Talk:Flagship/Archive 2

Draft of "Flagship Universities" for inclusion in new article
Hey all, I've completed a draft of the section for Flagship Universities in the United States. It's a little rough and I'm hoping we can work it in general, particularly on expanding some of the descriptions of the uses of flagship in research (looking at you, ElKevbo...maybe we can move this to your sandbox?). To minimize contention, I used unmodified statements from the original academic works to avoid original synthesis or extrapolation. Each sentence of possible contention is cited, with the weight and number of citations proportional to the likelihood of contention (essentially, the lists area). This makes the article somewhat inundated with citations, but once we've discussed the article and determined which sentences are most in need of multiple supporting sources, we can trim down other areas as needed.

I included the 75-member USA Today list, though I'd really prefer we find a list that is used by more than one reputable source (not including reposts). I conducted a number of searches, but have not been able to find the USA Today list replicated anywhere (a list of flagship universities with the same 75 members). If we could find one, that'd be extremely beneficial in establishing some parity of citedness between the two lists. Thanks for your patience (this thing was a monster) and discussion. Here it is:

Flagship Universities in the United States
Each state in the United States provides public university education through one or more university systems. The phrase flagship university or flagship institution is used to designate an individual school within its university system or a public institution within its state. Additionally, many states designate or at least recognize the largest and most competitive research institution as the flagship for the state. This status implies that the flagship university will compete on behalf of the state in the national marketplace of premier public research universities.

According to Robert M. Berdahl, interim President of the University of Oregon, the phrase "flagship" came to be associated with universities primarily after World War II, when universities established by the Morrill Act were joined by newer institutions built during post-war expansion of state university systems. The term flagship is naval in origin, referring to the vessel from which the admiral directs the movement of the fleet.

Defining Flagship Universities
Despite its use in publications, surveys, studies, and state education agency releases, there is no clear definition for a state’s flagship university. The Education Trust, for example, describes flagship universities as the leading, and typically oldest, four-year institution in each state. The College Board defines flagship universities as the best-known institutions in the state, noting that they were generally the first to be established, and are frequently the largest and most selective, as well as the most research-intensive public universities. Berdahl characterizes flagships as generally the oldest schools within a system, as well as often the largest and best financed.

Use of Flagships in Research
Flagship universities are used in a variety of comparative higher education studies and surveys, often in the context of public policy issues including enrollment trends for underrepresented student groups by race  and income , graduate earnings , admission standards , and influence on state legislatures.

Due to their status among the wealthiest public institutions, flagship universities are also analyzed in their use of state funds, financial aid commitments  , and cost of tuition. One commonly-cited annual survey conducted by the Higher Education Coordinating Board compares state-level tuition costs at institutions categorized as “Flagship Universities” by state higher education agencies in all 50 states.

An institution’s recognition as a flagship, or lack thereof, is also used as a factor in credit evaluations of universities by credit rating agencies including Standard & Poor's, Moody's, and Fitch Group.

Lists of Flagship Universities
There is no clear definition of a flagship university, though state higher education agencies have categorized institutions as “flagship universities” in all 50 states. These institutions are used by the Higher Education Coordinating Board in its National Tuition and Fee Rates reports and are described as a "nationally recognizable and accepted list of flagship universities" by the National Flagship Agenda. This list has been used in published research studies and public policy analyses, as well as by numerous organizations and agencies including the Society for College and University Planning ,the Princeton Review , the Journal of Blacks in Higher Education , the National Tax Journal , the American Institutes for Research and Matrix Knowledge Group , the Higher Education Coordinating Board , the National Flagship Agenda , the Education Trust , the National Science Foundation ,  the College Board ,  the Midwestern Higher Education Compact , the Joint Center Health Policy Institute and the Dellums Commission. Additionally, in 2006, USA Today published a tuition and fees survey which listed 75 “public flagship universities”.

