Talk:Bates College/Archive 1

Accidental rollback fixed
Whoops - sorry about rolling back two revisions; I just meant to roll back the last one, that accidentally duplicated some copy. - DavidWBrooks 18:30, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Oh, no problem. Wikipedia burped and I got an edit conflict, so I copied the "existing" into the "new" article and made my modifications there, without realizing that I was only editing the "External links" section.  That's why it duplicated.  I'm glad you caught it, because I wouldn't have looked at it again without your edit. -Rjyanco 23:16, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Cobb Divinity need separate entry?
It seems as though "Cobb Divinty" warrants a distinct entry, as it was not part of Bates for half of its time as a Divinity School, I'll add a few more facts eventually (and to the Stephens entry).

Jewish quotas at Bates
Part of this article isn't totally true -- Bates HAS NOT always admitted students without regard to relgion. In to the 1950s, Bates Admissions maintained a quota on the number of Jewish students they would amit each year. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.81.199.243 (talk • contribs)


 * Really? Is that true? I've never heard that but I'm willing to believe it. I would be even more willing if you left your name or some kind of evidence that what you say is true, or if you had spelled "admit" or "religion" correctly. I need to see some proof, otherwise, I'm going to remove your edit. User:Cdogsimmons 15:05, 18 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I've never seen actual evidence of Jewish quotas at Bates, beyond rumors...It doesn't seem as though there were large numbers of Jewish applicants to the college in the 1950s, so it seems doubtful that they would be turned away. Although anything's possible, I guess. I agree with Cdogsimmons...a source is needed for the allegation.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Swampyank (talk • contribs)

For substantiation of the existence of the quota, please see Bates Through the Years (by Charlie Clark). Specifically, see pages 105 and 108. [And sorry about the spelling in the original post!] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.81.207.240 (talk • contribs)

soccer photo?
The name of the photo is Brendan_O'Connell_'06.jpg but the caption says it is Terrence O'Connell - and an anon just added a "photo by" note that is not on the picture description page. Does anybody know what is true? - DavidWBrooks 21:29, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Bates confers only bachelor's degrees?
The article as it now stands says that Bates confers bachelor's degrees. Yet the article about Richard Buckminster Fuller states that Fuller received a D.Sc. from Bates. What's the story here? Were master's and doctorate graduate programs discontinued at some point? Joel Russ 17:37, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

While it is true that Bates used to grant master's degrees, Buckminster Fuller received an honorary doctorate from the college. Swampyank 23:09, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Bates was New England's first coeducational college?
Is this true? Is there a cite? Thank you. --70.109.223.188 (talk) 17:43, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it is true. Women were admitted in the first classes at Bates and the earlier seminary institution. Mary Mitchell, Class of 1869, was the first female B.A. in New England. Various sources confirm...just check it out on google book search. Mitchell worked in the mills and later became a professor and friend of Ralph Waldo Emerson and Louisa May Alcott according to one source.Swampyank (talk) 21:53, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Can you provide a cite? Thank you.--70.109.223.188 (talk) 14:58, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I already added it to the article.Swampyank (talk) 15:59, 4 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you. --70.109.223.188 (talk) 18:42, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Highly selective
The phrase "highly selective" has no place in the article, least of all in the opening sentence of the lead, which is why I have removed it. It is a weasel phrase and peacock term that conveys no actual meaning than to serve as boosterism for the institution. Furthermore, no institution or publication classifies colleges as "highly" selective, so it's not even verifiable. Assert facts, not opinions and just describe the admissions numbers (number of applicants, number admitted, number matriculated, and freshmen retention) in the body of article and don't tell the reader what to think. Madcoverboy (talk) 18:27, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Fragment Sentence in History Section
Towards the end of the section on Bates history, there is a fragmented sentence that I will quote below...

"During World War II, when male students abandoned college campuses to enlist in the armed forces, Gray established a V-12 Navy College Training Program Unit on campus,[10] assuring the College students - men and women - during wartime."

This sentence lacks an actual description of what it actually assured men and women of, and should be corrected. I'm not confident enough and not aware of the program in question to the extent that I feel comfortable performing this edit myself. Anyone willing to fix this typo?

74.101.160.253 (talk) 02:27, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Bates College 2015 controversies
Hi all. I am hoping that experienced Wikipedia editors and contributors to the Bates College page can take a look at the major new section titled "Controversies," that has been added by a new Wikipedia contributor, as well as the text at the top that sums up the new section.

I understand why this section has been added -- there have been events at Bates -- but am hopeful that experienced contributors can look at the tone/hyperbole (e.g., that the college administration is "mired in controversy") of the text and the fact that some of the source material is from opinion stories in the campus newspaper that have been printed anonymously or with scant attribution.

Specifically, the new text makes major, unsubstantiated charges regarding confidential personnel issues. The accuracy of these accusations, and their potential for libel, have already been called into question by college's Communications Office. As a member of that staff, I am not the right person to weigh in on these changes to the Bates page. I made an edit that I believed adhered to Wikipedia guidelines for conflict of interest but the original text has since been restored. So, I welcome the Wikipedia community's authoritative look at the style, tone and attribution of these recent changes. -Hjayburns (talk) 01:44, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
 * This is the edit (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bates_College&diff=651990830&oldid=650763677) of that was reverted without an Edit Summary.
 * Adding a sentence showing there is an opposing WP:POV might be a better way to go than reverting to Hjayburns's edit, using http://www.thebatesstudent.com/2015/03/18/letter-editor/ as a source. — Lentower (talk) 12:53, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
 * As you appear to have a Conflict of Interest (see WP:COI), you might want to suggest edits to this article, including citations, here on the talk page.

