Talk:Emory University/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

The importance of being fair and balanced on BOTH sides

Chicken Soda - a while back, I attempted to ask you what are your references for the inserts you keep doing for Emory University, such as:

>>Emory has an unusual student culture in that by most >>measures, the administration is far more progressive than the student body.

>>Emory's student culture is very conservative.

I didn't ever find a reply. Please note that I am at and have been with Emory for several years now in different capacities, and I find your statement a dubious opinion at best... no doubt what you write may apply to some of Emory's students, but not the majority and certainly not the entire student culture. If you have a verifiable source, then it could be considered. Wiki4fun 00:35, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Why do you think I didn't ever re-insert these statements after they were removed? Is your argument seriously that because I made 2 uncited claims which were deleted, and which I didn't reinstate, that it's OK for Emory's guns to warp the article however they choose?

Um, Chickensoda -- are you angry much? If you read the heading of this topic, it says BOTH sides need to be fair and balanced. Then if you check the history of the Emory University article, I removed not only your comments, but equally comments that went to far as promotional, pro-Emory advertising. Dude, calm down, and recognize that when I ask you to be balanced, I'm also asking the other side to be balanced too. Check my edits, you'll see I removed their pieces too. Wiki4fun 16:32, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

By the way, what office with Emory are you with, and which ones have you worked with in the past? (I think your affiliations should be clear as you seem to claim both insider knowledge and a lack of bias.)

Again, see above Chickensoda. Paranoid much? Why would I also remove pro-Emory advertising if I was with an Emory office? To answer you: I'm not. I work full-time with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and am a current part-time PhD student at Emory who previously attended as a college student. I live 5 minutes from Emory's campus at the moment and divide my time between CDC and Emory equally. Feel better? Wiki4fun 16:32, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Also, what are you comparing Emory to when you say its student culture is not conservative? I agree that its student body is less conservative than those of some schools. Perhaps apathetic, wealthy, and self-obsessed are more accurate?

I'm combatting people who try to distort this article to be either anti-Emory or pro-Emory either way. It's an encyclopedia after all. It should be balanced and fair on BOTH sides (again, see the header here) and you've clearly gone off the deep end. I was there as an undegrad from 1996-2000, and I knew several motivated and altruistic individuals. You must just have never connected with them. There was Alpha Phi Omega, the co-ed service group, which numbered about 120 active members at any given time, and then there was Volunteer Emory which included another 150 members. Maybe you're a bit self-obsessed with your view of Emory as being the only reality out there. Chill man. Let your axe go. Wiki4fun 16:32, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

In the end, I accept that we have different interps of the student culture. That doesn't make it OK to use the article as an advertising site (nor as an ax-grinding site). --Chickensoda 06:19, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Here's where I agree with you... and if you'll see the edits under Wiki4fun, they're striving not to be pro- or anti- anything, just the facts. Wiki4fun 16:32, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Meanwhile, read through the archives of the Wheel online (there's a dead-on piece when you search for "Emory apathy" that comes up in the first couple pages of results, with a title like "Why Activism is Really Dead at Emory" or something), and you'll find some interesting stuff on student culture. --Chickensoda 06:19, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Chicken -- I've been at Emory from 1996-2000. Then again as a PhD student in the last two years. I know its culture and I'm not saying that your perceptions aren't among some of the students there, but they are *not* representative of the student body as a whole and because you pick isolated bits of info and present them without a broader context, they're not proper for an encyclopedia article. Emory does have an active group of students who do volunteer and work with the community... about 300-400 odd members. I also did not come from a rich family (blue collar background) and was only able to attend Emory because of financial aid + scholarship. I recommend that if you have such an axe to grind against Emory, create a blog and you can *freely* write whatever you want on it. This is Wikipedia -- the Free Encyclopedia. Which means verifiable facts, not perceptions of reality. Understand the difference? Wiki4fun 16:32, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Chickensoda's concerns re: use of this article as an advertising site for Emory

I am bothered by some of the changes that have been made, and my recent revision attempts to include presentation of positive, negative, and most importantly, neutral data about Emory University. It appears to me that the page is being edited and skewed by those affiliated with Emory's recruitment office, as the site has become essentially an advertisement for the school. Some of my contributions that were specific and factual were removed. I restored those I thought should be restored, and deleted some overblown language.

Some questions:

What exactly is a "premier university"? Shouldn't we mention specifics, such as USNWR's ranking, rather than making blanket claims? And where exactly is Emory's commitment to the arts and humanities "renowned"? Specifics would be good.

I think others have mentioned that most of Emory's institutions fall into the top 20 in the nation for either U.S. News or Business Week. Is that acceptable as premier? Wiki4fun 00:35, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
If you read the first paragraph, the use of "premier university" is justified. The USNWR's ranking is used as is BusinessWeek's. 170.140.70.254

Why did someone remove the data on Emory's racial composition, which is easily verifiable by looking at the school's website?

What's the goal of this? What's the context? To provide racial data with out comparing it to similar universities seems only to do one thing: disguise one-sided journalism by providing isolated facts. I'm not saying we trying and write "pro"-Emory or "anti"-Emory, but you're failing to be balanced in what's contained in the article. Wiki4fun 00:35, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
Because you skewed the percentage to make Emory look less racially diverse than it is (you lumped Asians and Whites together, which is unfair and says a lot about what you consider to be "diverse"). If you go here, http://www.college.emory.edu/about/facts.html, the most recent data proves that 31% of the class of 2009 considers itself a part of one or more minority group. Furthermore, Emory is one of the most diverse private universities in the United States, and lack of African American male, Hispanic, and Native American enrollment is a problem all universities in America are facing, not just Emory. 170.140.70.254
Agreed -- by not providing the context for all universities having difficulty with recruiting more diverse student bodies, ChickenSoda incorrectly makes a reader perceive a fact in isolation, which is not balanced 67.35.9.19 01:09, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Why did someone remove the information that the Emory Village is the only nearby attraction to campus?

Because this seems to be boarding on being unbalanced. This is not eOpinions.com Wiki4fun 00:35, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
Because it didn't fit with the rest of the paragraph it was inserted in, and has little to do with student life, activities, and culture (this section should be retitled to just student life and activities). 170.140.70.254

Why did someone remove the info that the cost of attendence is about $40,000?