Controversy
Berdahl noted that "Those of us in 'systems' of higher education are frequently actively discouraged from using the term 'flagship' to refer to our campuses because it is seen as hurtful to the self-esteem of colleagues at other institutions in our systems. The use of the term is seen by some as elitist and boastful. It is viewed by many, in the context of the politics of higher education, as 'politically incorrect.' ... Only in the safe company of alumni is one permitted to use the term."

In February 2012, Idaho's State Board of Education made a controversial decision to strike the word "flagship" from the University of Idaho's mission statement. The Board's President Richard Westerberg explained that this revision was made as part of the Board's many changes made to multiple Idaho universities' mission statements in an effort to ensure all statements were consistent and collegial in nature rather than comparative or competitive.

Sources:

1.	http://collegemeasures.org/page/Glossary.aspx

2.	http://uiswcmsweb.prod.lsu.edu/manship/ReillyCenter/files/item16286.pdf

3.	http://uiswcmsweb.prod.lsu.edu/manship/ReillyCenter/files/item16286.pdf

4.	http://cio.chance.berkeley.edu/chancellor/sp/flagship.htm

5.	http://cio.chance.berkeley.edu/chancellor/sp/flagship.htm

6.	http://www.postsecondary.org/last12/140Flagship.pdf

7.	http://www.edtrust.org/sites/edtrust.org/files/publications/files/EnginesofInequality.pdf

8.	http://www.nsf.gov/nsb/publications/2012/nsb1245.pdf

9.	http://cio.chance.berkeley.edu/chancellor/sp/flagship.htm

10.	http://books.google.com/books?id=Ku60XoLE_ngC

11.	http://www.jointcenter.org/sites/default/files/upload/research/files/FullHarper%20-%2025%20pages.pdf

12.	http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/2963173

13.	http://books.google.com/books?id=LbWX03UbQT0C

14.	http://ntj.tax.org/wwtax/ntjrec.nsf/198B2E40DE8EDF04852571C700477BF1/$FILE/Article%2008-Turner(F).pdf

15.	http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505145_162-57573646/which-state-university-grads-earn-the-most

16.	Miller, Stirling S., Jeffrey A. Rivell, and Bruce Walker. "Weighted Admission Standards at Public Flagship Universities." 131 (Spring 1991): 15-20.

17.	http://books.google.com/books?id=y3KdAAAAMAAJ

18.	http://books.google.com/books?id=2ZnkAAAAMAAJ

19.	http://www.edtrust.org/sites/edtrust.org/files/publications/files/Opportunity%20Adrift_0.pdf

20.	http://www.postsecondary.org/last12/241_712pg1_16.pdf

21.	http://www.scup.org/asset/65216/PHEV41N2_Article_Diversity-and-Budgets.pdf

22.	http://www.postsecondary.org/last12/140Flagship.pdf

23.	http://www.mhec.org/mhecwww/pdfs/tuition&fees07mar.pdf

24.	http://trends.collegeboard.org/college-pricing/figures-tables/state-tuition-and-fees-flagship-universities-2012-13-and-5-year- percentage-change-tuition

25.	http://www.flbog.edu/resources/_doc/factbooks/quickfacts/2004-05_TuitionFeesComp.pdf

26.	http://www.wsac.wa.gov/sites/default/files/KFChapterV.pdf

27.	http://www.standardandpoors.com/ratings/articles/en/us/?assetID=1245185069364

28.	http://www.moodys.com/research/Moodys-assigns-Aa1-rating-to-University-of-Delawares-Revenue-Bonds--PR_268666

29.	http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20090512006576/en/Fitch-Affirms-University-Floridas-Housing-Revs-AA-

30.	http://www.wsac.wa.gov/sites/default/files/KFChapterV.pdf

31.    http://www.wsac.wa.gov/sites/default/files/TuitionandFees2009-10Report-Final.pdf

32.	http://www.lsu.edu/flagshipagenda/Flagship2010/peers.shtml

33.	http://books.google.com/books?id=LbWX03UbQT0C

34.	http://www.postsecondary.org/last12/241_712pg1_16.pdf

35.	http://www.scup.org/asset/65216/PHEV41N2_Article_Diversity-and-Budgets.pdf

36.	http://books.google.com/books?id=l0xkvQnDtiYC

37.	http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/2963173

38.	http://ntj.tax.org/wwtax/ntjrec.nsf/198B2E40DE8EDF04852571C700477BF1/$FILE/Article%2008-Turner(F).pdf