I have made a number of edits to both move the tone towards a WP:NPOV, and the editing towards Wikipedia_policies_and_guidelines. — Lentower (talk) 14:54, 22 March 2015 (UTC)


 * I've removed the entire section. It's undue weight to place any significant focus on material that is only found in one source.  If these are genuinely noteworthy controversies then editors should be able to find several other reliable sources substantiating that assertion. ElKevbo (talk) 18:21, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Agree. If citations from several other reliable sources can be found, the incidents can always be added back. — Lentower (talk) 18:44, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Add Press Releases?
Adding as citations any press releases made by Bates administration on either of these controversies could help establish a WP:NPOV, with minimal text in the article (as press releases are primary sources best used to establish fact and provide the reader with text external to Wikipedia). — Lentower (talk) 14:54, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Possible Libel
The only private name brought up within the article was "Gregory Vincent", and he gave consent to use his name (and even so his name is has not been used as defamation of character). All other names are public figures making it essential for the statements to be proven false and posted with malicious intent for anything to be considered libel. If the Bates Student does not count as a "valid source" then an opinionated letter to the editor should not count as grounds to remove an important report of current events. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.181.115.221 (talk) 21:31, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Seems like this is gossip and not encyclopedia worthy until actually proven. Swampyank (talk) 14:43, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
 * To expand on remark: Wikipedia has a different standard that "libel" for excluding or including information about living people - see WP:LIVE.  Wikipedia has it's own Wikipedia_policies_and_guidelines on what can and can not be included in it's articles.  It's clear that WP:LIVE, as well as other Wikipedia_policies_and_guidelines have not been meet for including, in this article, either incident (called by some "controversies"") at Bates College this Spring.  Please review WP:LIVE and other Wikipedia_policies_and_guidelines and use them in any further discussion. Thank you — Lentower (talk) 15:31, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Copyright blanking
The history section of this article has been tagged as a possible copyvio; however, the copyvio is a certainty rather than a possibility. A quick check found copying of blocks of copyright content from three other pages of the school's website. I believe a thorough check of the whole article is needed, and have listed it at WP:Copyright problems for processing; that is unlikely to happen in less than a week. Meanwhile, anyone is free to start on a copyvio-free re-write, following the instructions on the template. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 08:20, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: the copyvio in the History section seems to go back to this edit dated 18 June 2005. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 08:30, 29 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Note: The Bates Communications Office appreciates the attention to the sloppy recent additions to the article. Hjayburns


 * Note: I've made suggestions to fix what I believe are the remaining two copyvio issues. Please weigh in: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Hjayburns/sandbox Hjayburns (talk) 15:52, 7 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi, I am non-involved and saw your note at Swampyank's Talk page. I don't do copyvio-fixing generally, so I may be off in my suggestions, but...
 * Could you please post suggested changes to an article at the article's Talk page? (So all followers can see any discussion, and so there is a permanent record with the article, and so we all know what has been fixed or not.)
 * Especially where fixing copyvio is intended, could you provide for direct comparison(s) where appropriate: e.g. link to copyrighted text, copy of copyrighted text, existing Wikipedia article text, your suggested text?
 * Include reference footnotes, and please use to force display of references. In your suggested text for an "Academic" passage you include "[19]" which is clearly referring to a non-included reference.
 * I demonstrate some of this in a subsection below on the carbon commitment text. Hope this helps. -- do  ncr  am  20:05, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

carbon commitment text
The copyrighted text appears to be this passage within Bates.Edu: "Bates is one of eight colleges and universities in Maine, and more than 100 nationwide, to sign an agreement to become “carbon neutral” — that is, to reduce institutional emissions of carbon-based greenhouse gases such that they no longer increase the atmospheric total of such gases. / In February, Bates President Elaine Tuttle Hansen signed the American College & University Presidents Climate Commitment. She is one of 62 chief executives in the coalition’s Leadership Circle, which provides guidance, peer encouragement and direction to the effort."

In the article, there is:"In February 2007, Bates President Elaine Tuttle Hansen signed the American College & University Presidents Climate Commitment. She is one of 62 chief executives in the coalition's Leadership Circle, which provides guidance, peer encouragement and direction to the effort."

Hjayburns suggests, instead: "In February 2007, then-Bates President Elaine Tuttle Hansen signed the American College & University Presidents Climate Commitment. She is one of 62 chief executives in the coalition's Leadership Circle, which acts as a clearinghouse and gives guidance for institutional programs to achieve carbon neutrality."

The first reference appears better, so use that. Otherwise, they look very similar. IMO, the suggested text is not different enough. I have not recently read Close paraphrasing but I know it addresses the topic. My apology if this is too basic a comment: To avoid too-close paraphrasing, a rule of thumb that I have heard is that one should read the text that is to be changed, then turn away and write the entire passage in your own words. And then make any fixes necessary, when you compare your writing to the original. It would be better to do this at a big level, at size of paragraphs at least, rather than for just one sentence at a time. In my experience, that almost always yields genuinely different text. The alternative, taking the problematic passage and adding and subtracting words and phrases, hardly ever changes the text far enough. Please comment, anyone else. -- do ncr  am  20:05, 13 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Here is a try by me, which I really did write on paper:

"The Bates president was on a leadership committee of X, which called for reduction of universities' carbon emissions. Bates' commitment made it one of just 8 out of __ Maine universities, and __th of ___ nationwide."


 * Then some fix-up:

"The Bates president in 2007, Elaine Tuttle Hanson, served in a 62-person leadership committee of the American College & University Presidents' Climate Commitment, an initiative which sought reduction of universities' carbon emissions. Bates became one of just 8 out of __ Maine universities and among the first 108 out of America's 4000(?) universities nationwide committed to reach carbon neutrality by 20XX."