Because you did not mention how many students also receive financial aid. Because you said "most Emory students are from rich families" and I, personally, can attest my familar was not rich nor the stuck-up-snobs you seem to believe most Emory students are. They were blue collar U.S. citizens who earned no more than $60,000 of combined salary at the time I attended school. And I also know I was not an isolated event at Emory. You do what Fox News does as a wonderful job of pseudo-journalism... you pick isolated facts and present them without context. Are some Emory students rich, yes. Are they all rich, no. Are most rich == prove it, because you're wrong. I might recommend you try taking a course in Journalism 101. Wiki4fun 00:35, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
This should be added, but the amount of students receiving financial aid should also be noted in my opinion. 170.140.70.254
Concur, as a lot of students are receiving financial aid. 67.35.9.19 01:09, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Anyone who has been a student at Emory has heard of "the Emory apathy," unless things have done a huge 180 in the past few years - why was this taken out?

Again, is this apathy any different at other major campuses? Provide context for your facts. Yes, are their articles on Emory apathy -- yes... but quite frankly that just seems to show how naive the students are that their apathy isn't limited to just their institution, but in part widespread among most private universities where there are sufficient students to exist in a "bubble".
Also, to the individual who cites 50+ articles on the Emory Wheel for the keyword "Emory apathy", you should know that there are 70+ articles on the Emory Wheel for the keyword "Emory activism". Isolated facts do not make for informed reading.
I find this to be a subjective opinion. Apathy is no doubt a problem, but I do not think it is unique to Emory. Thus, it doesn't seem necessary to mention on Emory's Wiki page. Furthermore, Emory's student body has become more active in recent years, and having recently graduated from the College, I am well aware of this increase in activism (and it's not only in student government). 170.140.70.254
Agreed -- by not providing the context whether or not all universities are having this same difficulty, a fact is isolation is not fair and balanced, but bad reporting. 67.35.9.19 01:09, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Anyone who has been a student at Emory knows that activism is virtually nonexistent on campus - why was this taken out?

See my answer above. 170.140.70.254

Where is the data that 70% of Emory students are volunteers coming from? Where is the data that 60% of students study abroad coming from? A source would be good -- seems like this would be easy to prove, as it's a statistical claim.

You're right, these too should be defended. Whomever posted them should provide a verifiable reference.
This has been taken out until it is verified. 170.140.70.254

Where is the data that 60% of students study abroad coming from? A source would be good - seems like this would be easy to prove, as it's a statistical claim.

It looks like it should be 40% -- http://icis.emory.edu/announcements/archives/CIPA_Spring_06.pdf, but has already been taken out. I will add it back, as it is now verifiable. 170.140.70.254
Yay for verification and providing facts in a broad context. More of this is good!  :) 67.35.9.19 01:09, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

WHY THIS MATTERS: I suppose I'm really bothered by the way this article is being skewed because I went to Emory and was demoralized by the extremely apathetic, self-interested, and privileged student culture there. A lot of the changes that have been made seem not informational in nature, but rather designed to portray the school in the most glowing light possible.

I do notice some anonymous edits coming from 170.140.*.* which would indeed be Emory ResNet domains. I think you are right in asking that they be defended just as I am asking you to defend your Emory attack light. You're just as guilty, if not more, as whomever is posting from 170.140.*.* that you're skewing the article too... be careful. Wiki4fun 00:35, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Who killed himself in the late 1990s there, after frequently discussing his growing alientation from the wealthy and self-centered student culture, nor for Chris McCandless, who died in Alaska after attending Emory.

Um, are you saying Chris McCandless died in Alaska because of Emory apathy? I don't think that's a correct interpretation. I assume you read "Into the Woods" -- he died because of either a mental illness or a lack of intelligence that he was near a major road and could indeed have survived.

There is something of a problem here, because the eighth-richest university in the US is obviously a lot better at publishing things about itself than are students who are addressing problems with the school. How can this disparity be addressed?

I was there as an undegrad from 1996-2000, and I knew several motivated and altruistic individuals. You must just have never connected with them. There was Alpha Phi Omega, the co-ed service group, which numbered about 120 active members at any given time, and then there was Volunteer Emory which included another 150 members. Finally, I was Chair of Emory's Habitat for Humanity Chapter and we had membership of about 100 members. So you must have had a completely different Emory experience then me. Oh, and I received Emory's Humanitarian Award in 2000 from President Chase for my volunteer efforts, so the University does annually recognize those students who are active. Wiki4fun 00:35, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Deliberately skewing information to make it sound like a cultural environment that it is not might be a priorty of people working for the recruitment office, but it threatens real harm to people who read this article and take away distorted info.

Amen. I agree with you 100% on this and we should be careful not to be too kind nor too attacking. Wiki4fun 00:35, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Though I do not agree with the extent to which this writer disapproves of Emory University, "Emory apathy" is widespread and well-known among the students. A 1999 focus group published on the Emory website itself identified apathy as one of the major problems facing the student body. It is frequently referenced by faculty and staff in public media, and by the Wheel in articles and editorials. "Emory apathy" is probably the most famous aspect of student culture at the University. 209.214.230.142 20:26, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

I was part of that focus group. See earlier comments above about my involvement with Volunteer Emory, Emory's Habitat for Humanity, and Alpha Phi Omega at Emory. The focus group wasn't saying all of Emory was apathetic, nor that there was just a small minority that were active -- but rather how to expand the involvement of activity to ideally include 80-90% of campus. That said, while I was on that focus group, my thoughts were how many other institutions also have similar apathy? I always though the label of "Emory apathy" was ironic because it demonstrated not apathy, but self-centeredness. Thoughts that Emory's student should be different, less apathetic, than other 18-22 year olds who -- quite frankly -- generally living in an isolated bubble at that age. Wiki4fun 00:35, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
I also agree with the above statements. I noticed a lot of questionable edits being made in the last few days from anonymous IPs and when I looked them up, I got returns from Atlanta and the Emory campus itself. Although anybody with good knowledge and solid facts is encouraged to edit, I also fear that this article has recently begun to resemble an advertisement from the admissions office.
Chickensoda, I agree with the first five of your points in your original post and feel they should be immediately re-added to the article but I think the final two need solid, verifiable sources to be included. I also think the vague language which paints the school in a positive light should be replaced and backed up by facts and publications. I'll try to do some editing where possible. Nrbelex (talk) 02:42, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
Concur 100%. Balance needs to be struck.

(1) On financial aid documents distributed in June, Emory University lists the Cost of Attendance for the 2006-2007 academic year as $44,844.00. Of this, $32,506.00 is tuition.

That's great -- now how many students received scholarships? And how many received Federal financial aid? That is, how many students actually paid this full amount. I know for the Goizueta Business School over 50% of the MBA students receive some form of financial aid.
According to the Princeton Review here, 38% percent of undergraduates receive need-based financial aid and the average freshman total need-based gift aid is $21,616. These facts should not be failed to be mentioned, as they are important to a prospective student in calculating what his or her actual costs will be. 170.140.70.254
Yay for verification and providing facts in a broad context. More of this is good!  :) 67.35.9.19 01:17, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

(2) A search for "Emory apathy" on The Emory Wheel's website (www.emorywheel.com) produced 58 hits on published articles.