39.	http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505145_162-57573646/which-state-university-grads-earn-the-most

40.	http://www.wsac.wa.gov/sites/default/files/KFChapterV.pdf

41.	http://www.lsu.edu/flagshipagenda/Flagship2010/peers.shtml

42.	http://www.edtrust.org/sites/edtrust.org/files/publications/files/Opportunity%20Adrift_0.pdf

43.	http://www.nsf.gov/nsb/publications/2012/nsb1245.pdf

44.	http://trends.collegeboard.org/college-pricing/figures-tables/state-tuition-and-fees-flagship-universities-2012-13-and-5-year-percentage-change-tuition

45.	http://www.mhec.org/mhecwww/pdfs/tuition&fees07mar.pdf

46.	http://www.jointcenter.org/sites/default/files/upload/research/files/FullHarper%20-%2025%20pages.pdf

47.	http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/education/2006-08-30-tuition-survey_x.htm

48.	http://books.google.com/books?id=LbWX03UbQT0C

49.	http://www.postsecondary.org/last12/241_712pg1_16.pdf

50.	http://www.scup.org/asset/65216/PHEV41N2_Article_Diversity-and-Budgets.pdf

51.	http://books.google.com/books?id=l0xkvQnDtiYC

52.	http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/2963173

53.	http://ntj.tax.org/wwtax/ntjrec.nsf/198B2E40DE8EDF04852571C700477BF1/$FILE/Article%2008-Turner(F).pdf

54.	http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505145_162-57573646/which-state-university-grads-earn-the-most

55.	http://www.wsac.wa.gov/sites/default/files/TuitionandFees2009-10Report-Final.pdf

56.	http://www.lsu.edu/flagshipagenda/Flagship2010/peers.shtml

57.	http://www.edtrust.org/sites/edtrust.org/files/publications/files/Opportunity%20Adrift_0.pdf

58.	http://www.nsf.gov/nsb/publications/2012/nsb1245.pdf

59.	http://trends.collegeboard.org/college-pricing/figures-tables/state-tuition-and-fees-flagship-universities-2012-13-and-5-year-percentage-change-tuition

60.	http://www.mhec.org/mhecwww/pdfs/tuition&fees07mar.pdf

61.	http://www.jointcenter.org/sites/default/files/upload/research/files/FullHarper%20-%2025%20pages.pdf

62.	http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/education/2006-08-30-tuition-survey_x.htm

63.	http://cio.chance.berkeley.edu/chancellor/sp/flagship.htm

64.	http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2012/feb/16/university-idaho-no-longer-states-flagship/

65.	http://voices.idahostatesman.com/2012/02/29/krichert/a_single_outdated_word_board_president_addresses_u_i_flagship_f

173.170.235.213 (talk) 07:58, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

RfC: Should this article contain a list of U.S. flagship universities?
Should this article contain a list of U.S. flagship universities? ElKevbo (talk) 17:19, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Survey