 * I hoped that the info was covered (I did not first check) within (slightly improved) reference:
 * Hmm, I don't see any target date; the commitment looks a bit mushy to me. So italicized text needs to be changed.  And, this is dated;  108 by a date in 2007, and more recently what number of universities?  And does Bates have measurable progress since 2007?  Perhaps it would have been better for me to read the full source article, then written my own summary, rather than trying to rewrite the existing summary.
 * I might have missed what other editors may think is most important, but hopefully this gets the rewriting idea across. -- do ncr  am  20:19, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Bates College. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140309035544/http://www.bates.edu:80/research/files/2010/04/bates.facts_1314.pdf to http://www.bates.edu/research/files/2010/04/bates.facts_1314.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 06:27, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed
Prior content in this duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://abacus.bates.edu/catalog02-03/college.html and others. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:38, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Please note that it was not possible to revert to a pre-copyvio version because fragments of potentially copied text were identified even in the 2005 edit prior to the first major influx. Additionally, that version was highly promotional and undersourced. I believe the lead is clear. Sections subsequent to the lead should be rewritten or carefully evaluated prior to reintroduction, and the history section is hopelessly corrupt.


 * I also removed the alumni section due to WP:BLP concerns. Please provide sourcing for names returned to the list in accordance with WP:V and especially for those people who are still alive. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:43, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Conflict of interest
It appears that a number of editors to this article may have a close personal or professional connection to the college, and thus have a conflict of interest. Conflict-of-interest editors are strongly discouraged from editing the article directly, but are always welcome to propose changes on the talk page (i.e., here). You can attract the attention of other editors by putting request edit (exactly so, with the curly parentheses) at the beginning of your request, or by clicking the link on the lowest yellow notice above. Requests that are not supported by independent reliable sources are unlikely to be accepted.

Please also note that our Terms of Use state that "you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation." An editor who contributes as part of his or her paid employment is required to disclose that fact. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:14, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Request edit on 30 November 2015: Acceptance Rate
The intro graf says that "as of 2015, Bates College has an acceptance rate of 17.8%." That cited percentage is only for Regular Decision. The applicable acceptance rate percentage to report should probably be 21.4%, a figure that includes all the decision rounds in 2015, i.e., Early Decision I, Early Decision II. (The 21.4% figure is cited in the same story as the 17.8%, so the citation would remain the same.) Hjayburns (talk) 15:37, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
 * It is my understanding that the vast majority of liberal arts colleges display overall regular admit rate in their leads. For what I've seen with regard to Bates College's acceptance rate is that the figure 21.4% encapsulates: the 2% transfer acceptance rate, regular admit rate, early choice round one admit rate, early choice admit rate, and special configuration admit rate. As for regular applicants the acceptance rate for them was 17.8%, the majority of students enrolled at Bates have this as their acceptance rate, thus I believe it to be proper to display the figure in the lead. It is, of course, put side by side with all five metrics in the *Admissions* sections. To throw an example on this I would point to Middlebury which has an overall admit rate of 19.9% but a regular acceptance rate of 17.0% and the lead reflects it. Williams, Colby, Amherst, and Bowdoin follow suit. Hovertover (talk) 01:10, 11 January 2016 (UTC)Hovertover
 * Agreed. The acceptance rate for Bates regular admit rate is 17.8% and should be shown in the lead as such. The acceptance rates that capture anything more than the normal admittance should be reserved for further detail in the respective section on admission statistics.Yorkshiremany (talk) 01:14, 11 January 2016 (UTC)Yorkshiremany

Robert F Kennedy
Can Bates really claim RFK as an alumnus? This is from the Wikipedia entry on Robert F Kennedy:

"Six weeks before his 18th birthday, Kennedy enlisted in the U.S. Naval Reserve as a Seaman Apprentice, released from active duty until March 1944 when he left Milton Academy early to report to the V-12 Navy College Training Program at Harvard College in Cambridge, Massachusetts. His V-12 training was at Harvard (March–November 1944); Bates College in Lewiston, Maine (November 1944 – June 1945 where he received a completion degree); and Harvard (June 1945 – January 1946). While serving in Lewiston, Kennedy wrote a letter to David Hackett which reflected his feelings of inadequacy and frustration at being isolated from the action. "Things are the same as usual up here, and me being my usual moody self I get very sad at times." He added, "If I don't get the hell out of here soon I'll die." Aside from Hackett, who was serving as a paratrooper, more of Kennedy's Parker Hall dorm mates went overseas and left him behind. One of them getting into combat before him was a thought that made Kennedy "feel more and more like a Draft Dodger or something." He was also frustrated with the shirker's mentality of some of the others serving in V-12 at Bates. He complained their attitudes really made him "mad especially after Joe being killed."