Also, to the individual who cites 50+ articles on the Emory Wheel for the keyword "Emory apathy", you should know that there are 70+ articles on the Emory Wheel for the keyword "Emory activism". Isolated facts do not make for informed reading. Wiki4fun 00:35, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
Searching Wash U's student newspaper's website for "student apathy" yeilded 26 results (Student Life) and at Harvard's student newspaper's website (The Harvard Crimson), "student apathy" yeilded 136 results. Does that mean student apathy should be mentioned on their Wikipedia pages as well -- in addition to countless other universities in the US? 170.140.70.254
Kudos for providing context. 67.35.9.19 01:17, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
Emory Apathy was such a common term on campus when I attended that it never occurred to me to compare this to other universities. Thanks for the context. However, I still recommend it receive a mention, since it is so common a conception. Perhaps stating that Emory students are commonly _perceived_ as apathetic by the student body and/or faculty. 209.214.230.142 17:32, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Ideas for Additions or Improvements

entire website only serves as a guide for people working within Emory on how to properly use Emory's symbols in publications. Because we have a valid fair-use tag for the images already, I think it may be best if we remove the added text which is a little confusing unless you have been given permission. Respond to me on either my talk page or here before any changes are made. Again, thanks for helping out with the article so much. Nrbelex (talk) 16:34, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Formatting

Is this logo copyrighted? -- Zoe

Probably. But it probably also is being used under fair use. --mav

Would anyone else like to see this article conform to the Wikipedia:WikiProject_Universities proposal for formatting? Right now, this article is well-written with good info, but it's tough to navigate. Formatting would require some major editing and moving paragraphs around, but I think it would be worth it. --User:Sayeth May 9, 2004

It's now using this template 68.211.149.176 15:00, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

I see that there is no "Campus" section as per the WikiProject Universities template. Also, the Points of Interest section (which contained one item, but to which I planned to add over the rest of the summer) has been dropped. Is there any plan to add a Campus section that may or may not contain Points of Interest? 209.214.230.142 20:57, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Emory Seal

According to this page, the seal listed here is not the Emory seal. In fact, it is explicitly stated that it is the President's seal and "was designed specifically for use by the Office of the President and appears only on documents and ceremonial materials produced by that office." Unfortunately, the correct one on that site is of low quality. Any suggestions? Nrbelex (talk) 07:10, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

I went ahead and uploaded it. It doesn't look very good but it is the right seal. Nrbelex (talk) 22:32, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Dooley's Week

During Dooley’s Week, if Dooley (a skeleton character that serves as Emory’s other mascot) and his entourage come into your class and spray your teacher with a water gun, that class is dismissed.

While this is true, when I attended 10+ years ago, this practice was somewhat contested. Some classes, particularly the intensive science courses like Organic Chem, did not want to be dismissed - especially when exams or in-class tests were approaching. I believe that "Dooley" now checks with professors ahead of time before dismissing their class. 209.214.230.142 18:08, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Image for infobox

In the past few days I've seen a number of changes to the Emory picture in the infobox. It started as Image:Emory.jpeg, became Image:Emory Crest.gif and is now Image:Emory Shield.gif. If you follow the WikiProject Universities template, a "seal" with the school's motto and year of creation should be displayed. This can be seen at the University of Michigan page which is featured. However Emory lacks this type of seal and the closest thing to is Image:Emory Crest.gif. This type of image can be seen at places like Harvard University and Duke University. I think before the picture is changed again, we should come to a consensus here as to what should be displayed. Nrbelex (talk) 17:43, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

To whomever changed the image again... please stop. Image:Emory Crest.gif is the most similar to all the other school's symbols in their infoboxes as it includes the school's latin phrase and the school's "coat of arms". Nrbelex (talk) 02:44, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
Nrbelex, I completely agree with you. You thought I changed it from the crest back to the shield, but in fact, I was replacing the shield with the crest. The reason people are not allowing the crest to be used, even though it is quite akin to what other schools use and is Emory's official university crest, is that it violates Emory's web identity rules (found at http://identity.emory.edu). Again, I think the crest should be used (it looks much cooler and has the latin motto), and have tried replacing the shield with it, but somebody with an Emory IP keeps replacing it (repeatedly) ... so I have just given up. 170.140.70.254

On second thought, Image:Emory Seal.gif is the most appropriate for the infobox but given our current copy's quality, I think we're better off with what there is now. Can any of the contributors (especially those on the campus - I know there are some of you) think of a way to get Emory to release a higher resolution image of the seal for use here? If given permission and a higher quality image, we could post it with Template:withpermission combined with a fair use rationale. Perhaps somebody could inform the Emory Identity staff that most of Emory's competitors have higher quality images on their pages compared with Emory's...? Nrbelex (talk) 00:33, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

The problem is, there is a blanket statement on use of the seal and similar items: "The President's seal (A) was designed specifially for use by the Office of the President and appears only on documents and ceremonial materials produced by that office. The University crest (C) is used for special commemorative applications only. The use of these two graphics, as well as the University seal (B) is restricted and must be approved by the Secretary of the University or the Office of the President."[1] The way I read it, I don't even think we can claim fair use on the crest, especially since there is a preferred identifying logo that Emory would rather have on the article. —C.Fred (talk) 04:46, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

The leadership of Emory University has designated their official symbol to be the name over the shield. Harvard and other institutions do not have a symbol that is ubiquitous for the entire institution, and Emory does, and that is what we want to use. Wikipedia is most effective when the information is closest to the truth and to display our symbol as anything but the shield is incorrect, and confusing to any one who comes in contact with Emory thought the publications, the website, the media, or the campus. At each of these locations the shield is the only image. ljhenry

Y'all have been downloading the GIF when you should have gone for the WMF. I downloaded the WMF, colored it according to the color guidelines at identity.emory.edu, ripped out the white background, and scaled and exported it as a PNG. (by the way, I can generate these shields at incredibly high resolution from the WMF; I chose the size I did because the {{logo}} template describes fair use as "low-resolution images of logos") —ptk✰fgs 02:16, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Also, I have to concur with those who oppose using the crest. Despite being an inmate here for 7 years, I've never seen it... anywhere except on the identity project website. Every official publication and website is marked with the shield logo. —ptk✰fgs 02:23, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Listen, I don't want to start an edit war, but I don't understand why the proper logo isn't being used in the article. Look at the logos from schools like Upenn, Yale, University of Chicago, etc. and you'll see that they all use the crest from their school and not some symbol or special font with the name as is the case currently at the Emory article. They all have a legitimate fair use claim for the crest and whether the symbol is widely used in documentation is not an issue. The University crest is supposed to be used for all University articles on Wikipedia and it falls under fair use. Emory's statement as to usage on their page doesn't matter. Coca-Cola probably doesn't give us permission to use their logo but we do legally under a fair use claim anyway. Emory isn't special and we should use the same format all other schools abide by on Wikipedia. Nrbelex (talk) 06:24, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