 * Oppose inclusion of such a list as it is way too narrow and specific for this particular article that discusses the term in its broadest sense. Such a list should probably be in another article, however, such as one dedicated specifically to flagship universities in the U.S. or one dedicated to higher education in the U.S.ElKevbo (talk) 17:19, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Oppose (conditional): Oppose if ElKevbo's suggestion is accepted and an article for flagship universities in the U.S., or flagship universities in general, is created. Any list of flagship universities, especially if the list is sorted by U.S. state like it is now, would be more appropriate there than here on the general flagship article. Support if ElKevbo's suggestion is not accepted and no article for flagship universities in the U.S. is created, meaning this article stays the only home for flagship university content which should include some form of nationally recognized list, even if it's only for one country's flagship universities.  Eidolonic (talk) 17:57, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Oppose, the word flagship is for naval ships and there isn't even a list of them. Furthermore, flagship universities aren't well-defined. Abductive  (reasoning) 18:26, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Oppose inclusion of such a list. I would oppose such a list at this article (which should be little more than a stub, IMO) under any conditions; I would also oppose inclusion of such a list at any stand-alone Flagship (university) or Flagship university article, at least until such time as it can be demonstrated that such a list can be compiled without violating WP:NPOV. HuskyHuskie (talk) 21:52, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Support the inclusion of an NPOV list as ElKevbo specified with due weight given to other views. Will change to Oppose if we use ElKevbo's idea and restore the Flagship Universities article (or better, create a Flagship Universities in the United States article), as an NPOV list of nationally recognized flagships would supplement that article significantly (and a better fit).  173.170.235.213 (talk) 22:26, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Oppose inclusion of list. This article obviously was not created for this purpose. Also, this list should not be included in another stand alone article due to the lack of well defined criteria regarding which universities should be included on such a list. Mistercontributer (talk) 23:50, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Oppose, Agree with Abductive - the word flagship is for naval ships where there is a clearly defined command and control system and there isn't even a list of them. Furthermore, flagship universities aren't well-defined and there is not likely to be a consensus definition. Lastly, the topic of flagship universities to date has been merely an expression of WP:BOOSTERISM and even under best efforts there would have to be multiple lists to represent every view. Sirberus (talk) 02:48, 30 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Oppose, the term applies to naval ships. As I have already stated above, this article should not include a list of U.S. universities. CZmarlin (talk) 07:27, 30 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Oppose. The history of this issue both here at the defunct Talk:Flagship university illustrates beyond dispute that the term has no agreed or even fixed definition in the context of universities, and any attempt to create a definitive list of such "flagships" is doomed to endless pointless debate - some of it sourced, some of it straight-up POV - and in the end no user is any the wiser or better off.  JohnInDC (talk) 20:05, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
 * No. This article certainly doesn't need such a list as it isn't even primarily about American colleges. Like others, I seriously doubt that such a list would be useful anywhere or could be created without serious original research and neutrality violations.--Cúchullain t/ c 12:41, 1 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Every one of those universities is in the same country. Other countries have first-rate universities too. Maproom (talk) 20:37, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Threaded discussion
Please note this question is only asking if such a list should be included. This is assuming that such a list could be created with consensus on how it is created and labeled. Whether that is a realistic assumption is a separate discussion entirely (as reflected in several large sections above in this Talk page). ElKevbo (talk) 17:19, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * This may be a good time to ask...does anyone see a reason not to create a separate page for flagship universities in the U.S. and let the main flagship page focus on the naval term? I've been working on the language for the NPOV list, but could just as easily combine it with an incorporation of Kgwo1972's work on the main Flagship Universities text to create a draft for the new article.  173.170.235.213 (talk) 22:16, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Unless someone can provide enough high quality, reliable sources to write a stand-alone article, I think it would be more appropriate to have a section in State university system. ElKevbo (talk) 22:23, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I'll have my draft up tomorrow. I'm using the following criteria:
 * 1. Under the assumption that this is a subject matter of inherent contentiousness, no sentence is used unless directly supported by a reliable citation.
 * 2. For reliability purposes, peer-reviewed cited academic publications are the first choice of sourcing.
 * 3. Due to their internally inconsistent use of the flagship university term, newspapers are eschewed.
 * 4. Due to their nature as interested first-parties, Universities' webpages and statements are avoided as sources of their own flagship status.  173.170.235.213 (talk) 22:38, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I cannot agree with these criteria for the following reasons -
 * 1.Under the assumption that this is a subject matter of inherent contentiousness, no sentence is used unless directly supported by a reliable citation. - Comment: The nature of each citation is the subject of considerable dispute and your citations to date have been carefully pruned to establish your POV and minimize others. You have extensively defended a very dubious reference that clearly was wrong, but you claimed was authoritative of actual state policy until proven false.
 * 2. For reliability purposes, peer-reviewed cited academic publications are the first choice of sourcing. - Comment: This would be taken on case-by-case basis as again your best evidence to date has not been credible.
 * 3. Due to their internally inconsistent use of the flagship university term, newspapers are eschewed. - Comment:  This is exactly the wrong process, since newspaper reporting provides much of the evidence of differing views of this very contentious area.  You appear to be trying to stifle the emergence of differing facts from your preferred sources which would rebut your POV.
 * 4. Due to their nature as interested first-parties, Universities' webpages and statements are avoided as sources of their own flagship status.  Comment: - Since this area concentrates only on PUBLIC universities there is at least some accountability to state governments for the reflection of actual state policy on state university websites.  Your method would again suppress rebuttal facts.

