, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, Marlin, I took care of the publishers. The rest are up to the article editors. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:33, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I'm fixing some of them. I can put in page numbers, but we've never been able to figure out a good way to add page numbers with the citation method used. I personally dislike Harvard citations, because they are not easy to use, but it's the only one that allows page numbers. Any ideas? OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 21:25, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: NRHP reference needed I refined the discussion of the 4 NRHP-listed properties and districts and added one reference, which, oddly, Orangemarlin promptly deleted, with an edit summary indicating difficulty reading in a Mac environment and a request to use CiteT or something like that. I think the NRHP information can and should be supported by references. The specific reference i added was this: <ref name="nrhptextComstock">{{cite web|author=Robert Mann and Alice Jean Stuart|title=National Register of Historic Places Inventory/Nomination: Syracuse University-Comstock Tract Buildings |url=http://www.oprhp.state.ny.us/hpimaging/hp_view.asp?GroupView=6341 |date=1980|accessdate=2008-01-25}} and [http://www.oprhp.state.ny.us/hpimaging/hp_view.asp?GroupView=62 ''Accompanying 19 photos, exteriors and interiors, from 1978'']</ref> The specific reference appears also in the Comstock Tract Buildings article. While its formatting might possibly be improved, it is in the format used in hundreds if not thousands of articles on NRHP sites. A difficulty in composing the reference is that the document being referenced appears in two separate PDF file parts. The current format is the best solution that i know of. Assistance in converting it to be acceptable for this article would be appreciated. It is an appropriate reference to include, and actually is quite informative. doncram (talk) 01:54, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Well, I deleted the reference (not what you wrote), because I'm a stickler about them (although Ealdgyth is giving me heartburn). It didn't work on my computer, on which I write websites, publish my blog, and do a lot of web design with no problems for Mac or PC computers. It seems to use an odd implementation of javascript, according to my error log. I've edited thousands of articles and to be truthful, I've never run into this problem. I have no clue what NRHP is, but it doesn't work here on two different Macs. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 02:40, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'll cut you a deal, OM, I'll do the italics and the publishers, if you'll pick up the page numbers, which I can't do anyway. Yeah, most of that list is picky stuff, but I like to make sure folks know that it's supposed to be done, rather than just doing it for them. I've found that if I do it for them, the next FAC they nominate .. I end up doing it there too.. and .. welll, I've got my own articles to edit also. Ealdgyth - Talk 03:05, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Dm for asking a helpful clarifying question. I was guessing, perhaps incorrectly, that Orangemarlin was objecting to the format of the footnote that showed in the Syracuse University article (and does show as footnote No. 2 in the Comstock article), as I was just recently discussing that general format for National Register documents with another editor (pdfpdf) in another context. Currently, i note that the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (OPRHP) website is down. (OPRHP website is now working, Thursday) I'll testify that the website usually works, and it should be accepted as a valid link rather than revising the reference to link to no website. Since the NYS website was up until a short time ago, it is also possible that Orangemarlin has some other problem on his Macs. The NYS website supports Microsoft Internet Explorer; it works less well with Firefox (which i use, nonetheless); it may not support whatever is the Mac browser that Orangemarlin uses. Anyhow, a reference or two is needed for this material for this article being at FAC. doncram (talk) 08:36, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I had no problem with the format of the citation. I still can't get this thing to run on both Mac browsers (Safari and Firefox). Here's the error I get:

Microsoft VBScript runtime error '800a000d'

Type mismatch: 'Rst'

/hpimaging/hp_view.asp, line 24

It just doesn't work on a Mac, because of Microsoft's sorry implementation of, well, anything. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 02:36, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I also believe the NYS website is not the greatest, i.e. that its Java interface programming is not up to world-class standards for a website. However, the website probably does serve the NYS agency adequately for its specialized purposes, and I think here it is better to provide a link that works for most browsers than to provide no link to the informative document about the Comstock buildings. So I added back the reference, as well as another general reference to the U.S. National Register Information System (NRIS). I'd be happy to have discussion--probably best elsewhere, at my talk page and/or at wt:NRHP--about refining the standard footnote to NYS NRHP sources to provide some notice/apology that the source doesn't work well with Apple browsers and with Firefox. doncram (talk) 16:27, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments - It's bad enough that the moral leader of FAC (Sandy) is a member of Red Sox Nation, but now we have Marlins fans here? Yikes. I will, however, put away my dismay long enough to review the Athletics section, which I like to do for university articles.

  • Before I make it there, move the reference for the school's nicknames in the first sentence to after the parenthesis mark, and take care of the two cite tags in Main campus.
  • Now in Athletics, first sentence of the second paragraph: Change the last two commas to semi-colons. This helps when you have list-like prose with extra description. If you do this, remove "and" before "the men's lacrosse team".
  • "In 1959, Syracuse earned its first National Championship". Please clarify that this was in football.
  • Two Carrier Dome links here. Also a pair for Manley Field House.
  • The two dollar figures in the section's final paragraph need non-breaking spaces, like this: $26.85 million (hit edit button to see code). That's something to check for throughout.
  • "It would go on to win USILA championships in 1922, 24 and 25." Try "It went on to win USILA championships in 1922, 1924 and 1925." Giants2008 (17-14) 03:37, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: I can't tell what is struck/addressed on images and sources above; someone needs to keep up with the bookkeeping. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:38, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Can I get a point of Clarification? Do editors have to actually respond to personal attacks on the Bosox or Marlins? And whose name appears to make him a football fan? Just asking. I've got some work to do I see. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 08:08, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • No, but it is encouraged, espcially when all involved share a common enemy, and the instigator is a fan of all sports. Everything above is struck, plus I left a comment. Giants2008 (17-14) 01:45, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Syracuse_University/archive1&oldid=1088821737"