What makes you think the crest is the proper logo? It's not what appears on university correspondence or the web site -- or anything, really. Selecting a logo merely because it's more like the logos used in other similar Wikipedia articles is a bizarre way to select the proper image. The logos we use in all the other articles you list above are the logos that those organizations actually use.
So, if you believe the correct image for this article is the crest, which has been all but phased out by the organization it represents, I'd really like to hear why. "It's more like the logos used on other university articles" isn't terribly persuasive. Georgia State University's logo looks little like the crests you described above. The University of Georgia also has a simple line drawing with no traditional shield and motto. Perhaps you have made an unwarranted assumption about university logos and how they should appear based on an insufficiently large sample of schools. —ptk✰fgs 19:23, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Emory uses the Infobox University template to layout what should be included and where. In the example provided on the page there, the "Seal of Lund University" is used for the article's image within the infobox. Since that template is what all university articles are supposed to abide by, it only seems appropriate to have Emory follow along and use their seal. As a student of Emory, I can say with complete confidence that the logo in question is used, granted not as frequently as the the other. When it is used, it's on official documents and not for less formal use, which the current logo is used for. The official "Honor Code of Emory College" (which I'm holding in my hand) is adorned with the logo in question as an example of official usage (and a fairly common document at that). Even if some university articles use less elaborate logos, a quick scan of the "University Logos" category will clearly show that many if not most use the more formal seal or crest, especially if they are a larger institution like Emory. Nrbelex (talk) 20:32, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
The logo used here still remains the one most commonly used by the university. Yes, I understand that this is a different style from the logos used most commonly by other universities, and that the crest is more similar to those. So far, we only have one example of a document that uses the crest. That we can do a thing does not mean we must do it, and I still don't see what the compelling reason is to use a less common logo. —ptk✰fgs 21:39, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
More critically, Emory has published guidelines for the use of the seal and crest that restrict them to official use only. Please tell me what had changed since this was discussed previously, as we've already been through this and determined use of the seal was inappropriate. (It's even less appropriate now, as Wikipedia is placing more emphasis on making sure free images are used whenever possible, and a restricted image headed very much away from free.) —C.Fred (talk) 23:47, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Regardless of the outcome of this discussion, if you honestly believe Emory's "published guidelines" have any effect on our legal right to use the crest versus the current symbol, you need to refresh yourself on fair use and in what conditions it applies. Nrbelex (talk) 03:15, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
First, regarding the Coca-Cola logo argument, Coke protects its interests in its logo with a trademark (and copyright) but does not tacitly forbid its reproduction. Emory does forbid reproduction of the seal: "Reproduction of the official seal is not permitted in any form unless specifically authorized by the Office of Brand Management or the Office of the Secretary." Second, regarding the published guidelines: if Emory maintains such strict rules on usage of the seal to ensure that it appears in limited context, does it not make sense that they do so to preserve the value of the seal? Is it not then possible that the value of the seal is diminished if we use it on the Wikipedia? If so, then using the image on Wikipedia is not fair use. —C.Fred (talk) 03:28, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
Every logo owner protects its interests using a document like Emory's identity guidelines. Those don't apply to us because our use of the logos is a fair use, for identification and commentary on the organization they identify, not one subject to agreement with Emory. An unfair use of the crest would be, for example, a campus organization placing it on its publications to imply a closer relationship with the university than actually exists -- this would dilute the mark.
Our use of the crest need not be influenced by the identity guidelines. Those guidelines do not apply to us; our use is a fair use and not subject to them.
The crest, however, is not the logo most commonly used by the organization. We should select one that is. And we have; that's what's in the article now. —ptk✰fgs 03:54, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
n.b. there is a long discussion on a similar issue at Talk:Lutheran_Church_-_Missouri_Synod/Archive_2#Copyright:_Fair_Use. The outcome of that discussion was, as one would reasonably expect, that the organization's restrictions on use of the logo simply do not apply to Wikipedia because its use of the logo is under a fair use claim, not one subject to restriction by the mark owner.
If you truly believe that Emory's visual identity guidelines on the use of logos apply to Wikipedia, then please, by all means, go find a lawyer immediately to comment on this issue. But don't come back claiming that those restrictions apply to us until you can find legal advice concurring with that. It's a waste of our time and it runs absolutely counter to the common practice on Wikipedia of simply grabbing and using logos when we have a valid fair use claim.
The visual identity guidelines are intended to constrain parties related to the university in an attempt to create a coherent visual branding presence. That doesn't concern us. We should simply find the most appropriate logo for the organization and use that in the article. —ptk✰fgs 04:00, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
Part of why I bring up the visual identity guidelines is that those same guidelines recommend the use of the Emory Shield as the preferred identifying mark. I support use of the shield, as is the current situation, to identify the school. I think we are absolutely within the bounds of fair use to use that image. I object to use of the seal, mainly on the grounds that it is not the common identifier of the school, and also because by way of the visual identity guidelines, the university indicates a preference not to use the seal widely.
I think the situation is analogous to that in the Phi Gamma Delta article. That organization requests very restricted usage of its Greek-letter representation and recommends the use of English-word spellings or "Fiji." The Wikipedia article honors those rules. Emory requests the seal to be used in a limited context and recommends the usage of the shield in the general context. I do not think we are required to honor the restrictions, but I think it is respectful to follow their preferences. —C.Fred (talk) 04:38, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, we went down the "respect their preferences" road at LCMS as well. If Wikipedia were to make a habit of respecting the arbitrary preferences of every content owner then we would never make a fair use claim on anything. Fair use is something that withers on the vine if you don't use it. Our only concern should be to find the most representative logo and use it in the article, irrespective of the organization's inapplicable guidelines for how to use it. In this case, that's coincidentally the one which the university recommends for internal publications. In practice we should opt for the seal that's in the article because it's the one that's almost universally used to identify the organization in its own publications. —ptk✰fgs 04:44, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Per my recent edit

I recently reverted a user's edits on this page [2] because I had believed they were vandalous edits. In retrospect, I now see these edits as unverifiable and without reliable sources (as well as unexplained content removals). If someone can provide the correct information that shows that I was wrong in reverting the edits, then by all means add the information back. However, the statement about the alcohol poisoning and the "top party school" feels unencyclopedic and not necessary for inclusion in the article (as it is merely a single incident relating to the paragraph). Ryūlóng 04:36, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I apologize for my edit. I reverted because of vandalism made to this page, and I checked the user's contributions in the article. I will reintroduce the information. Ryūlóng 05:24, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Defining Notable Faculty and Alumni

I'm not sure if there are any clear criteria as to what defines "notable" for either faculty or alumni. There does seem to be some back-and-forth about folks being added or removed. I think if folks decide to remove, they should post their reasons why. If folks decide to add someone, the reason should be clear either in the general news, via Google, via their Wikipedia entry, or via some URL that the contributor provides to make this contribution self-evident.