The sum of this is you oppose differing views which make this whole area contentious and evident of WP:BOOSTERISM. Sirberus (talk) 09:26, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Holy shit - are you even aware that "assume good faith" is one of our key tenets? ElKevbo (talk) 16:54, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

I've already stated my view that the only way in which a "List of Flagship Universities" page has any hope of being presented in stable and NPOV fashion would be to create two (or more) lists, each stating in purely descriptive, non-inferential terms what each list shows. I object to any attempt to portray any particular list as official or more definitive or authoritative than any other. I also think it improper to reject or disfavor entire classes of bedrock WP reliable sources. JohnInDC (talk) 20:37, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree with John. Trying to paint one particular list as a "nationally recognizable and accepted list" defined by "state higher education agencies" (who, now?) is misleading at best.--Cúchullain t/ c 12:37, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Comments on proposed draft for Flagship (university) by anon 173.170.235.213
It's a better effort than I would have expected. I do like how it acknowledges the lack of a formal definition. I'd still prefer for it to not actually include a list. HuskyHuskie (talk) 08:12, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Also, would it be possible for the draft to be located elsewhere? It feels awkward being in the middle of the ongoing discussion. HuskyHuskie (talk) 08:14, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I just noticed that Illinois State University is on the list. That is enough to prove to me that a list should not be included.  Positively NO ONE in the state of Illinois, not even the President of ISU, would have the temerity to call ISU a "flagship" university.  HuskyHuskie (talk) 08:16, 31 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the feedback Husky, appreciate it. As for ISU, you don't have to tell me...I'm grudgingly including the USA Today list because JohnInDC wants more than just the 50-member list (which has been cited far too many times to include in the article, so I tried to stick with only a dozen or so academic reliable sources with subsequent citations).  The only place the USA Today article has been cited (other than local newspapers reprinting it) is on the wikipedia pages of universities using it to add "Flagship University" status to their pages.  USA Today gives no basis for adding the 25 schools, the article was written by an intern, and USA Today articles from both before and after that survey directly contradict it. 173.170.235.213 (talk) 08:36, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

I agree. It's a very good and thoughtful effort. I'll gather some comments on the text and offer them later. As to the lists & captions themselves, the USA Today list doesn't warrant the prominence it's afforded here. It's a one-off thing, not particularly credible - just one of many other views of what schools are "flagships" - and the only thing really to be said for it is that it also seems to list at least one school in each state. A more appropriate counterpoint or supplement to the One-Per-State list (which incidentally should not be captioned simply "flagship universities" as though it were definitive), would be an additional column(s), with sources, showing other schools that have been designated or described by reliable sources as flagships, e.g. Texas A&M, FSU; and include the notation "none" where - again - credible sources have indicated that a state has designated no flagship at all (e.g. Idaho, New York). If the appellation "flagship" - or the absence of such a designation - has been presented by a source deemed reliable by Wikipedia then it is proper to reflect it any list or lists here. Indeed it would be improper not to. JohnInDC (talk) 12:14, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks John. I agree on changing the title of the "Flagship Universities" column...I struggled with finding a way to name it consistent with naming the USA Today list beside it - placing quotes around them both looked bad aesthetically and didn't really solve the problem, calling it a Consensus or Majority list gave it too much authority...I almost called it "List X" as a placeholder, but ended up using the quotes in the preceding paragraphs to attempt to distinguish.  If we're removing the USA Today list though, would it work to simply title the columns "State" and "University"?  Or if the column for additional designated school is adjacent, maybe "State" "Listed Flagship" "Additional Flagships"?  I know Listed Flagship sounds somewhat official, I'm open to suggestions but just not coming up with much.  I'm not sure on having an additional column act as a gathering place for the isolated designations of individual schools...my concern is due weight/undue weight.  Ideally, we can find another list of flagship universities that includes additional schools and is used by at least two studies/books/research reports/publications.  We could treat that as a significant minority-view list and put it adjacent to the current one.  If on the other hand we are using separate independent sources for each additional school, maybe we could list them below the wikitable instead?  173.170.235.213 (talk) 15:58, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