This implies that the US Navy sent him to Bates for a portion of his V-12 Navy College Training Program (8 months total). The "completion degree" I believe was awarded by the Navy not Bates. Is there evidence that he was either enrolled as a student or actually awarded a Bates degree? If so, then it can stand, but the article makes it look like RFK was a Bates graduate (as in a bachelor's degree) which appears to be false. IACOBVS (talk) 15:05, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

—I ran into the same situation with an alumnus from Colby College, in Waterville, Maine. It is my understanding that the completion degree was extended to Kennedy by Bates upon completion of the V-12 program installed by the at-the-time president. About a dozen students, including Kennedy, received degrees from Bates that included a completion of an academic program. You will note that after his time at Bates he continued his naval training at Harvard, thus pointing to a degree that was given to him by Bates and not the Navy. As it currently stands, Kennedy holds an academic degree from Bates College and can technically be labeled as an "alumni" but he does not hold a four-year bachelors from the college. Maybe there should be phrasing incorporated into the article denoting his exception.Yorkshiremany (talk) 01:49, 10 January 2016 (UTC) Yorkshiremany
 * If he was enrolled and received a Bates qualification of some sort, a diploma that may have been entitled the 'Naval Studies Completion Degree' awarded by the president of Bates at the time, then indeed he would be deemed a Bates alumnus of a sort. I very much doubt that after eight months he was given a bachelor's degree. I assume it was more akin to a course certificate. However, it seems that RFK was sent to Bates by the Navy - meaning he never applied for admission. It is definitely a gray area. IACOBVS (talk) 07:59, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

NPOV and Peacock
I have flagged edited this page for not adhering to a neutral point of view WP:NPOV and for hyperbole as in the constant use of the terms "elite" and "prestigious" etc. (known as "Peacock" in Wikipedia). I have also noted that several text attributions donot match with the citations supplied. See WP:Peacock. It may be that Bates alumni or fans of Bates are interested in enhancing Bates' reputation, but this is Wikipedia and it is not a platform for this purpose. I reverted as much of this language as I could, but I would ask that the current editors refrain from this unacceptable activity. Also, could editors cease from using the neologism "Little Ivy League" as a synonym for NESCAC. There is no such thing as a Little Ivy League and neither NESCAC nor any of its members self-refers as being in such a 'league.' The unofficial term Little Ivy does have some currency, but there is no athletic league or consortium of colleges using this term. IACOBVS (talk) 04:11, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I am re-flagging this article. Editors not only engaging in hyperbole and original research, but they are literally making up history that is not backed up by the sources cited. IACOBVS (talk) 02:02, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I have read through the entire history section and checked the supplied sources. All seems to check out. What specifically do you dispute? Hovertover (talk) 02:10, 11 January 2016 (UTC) Hovertover
 * History
 * the founder section is partly inaccurate. Randall did not create a 'new Christian denomination' that formed the educational institutions of Lewiston. He broke from the Calvinist Baptists and became a Freewill Baptist and thus organised this Arminian variant of the Baptist movement in New England. Oren Cheney was a Freewill Baptist and indeed did many things in education in Maine. Bates (as Maine State Seminary) was founded as a Freewill Baptist institution. This denomination later merged into what became the Northern Baptist churches over time. Bates deemed itself Christian until 1970 when it secularised. I have tried to include mention of Bates' Baptist roots, but it gets removed and changed into something rather vague and factually suspect.
 * Elsewhere:
 * There is a lot of hyperbole that keeps creeping in - "prestige, elite, top, best" etc. or the phrase "rich history" in reference to Bowdoin College - other than sports, I am not sure where the richness is. It is fine if these are quotations, but not if they are simply opinions.
 * Whenever any statistic that does not seem to promote Bates is listed, an editor deletes it. There is quite a bit of this and thus it is not being written from a NPOV. Old stats that favor Bates are listed (the US News ranking of 2015) rather than the latest ranking (2016).
 * The president of Bates did not 'found' the Navy V-12 program at Bates in 1943. It was set up by the Navy at 130 colleges including Bates. I have tried to rewrite this several times and it gets changed to look as if the one and only Navy V-12 program was at Bates College with RFK making a cameo appearance. Kennedy was sent to Bates by the Navy - he didn't apply to Bates and apparently didn't want to be there.
 * NB: I don't think the editor is doing this in malice, but rather as an enthusiastic alumnus. I too am an alumnus, but I want this article to be a good one and that means it must adhere to Wikipedia rules. IACOBVS (talk) 02:33, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I couldn't agree more. I'll go ahead and taper that language down and correct the promotional tone that I find. I believe the best way we can fix the inaccuracies of certain sections of this article would be to place the 'Citation Needed' template [citation needed] next to it so it can be addressed and properly cited. As for the rankings I believe that rankings for both years are displayed within the article. If something is outdated (even by a year) feel free to update it, with the current ranking. The common thread I see with the issues you have found is phrasing which is easily fixed and does not need a header flag. Please feel free to go in and edit the sections you find improper with regard to promotional activity and anything you find as you say 'suspect' ask for a citation so it can be cleared up quickly. Thanks. Hovertover (talk) 02:42, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I was getting fatigued with trying to tone down the language so often. The editor in question is rewriting (as well as creating) whole sections at a quick pace, but material that was on the page gets sacrificed in the process. In addition, the editor tends to cite something and then interpret that source in a 'creative' way that is often not at all reflective of the source, but suits his/her aim.. This again results in WP:Peacock. On the plus side, the editor had loads of photographs of Bates that decorate the page nicely. His intentions are noble. I just wish he would follow the editing rules in on neutral point of view (NPOV) and avoid florid and at times dubious language. IACOBVS (talk) 02:58, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Agreed Lets continue making this article on Bates College, balanced, and informational.
 * One other thing that keeps reappearing is the 17.8% admission rate. That is for regular decision. When combined with early decision, the averaged rate is 21.4%. This rate is the official rate as used by Bates itself and it is the rate that all other colleges use as well as college ranking entities (US News, Forbes, etc.). IACOBVS (talk) 18:27, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Then you need to find a source which cites that.  Scr ★ pIron IV 18:33, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Good edit, but the admissions rate(s) still need to be sourced.
 * Yes, just saw that, moved to admissions section with proper citation. Few colleges have the acceptance rate in the lead anyway. It is now only mentioned once, with both metrics cited, and in the admissions section. Hovertover (talk) 00:46, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks to both of you for cleaning up the lead, it looks very good now. Cleaning up the rampant use of approximately was also good, Bates enrolls 1,773 students not "approximately 2,000" and the acceptance rate is not "approximately 25%". Yorkshiremany (talk) 00:49, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Just deleted three sentences from the 'Founding' section that 'the editor' created - for the following reasons:
 * 1) Maine State Seminary was not founded on Sept 22, 1854. That was the date Oren Cheney learned in a letter that Parsonfield Seminary burned down. It was the date that he decided he needed to build a new Freewill Baptist seminary elsewhere in Maine.
 * 2) The quote from Cheney that followed the sentence above was a non-sequitur as Cheney at that time was interested in founding a 'school' and had no idea that his seminary would evolve into a liberal arts college.
 * 3) The editor wrote a sentence to claim that the land given to Maine State Seminary in Lewiston was the 'finest piece of land in New England' which is not what the source cited states. Rather, it states that the land given was perhaps among the best situated among the New England colleges - a rather different meaning. IACOBVS (talk) 06:13, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Agreed, I think those sentences were not directly accounted for within the context of the citation. I believe the 'finest piece of land in New England' addition was just a simple misreading of the source. I added citations to a select number of statements in the history section, and they are the following:


 * 1) Bates College's connection with Bowdoin College: With all that I've read with the historical founding of Bates is that there is a pronounced connection between the two colleges. There has always been a stark contrast between Bates and Bowdoin as Colby was the median between the two. The contrasts of Bates and Bowdoin encompass wealth, social standing, academics, progressive/conservative values and of course, athletics. The physical text I found on the specific topic drew the connection between Harvard, Yale, and Princeton. With Harvard and Yale having an athletic rivalry but grouped at least informally with Princeton. (Bowdoin, Bates and Colby are commonly grouped, as I understand it, together in the state of Maine.) The historical sources also point to numerous examples of Bowdoin alumni helping establish Bates College and Bates alumni teaching at Bowdoin, developing buildings and ushering in progressive principles.
 * 2) The founding principles of the college. I noticed there was a citation template placed next to the concluding sentence of the first paragraph and added three citations. "It was founded on the principles of egalitarianism, abolitionism, and scholarship" the sources I found (one for each part) point both indirectly and directly to these three principles guiding the foundation and operation of Bates College.
 * Yorkshiremany (talk) 22:25, 12 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks for this reply Yorkshiremany. Agreed that it should be Bates-Bowdoin and not Bates-Bowdoin-Colby, as I assumed. They did form the CBB athletic rivalry in 1870. If there is substantial interplay where Bowdoin alumni helped in the foundation of Bates (which is interesting because the two colleges had different religious connections and social class affinities) and where Bates alumni taught at Bowdoin, it should be cited and further explained. While you could say by deduction that the college was founded on principles egalitarianism, abolitionism, and scholarship, the question is this: is this how Bates describes itself? Or is that your conclusion? If the latter, it is not permitted because it constitutes original research (WP:OR). Bates was certainly founded as a co-ed and abolitionist school that wanted to have high academic quality, but it is important not to make a statement that sounds authoritative when it is not part of the college's self-definition. It would be best to search the Bates website for this sort of statement. Here is a statement from the Bates website on how it describes itself:
 * A private, highly selective, residential college devoted to undergraduate study in the liberal arts, Bates has always stood firmly for the ideals of academic rigor, intellectual curiosity, egalitarianism, social justice and freedom. Bates is recognized for its inclusive social character and progressive tradition, and is rightly celebrated as one of the first U.S. institutions of higher learning to admit women and people of color.
 * Also, please note that the following web source is not reliable (http://everything.explained.today/Bates_College/) and anything there must be double checked with an additional source. It seems a bit too much has been taken from this website. IACOBVS (talk) 22:35, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Sounds good. Yes, I realized that the source was faulty after I restored your deletion, my apologies. And I looked through the article and from what I have seen the only thing cited from the source was the secret society sentence. You make some good points on the founding principles, maybe it is best to leave it for the website to deduce and keep that off of wikipedia, and follow through on Wikipedia's policy of letting the reader conclude on their own. Yorkshiremany (talk) 02:31, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Bates in the Snow
There are a lot of (new and changing) photos of Bates, but all but one are snowy.