Thoughts? My primary concern is not having vandalism of this page, while at the same time avoid vanity additions as well. Wiki4fun 03:40, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Three points + a recommendation: 170.140.134.126 12:27, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

1. Check out Harvard University and List_of_Harvard_University_people. what we all may be running into is the fact that "notable" is extremely subjective. For folks outside the United States, they may not care if someone played a leadership role in 9/11 whereas other folks not to interested in business may not care that someone was a CEO of a company with no other fame associated with that other than they did a job; for which they probably were highly paid.

2. Don't single out a specific person unless you apply the same rationale to all individuals. I've not seen anyone attempt to explain the rationale that includes all "notable faculty" or "notable alumni" -- saying someone is not "old" enough is subjective and prejudiced. If there was to be a rule, need something that can be demonstrated against everyone here but even then the contribution of what different people do to their local, national, and global communities is really subjective to each of us and hard to weigh.

3. Lastly, somewhat concerned we're using Google to judge people's notability, some people's jobs may create more or less Google hits. I happen to know that government workers cannot talk to the press during their work and may have other security clearance restrictions, whereas academics probably create a lot of news through the University's press office, and politicians + tv stars probably have people that they pay to issue "press releases" for them. So Google hits alone do not equal notability.

Since we cannot make another repeat deletion; that would violate Wikipedia's rule-of-three, I suggest we try to find a middle-ground solution. Harvard solved this by having a seperate page with List_of_Harvard_University_people, no "notable faculty" or "notable alumni" are cited on the Harvard University Wikipedia entry. I would recommend we move all Emory faculty + alumni to a similar List_of_Emory_University_people webpage, and use text similar to Harvard. 170.140.134.126 12:27, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm not particularly committed to keeping or removing any one entry in the list. I would say, however, that the lists are getting quite long. I think we should either pare them down, or do as you suggested and move them to a new article. —ptk✰fgs 16:24, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
I concur with ptk and 170.140.134.126. I like the middle-ground solution. I'm sure we don't have all the famous Emory faculty and alumni here, only those who either (1) historians put them on, (2) they put themselves on, (3) friends put them on (or enemies took them off). I think Harvard has the right approach to separate the Emory University entry from the Emory faculty + alumni entry. Who wants to move them? I'm not a Wikipedia expert but could (ptk seems more skilled...) Wiki4fun 16:27, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

This talk page is getting long, what's the rule for "clearing out" old discussions?

Simply that, any suggestions on a rule for "clearing out" old discussions? I'm wondering if some of the early discussions are still relevant, yet I don't want to incur vandalism flames if I delete them. Thoughts anyone? Wiki4fun 04:20, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

We archive old discussions. I have archived the old discussions. —ptk✰fgs 03:39, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
Thank you ptk, merci beaucoup! Wiki4fun 03:03, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Please don't duplicate threads from the archive back into the talk page without good reason. It's confusing and creates a mess. The discussions I archived haven't been active in months (a month and five days, in the most recent case). This talk page is for discussing changes to the article, and the issues in those threads are resolved. There is no reason to clutter this page with them, especially for newcomers who are coming here to discuss changes to the article. —ptk✰fgs 16:56, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for archiving the old threads out. Yesterday, the threads were deleted but not archived, and that's why I restored them. Since there is now an archive page for them, they can be deleted from this page. —C.Fred (talk) 01:15, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Salman Rushdie

Do we need this yet? While I would say the Wheel normally meets WP:RS, in this case they're citing an anonymous source.[3] —ptk✰fgs 16:08, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Is this better? Nrbelex (talk) 17:59, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
Much better. —ptk✰fgs 18:02, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Article Needs More Photographs

Can someone help out by adding high quality photographs of the campus to this article? Photographs pertaining to Emory history would be useful as well. Thanks. Majoreditor 11:57, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

All of my Emory photos on Flickr are under an Attribution-ShareAlike license so they are usable... but most aren't really appropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think any will work, send me a message and I'll upload them. Nrbelex (talk) 05:42, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Emory Eagle.gif

Image:Emory Eagle.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:38, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

More Information About the Arts?

I was wondering if it's okay with the creators/editors of this page to add more information about the arts and venues? We were thinking of adding this to the article, under the Athletics portion:

Arts

Two-thirds of Emory’s student body is involved in the arts with double majors, minors, or participation in student-organized groups in the areas of Art History, Creative Writing, Dance, Film Studies, Theater, and Visual Arts. There are approximately a dozen faculty-led and over 50 student-led arts organizations on campus, presenting about 300 events per year, 80% of which are free and open to the public.

Emory’s most widespread and well-known arts event is Campus MovieFest, begun in 2000 by four Emory students. Campus MovieFest is the world’s largest student film festival, with participating schools in Georgia, Boston, California, Florida and Scotland.

Donna and Marvin Schwartz Center for Performing Arts

The Schwartz Center was completed in 2003 and serves as the visual representation of the arts at Emory. It includes the Emerson Concert Hall, voted “best acoustics in Atlanta” by Atlanta Magazine*. The centerpiece of the concert hall is the massive Daniel Jaeckel Op. 45 organ. The Concert Hall also presents major musical recitals and performances, including those that are part of the Flora Glenn Candler Concert Series, which has recently showcased such artists as Joshua Bell, Itzhak Pearlman, and the National Philharmonic of Russia. The Schwartz Center also houses a blackbox theater and a dance studio.

Professional Companies

Theater Emory Theater Emory is the professional theater company in residence and is a unique collaboration of professional directors, actors, designers, choreographers, playwrights, and dramaturgs from throughout the United States and abroad, who work with students in productions and workshops, and serve as mentors and teachers in many courses. An important aspect of Theater Emory is the Playwriting Center at Emory, which creates a support system for the development of important new work for the stage and, increasingly, screen, with linking artistic and academic missions. The biennial Brave New Works Festival has developed over 100 new works.

Emory Dance Company The Emory Dance Company provides an in-depth study of a choreographic work from its beginning stages to the completed concert performance. The Company also regularly commissions choreographic works and musical scores by local and national guest artists. Performances include annual concerts of faculty works as well as programs directed and choreographed by students.