The work is better than I anticipated; I will concede that much. However, I still do not think it belongs in Wikipedia as it will be a perpetual source of WP:BOOSTERISM as it places some public universities on tiers without good reason and by those who use the term for convenient academic reasons and those who use it for something else. We should also note that Berdahl also recognizes in his speech at TA&M wrt his definition of what constitutes a flagship is that some states have more than one. As for assume good faith, well I have been editing pages on Florida universities for some years now and it is comical how little good faith has actually been demonstrated. The protection of some pages by independent admins to prevent persistent rival school vandalism is even needed. Pardon my skepticism, but this work adds much potential for mischief for little added value. I give it an B for Effort but a U for Unnecessary. Sirberus (talk) 03:14, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

In response to Cuchullain's notes, I've added language to address NPOV concerns and insure that the readers know the language used is quoted from the sources. Also changed the Column title to reflect its status as a placeholder until we determine an appropriate name, per JohnInDC's feedback. 173.170.235.213 (talk) 16:23, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I have a bit more to add still, but it would be good to hear from others before that.  JohnInDC (talk) 16:45, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

As I indicated in the survey, the general flagship article is not the ideal place for discussion on flagship universities. However, "flagship universities" has a distinct if inexact meaning and its use is too prevalent and too widespread to omit from Wikipedia entirely. Regardless of whether we use this draft, we should have a separate article for this body of information. Based on Maproom's answer in the Survey, I suggest the article specify flagship universities in the United States rather than flagship universities generally. The draft itself is impressive, though I agree that the USA Today list should be replaced with either a list from an academic source or a general paragraph underneath that explains there are flagships not on the list that have been recognized by other academic sources. As for the name of the placeholder list, what about 50-Universities List? Eidolonic (talk) 21:24, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
 * That's not a bad idea. We can probably do better (that's not the most elegant) but it is both plain and descriptive.  I still intend to add a few thoughts but in the meantime removed from the lead-in to the table, one sentence added today saying that "some but not all" states had formally designated flagships.  I don't know that we've seen a single instance of a formally declared, official flagship, have we?  JohnInDC (talk) 01:16, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't think so. Various state/federal governmental entities have referred to University X as "the flagship university of the State of Y" or "Y's flagship university", but I can't recall ever seeing (or anyone here citing) an official designation for an institution the way a state bird or state anthem would be.  I agree, better to leave the language out than obfuscate the issue.  As for the list names, something along those lines would work.  50-Member List or 75-University List (or whatever we end up using) would be plain and descriptive as John noted, as well as neutral.  173.170.235.213 (talk) 03:20, 4 April 2013 (UTC)


 * There remain some pretty serious issues. For instance, the line "state higher education agencies have categorized institutions as 'flagship universities' in all 50 states". This is incorrect at least in the state of Florida, where no universities are regarded as flagships. The closest there is is that three universities are considered "research flagships" in the context of research only: the University of Florida, Florida State University, and the University of South Florida. However, this designation is certainly not "flagship" in the usual sense, and I doubt most people would consider USF one of Florida's "flagships" even if they include Florida State. We need to be clearer on who exactly is saying what.--Cúchullain t/ c 15:05, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Ugh - I hate that proposed title! How about keeping it simple with "U.S. flagship universities" and using accompanying text, including footnotes, to provide the necessary explanations?  I would also omit the second column altogether and instead place that information either in a paragraph following the table or in footnotes added to the table for each state.  Alternatively, you could use the second column solely to list additional universities also considered a flagship by a minority of publications with each institution specifically including citations to the publication(s) that includes it. ElKevbo (talk) 15:51, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