Can we get a fall photo of the quad or some summer photos? The new photo of Rand Hall looks almost industrial. Xin_Deui - do you have any spring/summer/autumn images? IACOBVS (talk) 23:04, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Sure do, I am going through hundreds of photos of Bates, Colby, and Bowdoin I have and uploading all of them to Wikipmedia Commons, so there are a lot more available for this article, so few free to search them, I have added them in the "Bates College" category. Xin Deui (talk) 03:17, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks! IACOBVS (talk) 07:51, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Little Ivy distinction
Xin Deui, I noticed that you added (in the lead) a distinction referring to Bates as a Littly Ivy, while I know that it is grouped with that title, perhaps its not essential it be noted in such a prominent manner as it is not the athletic conference or anything of that sort. Any input is welcome. Odwallah (talk) 14:17, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Odwallah Yes I added it as many associate it with the grouping, partially due to its involvement with the NESCAC, partially not. It is my belief that lead sentences should both introduce and contextualize the subject, so this seems fitting. The grouping of Little Ivies is an established and widely covered, circulated distinction that is used in the characterizing of colleges. I noted that private, and liberal arts was also used in characterizing the school, so included the Little Ivy one as well. Xin Deui (talk) 14:22, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I see what you're saying however, just as say Harvard has in its lead, " private Ivy League research university in Cambridge, Massachusetts", the notation of Ivy League has connections to something greater than just a close connection to its athletic league. It connects to certain social standing, prestige, and academic programs. Little Ivies, although covered to the extent that it is, I find has limited scope. Odwallah (talk) 14:35, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Odwallah I don't think it has a limited scope at all. Ivy League is used as a descriptive term in the lead as it is an athletic conference and has connotations to social standing, etc. The Little Ivies are very closely associated with the New England Small College Athletic Conference, and notes, as you say the social, standing and academic programs of more rigorous schools. I don't view it as conformation to look like the Ivy League but more as an additive description in the lead. Xin Deui (talk) 14:43, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
 * If I may interject, I think this should go for all schools in the NESCAC, especially Colby and Bowdoin along with Bates, as they are specifically called out with their grouping in the Colby-Bates-Bowdoin Consortium as Little Ivies. The NESCAC has long been recognized as a leader in colligate academia, and the term Little Ivies just affirms their respect among peer schools, employers, and academics. I think it should have been added as soon as the publications first began coming out, as the same happened with schools in the Ivy League. As soon as mention of the Ivy League came out, Cornell, Dartmouth etc, began to be known as "private, Ivy League schools" instead of "private schools" in so and so location. It makes a lot of sense to me for Princeton to go from:
 * "[Princeton] is a private research university in Princeton, New Jersey" to "[Princeton] is a private Ivy League research university in Princeton, New Jersey"
 * Just as I see an member of the NESCAC or another referenced member, such as Williams to go from:
 * "[Williams] is a private liberal arts college located in Williamstown, Massachusetts" to "[Williams] is a private Little Ivy liberal arts college located in Williamstown, Massachusetts"


 * Its just a minor distinction, that is covered by their athletic association and wide media coverage and reference. 134.181.163.52 (talk) 15:00, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Firstly, no need to sign twice, IP. Secondly, it is just a matter of including the Little Ivy distinction on other pages manually, no one is saying that this would just go for Bates, or Colby and Bowdoin. Thirdly, the main issue that I have is that it is such a fluid list that has no clear boundaries and thus can not be specifically limited to schools in the NESCAC. Odwallah (talk) 15:08, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Bates, Colby, and Bowdoin are specifically referenced as small or little ivies, numerous publications draw the connection completely independent from The Greenes' Guide. With respect to the Little Ivies, the three Maine schools are consistently noted with the Ivy League.
 * "...Of the three top schools in Maine, the CBB drew the most notation to what was informally characterized as a smaller Ivy League, one that provided an Ivy League education with a smaller student body" (Calhoun, Charles (1993). A Small College in Maine.)
 * "... the group seemed to draw power from their comparisons to the Ivy League operating in such a group entitled, 'the Little Ivies."... Bowdoin often drawing the connection to Harvard, Bates to Princeton, and Colby to Yale." (Eaton, Mabel (1930). General Catalogue of Bates College)
 * "With a progressive notion of academic integrity, Bates along with Bowdoin became the major figure heads of Ivy League caliber faculty." (Clark, Charles E (2005). Bates Through the Years: an Illustrated History.)
 * All three Maine schools, I believe should have this notation as there is a clear definition that it is them in fact, who are Little Ivies. I also believe that it should be furthered on to the tabled list presented on the Little Ivies article. In any case, just as a baseline, schools in the NESCAC should be included. 134.181.163.52 (talk) 15:20, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

An Appeal for Accuracy on this Page
This page is subject to rather intensive editing with a lot of new information being added frequently. Most have no doubt been done out of enthusiasm; a persistent few out of vandalism or college rivalry issues. The page thus remains semi-protected. However, there have been far too many grammatical, syntax, or factual errors in the edits over the past several months.

For example, in a recent edit of the history section concerning the Bates College foundation date of 1855 as Maine State Seminary: it was noted that this 1855 date makes Bates "eight years older than its home town." Lewiston, Maine was founded as a town in 1795. Bates is thus 60 years younger than its home town. Lewiston was re-incorporated (or upgraded) as a city in 1863. The only thing that happened was that Bates was founded in the Town of Lewiston which eight years later became the City of Lewiston. This change of municipal governance has little relevance to this article so I have deleted the sentence as inaccurate and, even if corrected, not relevant.

The above is an example of what happens rather too often. Please fact check what your write before you save it and please try to use correct grammar and syntax. I appreciate the enthusiasm of the contributors and do not mean to disparage any editors (except the vandals!), but accuracy and precision of language are important for this article and Wikipedia in general. IACOBVS (talk) 15:46, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Agreed. I believe that the information added is very accurate its just that when the information is "polished" grammar issues pop up and reduce the quality of the article. Looking specifically at the founding date, I believe editors just got confused about the founding of Lewiston the Town and Lewiston the city, easily fixed and no harm done. There are also issues regarding the student population, with some editors adding 1,777, some adding 1,778, and others adding 1,790. The most reliable source I have found points to 1,792 students, and have added it as such.
 * Also there seems to be someone going out of their way to vandalize this page on an ip address, which is incredibly annoying. Thanks for the comment. Odwallah (talk) 23:51, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Bates College. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.bates.edu:80/x65013.xml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 03:38, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Problems with the article
There are puffery-claims only supported by information from Bates College itself. If tags are removed without fixing the problems, I'll alert administrators. For example, is Bates the "oldest continuously operating coeducational university" in the US, as claimed? A bit of a stretch here -- with the words continuously operating being original research, that is, that since Oberlin had financial struggles for a few years, well, then it's disqualified from being the oldest coeducational college in the US, or that the "continuously operating" is somehow relevant to this claim. Funny, but Westminster College in PA makes a similar claim; the claim was that "Thirty years of research indicate that Westminster is the oldest coeducational college in the country..." Granted, the Westminster source was equally dubious. Generally Oberlin takes top honors here with another source saying Oberlin is first. So if you stick with Bates being #2 -- and can provide a reliable source to that effect, ie, not Bates College itself, maybe we can make that claim stand--Tomwsulcer (talk) 11:01, 16 June 2016 (UTC) Further, Bates is not mentioned on this list of the 10 oldest co-ed colleges in the US (although this source too seems dubious).--Tomwsulcer (talk) 11:08, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