Coca-Cola Artist-in-Residence Program

Sponsored by the Coca-Cola Foundation, Emory’s artist-in-residence program allows for members of the Emory community and the metro-Atlanta area to experience the arts, especially many who otherwise would have limited access. World-class artists whose work reflects international and diverse cultural dimensions provide Emory and Atlanta area student with teaching, masterclasses, individual study, and lectures in addition to a public performance. Past notable participants have included Toronto Dance Theater, Joshua Bell, Jose Limon Dance Company, David Krakauer, Edgar Meyer, Chris Thile, Frederica von Stade, and Kenny Barron.

Schwartzcenter 19:28, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

The only objections you are likely to run into will revolve around 1)sourcing/references - have you got referenceable published sources to support the information in the text, and 2) your username, which places you in a position to be seen in violation of Wikipedia policies on self-promotion. It's better if someone else adds the information. Personally, I'm more than a bit surprised to find the Schwartz Center doesn't have it's own article here - something I would be happy to address, as it certainly is notable enough for it. AUTiger ʃ talk/work 20:20, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
I do have sources, but agree that it would be more appropriate for someone else to add the information. I think it'd be great if you addressed the Schwartz Center issue. Thanks!
Schwartzcenter 20:47, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
The issue I'm finding is that all the published articles on the Center are in the Pay-Per-View sections of the various newspapers' websites (the greatest number of which are in the AJC of course). That's making properly sourcing things a bit more difficult. AUTiger ʃ talk/work 18:26, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
I did get the article started however: Donna and Marvin Schwartz Center for Performing Arts. AUTiger ʃ talk/work 18:56, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Discussion of new article on Emory Eagles (athletics)

Disavian tagged the athletics section as a possible spinnoff to a new article. Your thoughts?

IMO, it's a worthwhile goal. However, I don't think there's currently enough material to justify creation of a new article. If, however, someone want to expand the section then I would consider supporting a spinoff. Majoreditor 21:10, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

There's not enough to make an article of any real value, imho... Nrbelex (talk) 18:52, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
Not enough to support an article. Not for the forseeable decade, even. —ptk✰fgs 10:43, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Emory Alumni Association section

It's been suggested that the article doesn't need an entire section for the Emory Alumni Association. A quick check of other university articles reveals that most don't have a section on alumni orgnizations. The current section is of questionable encyclopedic value. I'd suggest deleting it. Thoughts/comments? Majoreditor 01:25, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm strongly in favor of its complete deletion. Nrbelex (talk) 02:48, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
Agreed. Boosterism isn't appropriate. Majoreditor (talk) 15:41, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Boosterism

I sought a third opinion on whether to include the Sigma Nu championship [4]. The editor agrees that it doesn't belong in the article. The material is un-encyclopedic boosterism and trivia. Majoreditor (talk) 13:58, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Related along the same lines, the Notable faculty referenced with Emory -- some make perfect sense to include there, whereas other perhaps should be moved to List of persons associated with Emory University, thoughts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.219.74.36 (talk) 02:52, 6 January 2008 (UTC)


Dooley

Why isn't there any separate article on Dooley? There are so many things about him, so many rumors. Lskatz (talk) 17:22, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

You answered half the question: if a lot of it is rumours, then there isn't much left to build a factual article on. —C.Fred (talk) 17:25, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

There have been newspaper articles and some facts on Emory's website. For instance, Emory Magazine and the actual story Lskatz (talk) 02:40, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Somebody could do us a great favor by creating an article on Dooley. Majoreditor (talk) 01:02, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Valdosta Junior College Deleted?

Why was the section on the Valdosta Junior College campus deleted? It is historically factual and interesting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.99.69.204 (talk) 06:45, 24 November 2008 (UTC)


Notable alumni and Eliza Dresang

4/26/09 Responding to query regarding reference for Eliza T. Dresang in Notable Alumni section. There are now two references for this. One from the Florida State University website where she taught and conducted research for several years, and the other from an ALA article on the award given to Dresang. Thesea references are now included in the wiki article on Dresang that is under construction. --JourneyWomanSLP (talk) 15:12, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

The problem is that Dresang is not nearly of the notability level of the notable faculty. She should not be on the shortlist of notable persons mentioned in this article. However, once her article is created, I don't see a problem listing her at List of persons associated with Emory University. —C.Fred (talk) 16:56, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Jag Sheth

Jag Sheth appears to be the only one in the "notable faculty" shortlist here for whom there is no assertion of notability independent of his activity as a professor. This list is going to grow very, very long again if we set the bar at "one of the most notable professors in field XYZ". In the absence of an independent claim of notability, we should leave him for the longer list. —ptk✰fgs 22:30, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree, the article needn't be junked up with lengthy lists. I just now stumbled across the link you mentioned, which is at the bottom of the article. I'd suggest promoting the link the way Washington University does. Also, one would expect to find Nobel winner Wole Soyinka on the Emory faculty list. I suppose I shall add him. Majoreditor 00:45, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
It's right there at the top of the "Notable faculty" section here. That's what the manual of style recommends. —ptk✰fgs 00:58, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Seney Hall cannot possibly have been the scene of a photograph of a college class in the 1840s. Seney was not constructed until much later, 1890s I believe.75.177.90.211 (talk) 00:17, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Edits to be made to Athletics section

I would like to update the Athletics portion of the page in order to:

  1. Expand on intramurals and draw a better distinction between them and club sports (which are also very popular at Emory)
  2. Add more updated information pertaining to recent victories at the varsity level
  3. Dedicate a sub-section to “sports and scholarship,” which would illustrate the intersection between academics and athletics at Emory and show how the University puts emphasis on both – for example, Emory has the second-highest NCAA Postgraduate Scholarship winners since 2000 of any school in the U.S.

I’m open to suggestions on this and would appreciate any feedback that other editors could provide before I make these changes. Akvwiki (talk) 14:23, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Emory History Section?