I strongly suggest moving this and the other relevant sections to someone's sandbox or an AfC sandbox with a link here to that new location. I make this suggestion based on my reading of the current responses to the RfC that seem to strongly oppose including this material in this specific article which means that we're using a lot of this Talk page to discuss a topic that doesn't quite belong here. Feel free to throw into my User space if you'd like; I don't mind. ElKevbo (talk) 15:54, 4 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Created an AfC sandbox with changes incorporated per feedback from ElKevbo and Cuchullain. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/U.S._Flagship_Universities  173.170.235.213 (talk) 23:34, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Though - shouldn't the article text be on the project page?
 * If you could copy/paste it from the Talk page to the Project page, that would be great. I don't think I'm able to.  173.170.235.213 (talk) 01:09, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Done. I put the article text on the project page, here, and copied this discussion over to the Talk page, Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/U.S._Flagship_Universities. Discussion should continue there. Let me know if I messed something up in the transfer and I will try to fix it. JohnInDC (talk) 01:37, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Better titles than any using the word "flagship"
I would suggest considering the title "Public Research Universities" than the word "flagship" in any title which is wrong on so many levels. Think how all the energy against the use of the word "flagship" would dissipate and suddenly a perfectly acceptable list of major public research universities would emerge free of unnecessary baggage. The argument of WP:BOOSTERISM would be eliminated and the term would broadly and accurately encompass many public universities.Sirberus (talk) 05:49, 5 April 2013 (UTC)


 * (Discussion continues here.) JohnInDC (talk) 11:25, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Revisions to "universities" (and arbitrary break)
I continue to believe that a table is a bad idea but while the discussion is ongoing I've revised its caption to state more accurately what it reflects, namely, a selection of "flagship" schools, in the United States. In my Googling, I've also discovered that schools outside the U.S. may apply the term to themselves (or have the term applied to them) so I've qualified the table as U.S.-only. In addition, the more I dig, the more sources I am turning up to illustrate how this whole area is fraught with squabbles, positioning and marketing that really undermine any serious, meaningful use of the term, and I anticipate editing the prose section to reflect these sources as well. JohnInDC (talk) 13:32, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Perhaps a table captioned, "Flagship Universities as listed by the College Board", with that single citation, followed by another table or listing captioned "other schools described or designated as flagships" which lists, along with a specific reference to support it, various additional schools. JohnInDC (talk) 14:39, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I removed the word "recognized" from the table. They are "recognized" by the entity or entities that created the lists, which as appears here is both incomplete (Texas at least having more than one flagship) and overinclusive (Idaho and New York having none).  The table can be recaptioned as "Flagship universities listed by the College Board" and it will be correct, though still of uncertain authority.  JohnInDC (talk) 19:01, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Based on edit summary comments, I have restored the caption to "List of flagship universities" pending further discussion. JohnInDC (talk) 20:07, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I would suggest that the term "flagship" be described together with its various uses in this article, but there should be no "lists" of academic institutions. Not only would such a list be subject to constant change depending on whose criteria is applied, but why limit it to U.S.-based universities? There are specialized education-related lists (see: Category:Education lists). Moreover, if a list of so-called flagship U.S.-based universities is included here, then it would encourage the creation additional lists within this article. For example, should this article include a list of the world's fifty flagship retail stores, fifty flagship automobiles marketed in Asia, fifty flagship museums in Italy, etc. About the only legitimate list to be included here would be the top fifty "real" flagship flagships, which is the foundation for the use of the term and subject of this article! CZmarlin (talk) 19:28, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