My problems with this line -- Bates College alumni include the following: 86 Fulbright Scholars,[20] 22 Watson Fellows,[21] 11 Olympians,[22] 10 Justices on State Supreme Courts, 5 Pulitzer Prize Winners,[23] 4 MacArthur Fellows,[24] 4 Freedom Medal Recipients, and 1 presidential candidate -- these statements are only supported by primary sources, namely Bates College itself, and really need independent validation. The tag stays until independent validation can be found; if removed, I'll alert administrators.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 11:03, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your edits. I noticed you removed a lot of material that was covered by reliable sources without discussion and put undue weight on certain topics; if continued I will report you to administrators for vandalism. I will go ahead, if its okay with you, and comb through all the edits you've made and make sure you're following the rules and not randomly tag bombing articles as you've done in the past. :) Wentworth Washington (talk) 14:00, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Your insertion of "Bates is one of the most expensive colleges in the United States" followed by a citation from 2009, another mentioning the college with 50 others from 2010, and another one from CBS from 2010 again mentioning the college among 50 others is textbook definition of undue weight and is more than likely to be removed. Wentworth Washington (talk) 14:26, 16 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Bates College is not a reliable source for much of the contentious material. Bates' high price is most definitely important and should not be buried at the bottom, especially considering how the high cost of college these days is a major issue.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 14:30, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
 * This article is not about the rising costs of tuition. Its relatively high tuition five or six years ago is not an integral component of the college and most certainly is not be included in the third sentence of this articles lead. And for your removal of the sections in this history section; why did you do that? I'm going to have to restore that unless you can justify why the official college records are an unreliable source on the official history of the college. Wentworth Washington (talk) 14:44, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Your talking about my removal of this sentence -- Some members of the faculty voiced concern over the college's prestige when the first black and female students arrived, but the inclusive ethos of Bates as a progressive institution prevailed. -- it is laudatory puffery (prestige, inclusive ethos, progressive etc) based on the flawed Bates source. It is brochure-junk. It makes Wikipedia look like amateur hour, public relations wannabees.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 16:06, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
 * That Bates is one of the most expensive colleges in the nation is directly relevant to people reading this article, such as prospective students -- it is well-referenced -- the media thinks it's a big deal, particularly in light of escalating college costs today. This information should not be buried like in the fine print of an insurance contract.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 16:06, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
 * You removed historical content that was well sourced; not okay. If you dislike the wording, change it! Don't just delete it because you deem it "amateur hour". I've already wasted so much time with you and this article, believe it or not I have other editing I'd like to get done. This college's tuition is not supposed to be in the lead of the article, it would be much better in the cost of attendance section or another comparable section. Not to mention it is already heavily detailed in the In Media section. Also what on earth are you throwing dubious cite on statements that are incredibly well sourced? What is that all about? Also the cites for "Bates is one of the most expensive colleges" is not well sourced and unless you can find actually sources backing up your claim; it is more than likely to be removed. Wentworth Washington (talk) 16:14, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
 * "Well-sourced"? You mean from Bates College sources. Naturally they'll be pro-Bates since they're a primary source -- not okay. Being one of the most expensive colleges in the US should definitely be in the lede paragraph -- consider the numerous prospective college students and families reading this page -- that is certainly something that is vital to know. If you think Bates being expensive is not well sourced -- you're saying you don't trust Forbes, Bloomberg, CBS News? Come on.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 15:51, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I have monitored this page for a while. I have tried many times to make the history more accurate and reduce some of the peacock statements and just plainly inaccurate or puffed-up claims. But I have to admit (as an alumnus of Bates) that this article has devolved in just a few months to puffery in the extreme. As soon as I read that opener that Bates was endowed by Benjamin Bates "and the Boston Brahmin," I knew it was out off control. Bates was never a magnet for funds from Boston's old money class. For that, think Harvard and maybe Williams and Amherst. Bates is a great small liberal arts college, but this page now reads like a college with an inferiority complex. It would be great if someone (not me) could de-puff this page, but leave the historical details intact as well as some of the truly notable things about this unique little college in Maine. IACOBVS (talk) 04:26, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
 * My sense exactly. I'm not a Bates alumnus (my main college is this one) but my sense is that all the puffery and rampant praise undermines the article's believability, that it doesn't read real, so to speak, like it's trying so hard that one suspects there are serious problems or some kind of coverup, or else why would the article look like a brochure. And I think it's right that Bates is a "great small liberal arts college", and this article doesn't communicate that, rather, it communicates that Bates is a rank-obsessed striver rigorously competing with other colleges, and going to almost absurd lengths, such as first college in the Eastern US to go coeducational (a somewhat dubious claim if you take a good look at this list -- maybe first in northeast US, or New England, is a more reasonable claim). What is missing among the puffery and claims and ranks is that this is a cool school.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 10:59, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree with both of you and would appreciate to see more constructive edits on this article. I'm not an alumnus of the college, in fact wasn't educated in the states but I have seen this article torn to shreds by editors claiming this and that so I would not like to see it torn to shreds again. In late 2014 the article was incorrectly tagged for a copy right violation and was blanked completely leaving it as this dingy little article that looked like someone in bad faith tried to make this school look bad. My apologies if I was quick to assume and be hard handed, I am just pretty sick and tired of large portion beings deleted and flags thrown everywhere without constructive edits. Please bring up examples of puffery so they can be addressed and discussed so they can be removed or rephrased to keep the integrity of the historical detail. Some of the examples brought forward were well sourced and a statement of fact so I'd like to see some further input and hopefully reach a consensus. Wentworth Washington (talk) 02:30, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Update. I have gone through and | removed some puffery wording; did I miss anything? Wentworth Washington (talk) 05:17, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Fellow editors, still much work to be done to this puffed up article. I looked at the Traditions section and the article claims that the college's traditions stem from its rivalry or connections with Bowdoin (reasonably true), Dartmouth (questionable), and the University of Oxford (ridiculous). I am an alumnus of Bates and I am finishing a doctorate at the University of Oxford right now (I live in Oxford, England). Rest assured, no one at Oxford is aware that Bates College has a rivalry with them or traditions based on Oxford's. Of course, the vast majority at Oxford have never heard of Bates! The fact that the debate society at Bates has debated at Oxford is not a tradition or a true rivalry. The Oxford Union (Oxford's debate society) is independent of the University and self-funding. It has its own buildings that do not belong to the University or its colleges.