Emory University was not chartered until 1915. Almost all of the current 'history' section is occupied with the period before the college's move. The 'history' section should reflect the more recent period of the universities existence after its founding in Druid Hills(with a brief introduction to the college's earlier history). The more expansive discussions now under this topic should transferred to a section specifically concerned with the history of Emory College. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RrML (talk • contribs) 02:45, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

New Emory-related article

In some other editing, I came across this org and went ahead and made a stub for them. I'm not sure where to link it from the main Emory article, though: Lillian Carter Center for International Nursing. —Disavian (talk/contribs) 19:54, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Dooley

Most other college mascots have articles; perhaps Dooley (mascot) should as well? —Disavian (talk/contribs) 00:00, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

I may get around to writing an article on Dooley sometime in the next year. Majoreditor (talk) 03:00, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
Good enough :) —Disavian (talk/contribs) 15:28, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Secret Societies

Does anyone know if Swoops Revenge is a real secret society at Emory? I noticed an IP address added to the article. --Jerm (Talk/ Contrib) 18:52, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Sounds dubious. If it's real then it's new. Majoreditor 21:02, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
I find the last 3 secret societies dubious (Ducemus, Speculum, and the Order of Ammon). The link given does not list specific secret societies. I can't edit it though, because I'm an Emory student and our incredulity about the existence of some of these (specifically speculum) is kind of common here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iank125 (talk • contribs) 16:48, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Scores scandal

I removed the addition of the score scandal and another editor reverted me. Let's talk.

While I completely agree that this is a notable event and is very clearly covered by secondary reliable sources, I feel to make it a fourth of the entire lede would give the event undue weight. I'm open to a compromise that has a shorter description in the first few paragraphs, but the amount currently inserted is too much. --Lord Roem ~ (talk) 22:33, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

This doesn't belong in the lead as it's not essential to helping a reader understand the university. ElKevbo (talk) 22:48, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
Agreed. I have removed it from the lead per WP:LEAD and WP:UNDUE and because it seems like a flash in the pan event. However, I've kept information about the scandal in the appropriate section in the body of the article. Majoreditor (talk) 01:25, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Location of Emory university, confirming

This may sound strange, but is there "consensus" that Emory University is not located in the City of Atlanta? There is a previous talk page link at Talk:Emory_University#Location_of_Emory, but I am starting this just to be safe...

The reason why is that a user believes that a talk page notice about this needs to be supported by a talk page section asking for a clear consensus: User_talk:ElKevbo#Emory_University WhisperToMe (talk) 05:17, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

There was also a discussion at User_talk:98.192.57.38 WhisperToMe (talk) 05:27, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
There is consensus that Emory University is located outside the Atlanta city limits but within the Atlanta metropolitan area as defined by the Bureau of the Census.This can easily be verified by checking a map such as this one [[5]] which shows that the main campus of Emory University is located outside the city limits.
Perhaps ElKevbo's point is that the US Post Office allows mailing addresses which list a nearby city rather than the actual corporate entity of a particular address. Many people living outside the City of Atlanta list "Atlanta" for mailing purposes on their USPS letters and parcels. That, however, does nto mean that their houses are located inside the city limits of Atlanta. The USPS is hardly an arbiter of city boundries.
Small portions of Emory are located inside the city of Atlanta, such as Emory Midtown Hospital. However, the headquarters and main campus of the University are clearly located in unicorporated DeKalb County.Majoreditor (talk) 13:41, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
No, my only point is that I don't think administrators should use their tools to impose content on an article without explicit consensus from other editors. Even if we all agree that this article should say that Emory is in __ then that doesn't mean that we need (a) an edit notice that accosts everyone who makes any edit to this article or (b) a warning that only administrators can edit or remove. We deal with this kind of issue all of the time and it's rare that we need to use such a blunt tool that is limited only to administrators so I don't see why we need to use one here. ElKevbo (talk) 15:41, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
If you wish, I can discuss the general uses of page notices on a noticeboard. Also I think having a "To discuss this issue, see Talk:Emory University" could be a remedy to concerns that non-administrators or other users may not be able to access the issue. From experience this issue is more common in instances where a postal address says one thing and the actual location is another; it means you may many drive by anonymous editors making erroneous changes. I'll get lists of edit summaries to show instances of anonymous editors making driveby edits. WhisperToMe (talk) 18:34, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
2009: I changed instances of Atlanta to DeKalb County ("Atlanta area" would also have been acceptable
2008: C Fred reverts again
2008: Anonymous user reverts C Fred saying in the edit summary "Emory has an exception and is granted an Atlanta address. No one knows/cares about Dekalb."
2008: C fred reverts anonymous user who changed it to Atlanta (Edit summary "Revert to revision 249619956 dated 2008-11-04 10:34:30 by WhisperToMe using popups - not in the Atlanta city limits")
2007: Changed Atlanta to saying it's not in Atlanta
WhisperToMe (talk) 18:34, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
I appreciate you taking the time to gather and share this information! However, five edits over the past six years - and none since 2009 - doesn't seem like anything worth worrying about and certainly not something rising to the level of needing an edit notice. ElKevbo (talk) 19:09, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
Perhaps we can wait and see if there are any responses in five days. If not, I can nuke the edit notice and try only using commenting marks WhisperToMe (talk) 06:22, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

No Ely Callaway in the Notable Alumni section?

Did I miss it, or was there no listing for Ely R. Callaway. Jr. in the Notable Alumni? How could you omit Mr. Callaway, if he is, in fact, an Emory alumnus? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Allred E. Gnuthat (talk • contribs) 02:48, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

@Allred E. Gnuthat: Look here. It is a list of notable alumni/faculty of Emory University. He is listed under the "Business" section, which is where I linked. CorkythehornetfanTalk 07:52, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Overkill in the lead

Isn't the third paragraph of the lead a bit over the top? I think such detail belongs in the body of the article. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 04:41, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

I agree, this article has a lead with too much detail. See WP:LEAD for information on what the lead section should and shouldn't contain. The list of Emory-related people is particularly over the top. Please feel free to refactor the lead. Majoreditor (talk) 17:50, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
@Alexanderfernbank:, I see you have reverted the change I made yesterday. From your contribution history, I notice that 95% of your wikipedia edits have been to this article, more than 100 in total. So you obviously care about the contents of this article. But you must admit this lead is overkill. By way of comparison it is only 10 words shorter than the lead sections of Harvard University and University of Oxford.... combined!
I am not going to pretend that my initial effort at reducing it was perfect. I expected it to be changed, but not simply reverted back to the original state. So I invite you (or any other interested reader) to have a go at paring it down to something that people will actually want to read. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 00:00, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
I jumped the gun and did not pay attention to the fact that there was a further reversion following that. So I have struck through my comments above. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 00:11, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Emory University Page Issues

I am an alumni who with other students have attempted to make the emory university page more presetable and organized. SOme people keep reverts to an older and unorganized version, with some of the reasoning being from accdoing to editing summaries, rascist implications. Please stop reverting to the older template and if you wish toad or update information please feel free to do so without messing with the current template. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Superdude112 (talk • contribs) 05:00, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Emory University

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Emory University's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "nris":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 21:24, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 16 external links on Emory University. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 23:42, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Safe Spaces Non-encyclopedic

A recent update about safe spaces at Emory by another user was reverted for being "unsourced and non-encyclopedic". Obviously unsourced is an issue but what does "non-encyclopedic" mean in the context of safe spaces? I am a new user; are safe spaces considered non-encyclopedic across university pages on Wikipedia? CTKE15 (talk) 02:04, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

translation into Chinese Wikipedia

The 15:16, 5 October 2016‎ Contributor321 version of this article is translated into Chinese Wikipedia to expand an existing article.--Wing (talk) 16:01, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

add pronunciation characters /.../

/.../ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:587:4107:9B00:FD1D:4570:446D:E240 (talk) 12:07, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Emory University. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:36, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Emory University. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:41, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Prestigious University

There seems to be an edit war going on at the moment on a claim in the article's lead. I propose that we discuss it here on the talk page.

Cheers, Majoreditor (talk) 22:44, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

This is going on across several pages (see UC Berkeley, Columbia, etc.), by the same user (ip). I've reported the user here, please add your comments. UCaetano (talk) 22:58, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
Setting aside the persistent sockpuppetry and edit warring, the material is WP:OR so it has been removed until editors can find sources that explicitly support it. Collecting together a handful of different rankings to make an argument is textbook synthesis; moreover, if it's so important that it needs to be included in this article and indeed in the lede then surely an editor can find reliable sources that directly state it. ElKevbo (talk) 18:40, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Location of Emory

An anon editor took offense to an incorrect statement he added to the article. Emory is not located in "the city of Atlanta." This isn't a subjective matter; Emory's campus is located east of the city limits. The term metropolitan area includes both urban and suburban environments. Some sources refer to Emory as urban; others, such as Emory Clinic, U.S. News and World Report and Emory's Office of Athletics, refer to it as suburban. I'm indifferent to the term as long as the article doesn't make a factual error. I've changed the phrase to "metropolitan Atlanta"; hopefully that will satisfy all. Majoreditor 14:32, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

  • Note: This discussion is out of date as Atlanta annexed Emory in 2018 WhisperToMe (talk) 06:21, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

DeKalb

NOTE: This is an outdated section as Emory has been annexed into Atlanta effective January 1, 2018 WhisperToMe (talk) 06:05, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

I think it is clear that we, on Wikipedia, have a consensus to say DeKalb on this. DeKalb IS the location of Emory. Emory IS NOT in Atlanta. The county's fire and police departments have Emory in their service zones. Therefore DeKalb is the de facto local government serving Emory. Readers care, or ought to care, that this is in DeKalb. On other articles we give specifics on locations. The article ALREADY says that it is in the Atlanta metropolitan area. WhisperToMe (talk) 21:59, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

I concur with WhisperToMe. Majoreditor (talk) 00:59, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

The address of Emory is Atlanta. Part of Atlanta bleeds over into DeKalb County. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.99.69.204 (talk) 06:42, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

The postal address does not always have anything to do with the location of the destination. (For point of reference, I once had a Falls Church, VA address even though I lived in Fairfax County.) Likewise, while the post office serving Emory calls itself Atlanta, Emory is located in unincorporated DeKalb County. It is not in the portion of Atlanta located in DeKalb. —C.Fred (talk) 12:26, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
C.Fred is correct. Emory's campus is not within the city limits of Atlanta. Majoreditor (talk) 17:02, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Would the opening sentence read better as "Emory University ... is located in the Druid Hills neighborhood of the City of Atlanta?" Druid Hills in not an "area" but a neighborhood. 10 March 2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by RrML (talk • contribs) 02:27, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

As a note, the "Druid Hills" referenced in this article is an unincorporated area that is not in the City of Atlanta at all. WhisperToMe (talk) 19:00, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
I am getting my information from other Wikipedia articles and maps - but it would appear to me that a section of Atlanta bleeds into DeKalb County, and besides, Druid Hills appears to be a neighborhood of Atlanta much like Midtown or Buckhead. --haha169 (talk) 06:21, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
Emory is not within the city of Atlanta; in contrast, Buckhead and Midtown are within the Atlanta city limits. The fact that a small part of Atlanta is in DeKalb county doesn't matter. It can said that Emory is in located in DeKalb County or that it is located in the Greater Atlanta metropolitan area. It is incorrect to state that Emory is located in the city of Atlanta. Majoreditor (talk) 02:47, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Problematic translation of Latin motto (its verb actually means will possess)

The school's Latin motto Cor prudentis possidebit scientiam is a phrase with its verb possidebit in the future tense. Yet, the current translation in the article's infobox parses the verb as being in the present tense. (This can be confirmed by the conjugation rubric on this Wiktionary page; in the motto, the verb has the indicative future active third-person singular form.)

That is, the article now translates the verb as possesses, whereas the standard translation would be will possess. Therefore, the English translation of the motto, which now reads The prudent heart possesses knowledge, should actually read The prudent heart will possess knowledge.

This would not only fit the literal meaning of the words, it would fit the mission of a school, which, by offering students the opportunity to attend, offers them the opportunity to have increased their store of scientia (English: knowledge) at some time in the future.

I, myself, possess no knowledge of the school's version of the English translation of its motto, so I will not edit the translation as it now stands. It is the school's prerogative to represent its motto as meaning anything it chooses, but I would think that the school's intent is to use the standard Latin meaning. And the questionable translation that we now see in article's infobox may be Emory University's own official version of their motto's English meaning.

I urge someone who is familiar with the situation, and who has more authority than I, to look at this matter, and to please either address it, or to reply here, with an explanation. catsmoke (talk) 09:22, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

The motto of Emory University is found in the Vulgate version of the Old Testament, at Proverbs 18:15. There we read Cor prudens possidebit scientiam (in the Vulgate, the second word is in the nominative case; in its motto, the school uses the word in its genitive case).
Emory University translates its Latin motto into English in two different ways.
  1. The more prominent of the two seems to be The wise heart seeks knowledge, which is used by the school's
    1. Board of Trustees
    2. College of Arts and Sciences
    3. Candler School of Theology
  2. The more literal translation The prudent heart will possess knowledge is used by the school's
    1. Woodruff Health Sciences Center
    2. Emory Magazine when describing, for example, Commencement
  3. The school's Office of Communications and Public Affairs uses both the first and the second, each in different contexts.
I'm going to change in the motto's English translation, in the article's infobox, to the first version that I listed above. This would best reflect Emory University's intent. catsmoke (talk) 17:59, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Recently in Science magazine

--Lamiot (talk) 17:51, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Emory annexation

See https://gis.atlantaga.gov/docs/council/councilall.pdf which now shows the university http://emorywheel.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Complaint-2.pdf is a document of a related lawsuit WhisperToMe (talk) 05:19, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Emory_University/Archive_1&oldid=1142759815"