 * Also, the are loads of grammatical/syntax issues in the article. It could be a Good Article, but right now it is distinctly B-class and deserves to remain there until the inferiority complex is addressed and the resultant puffery is expunged. IACOBVS (talk) 02:51, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Getting article to good article status
IACOBVS, Reading through the article and others related to it, I can certainly conclude there is a connection between Bowdoin College and Dartmouth College. I am unsure about the connection with Oxford, from what I gather only the Debate Society of Bates has a connection with Oxford which includes an annual debate and some historical ties... Congrats on the Oxford Doc btw! If you could read through the article again and set some examples of what need to be fixed (as you pointed to grammatical/syntax issues) that would be great. I like to see Good Articles and this one seems very extensive. Elizabeth I of England (talk) 08:14, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you Elizabeth I of England. I think there is simply a lot of hyperbole throughout the article. Bates has a natural connection to Bowdoin, although I am unaware of any Bates traditions per se stemming from its rivalry with Bowdoin. Bates has a joint degree program with Dartmouth in engineering, but this joint degree can also be taken with Columbia, Case Western Reserve, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, and Washington University in St. Louis. So, one could argue Bates has a connection with all these schools. However, other than the fact that Bates' winter carnival may have been inspired by Dartmouth's, this does not seem to be a tradition directly related to Dartmouth (unless imitation is enough). The connection to Oxford is indeed via the Debate Society, but simply debating at Oxford does not mean that Bates has any Oxford-inspired traditions or that there is any actual rivalry between the Oxford Union and Bates' debate society. There is some interesting early 20th century history as the first American collegiate debate society going to Oxford and vice versa, but again this is not a tradition or a current rivalry. I might suggest that you simply tone down the brochure-like hyperbole. Weird things have crept into this article as well. Someone put a French motto (aimer apprendre) under the Latin motto as if Bates has two mottoes: Latin and French. But it only has one Latin motto. There seems to be a lot of creative inflation of the narrative to make Bates seem superior to most small liberal arts colleges, but this inflationary language (puffery) damages the article's credibility. IACOBVS (talk) 05:11, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
 * To be honest with you, IACOBVS, I can't claim much knowledge or expertise on this college so I'm not going to pretend to issue any type of counters to what you've said; I can only work with what I see on the article. Thank you, this is exactly what I'm talking about bringing up examples and then fixing them to get this to good article status. This article seems super extensive and it seems like a hop and a skip away from good article status. The college's connection with Bowdoin seems set and well sourced; from their little athletic conference with Colby College and so on. As for Dartmouth; I have heard of the Winter Carnival parallel with Bates from Dartmouth students myself to the tune that both school have small niche traditions based off of their respective school's traditions. However, I don't think students at Dartmouth are too aware of the traditions as they are this huge research university and Bates is a small liberal arts. There is a "History of Bates College" page that has two sections: "relationship with Bowdoin" and "relationship with Dartmouth,' the latter says that both of the campuses' were designed by Gridley J.F. Bryant, thus enforcing campus parallels, coupled with numerous traditions, founding affiliations, ect. As for Oxford, I don't know if I removed it or not, but the only mention  of Oxford was its debate against Bates in the 1930s and its annual debate; not much of a rivalry section, no? As for the French motto, I can't say much about that, from what I can tell it is literally a French translation of the school's motto backed up by a source by Timothy Larsen's "Faith by their Works". I am fine with removing the french motto, doesn't seem like an integral part of the article. Also a lot of content has been changed on the article so if you and others could read through it again and bring up the examples that are getting in the way of good article status that would be beneficial. Some of what you were referencing has already been taken out. Elizabeth I of England (talk) 12:50, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

editing the section about demographics
I reviewed the citation for this statement: "closely associated with the White Anglo-Saxon Protestant (WASP) demographic." There is nothing to back this up. It would be accurate to say 70% of students are white and leave this out, since it is not actually in the report cited. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.198.118.167 (talk) 21:34, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ Just checked it out, although the ending citation didn't include the information, the one above it says something about the WASP statement. I moved it over. Yorkshiremany (talk) 23:04, 12 August 2016 (UTC)