I didn't think my edit was controversial, but perhaps so. Anyway, for further consideration, here was my attempt to add to the definition: "Some states designate official "flagship institutions" and some do not, and there is no standard definition for the term. The College Board defines flagship universities as the best-known institutions in the state, noting that they were generally the first to be established, and are frequently the largest and most selective, as well as the most research-intensive public universities.  These schools are often land-grant, sea-grant, or space-grant research universities.  However, there are published lists of "flagship universities" that contain schools that do not fit each of these criteria." -Kgwo1972 (talk) 21:08, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I restored that edit. I think it's fine.  I don't care if it stands or falls while we discuss it but I don't see the problem with it.  Plainly, there is no standard definition of the term.  If there were, then the lists, and the facts, would all align.  That needs no citation.  The next sentences simply illuminate the first sentence - the College Board defines (well, describes) flagship one way but there are lists that don't match up with the criteria or with the College Board list.  JohnInDC (talk) 21:12, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I've added a citation to the College Board's much discussed list. To take one example I know best, the University of Kansas is NOT the Land Grant College (KSU) or the oldest public college (KSU) for the state, although KU has the largest enrollment.  Michigan is another example, given further up.  UNLV is larger than the University of Nevada Reno.  I'm sure I can go on, but do not need to to support the statement.-Kgwo1972 (talk) 21:37, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

See also: http://jacksonville.com/news/politics/2010-04-12/story/uf-flagship%E2%80%99-status-doesn%E2%80%99t-last-long-critics-attack-senate-bill Sirberus (talk) 09:21, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * The State of Florida has NO official flagship university. Would someone kindly delete any reference to Florida from such a list?


 * Can you quote from the article where it says that the State of Florida has no official flagship university? It says the word flagship was removed from a bill "to appease" angry facebookers and that Carnegie Foundation classifications were used instead.


 * Have you read both the original and changed versions of SB 2442? This is the change you're referring to:  "A nationally recognized and ranked university that has a global perspective and impact shall be afforded the freedom to pursue an agenda on the global stage in fair competition with other flagship institutions of other states."  That was changed to end "...in fair competition with other institutions of other states in the highest Carnegie classification."  The University of Florida was not named in the original version.


 * Here's the most important part...SB 2442 was a bill that amended §1001.706, Fla. Stat. - Powers and duties of the Board of Governors. The language of SB 2442 was incorporated at §1001.706(5) - Powers and Duties Relating to Accountability, subsection (a).    http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=1000-1099/1001/Sections/1001.706.html       So now that subsection states that "A nationally recognized and ranked university that has a global perspective and impact shall be afforded the freedom to pursue an agenda on the global stage in fair competition with other other institutions of other states in the highest Carnegie classification."  That was the change.  Nothing forcing the Board of Governors to name a flagship, nothing restricting the Board of Governors from naming a flagship.


 * The Board of Governors "shall operate, regulate, control, and be fully responsible for the management of the whole university system." Florida Constitution, Article 9, Section 7, Subsection 1.  http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?mode=constitution&submenu=3#A9S07  The Board of Governors, as recently as this year, designated University of Florida as Florida's flagship in its National Comparison of Tuition & Fees report - http://www.flbog.edu/about/budget/tuition.php.  That is the government authority with the constitutionally granted power to regulate, control, and manage the state's university system calling the University of Florida the state's flagship.  There are links above to the Florida House of Representatives and the Florida Department of Education calling the University of Florida the state's flagship as well.


 * Do you have a reliable source that supports the theory that the state of Florida has no flagship? If it's a newspaper article, is it more recent than January 15, 2013?  I ask because, though I it is doubtful a local newspaper article would satisfy wikipedia's reliability standards when it contradicts statements of multiple governing agencies regarding entities under their regulation, the most recent article we've found still calls the University of Florida "our state's flagship university" (see link above).  173.170.235.213 (talk) 16:39, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * You're going to be having this argument about once a week, for just about ever, if this list goes up labelled as anything but what it is - namely, just one of many possible, well-sourced collection of flagships. JohnInDC (talk) 17:31, 27 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Response:
 * I was born and raised in Florida and have lived there all my life. I am an FSU graduate and have family who graduated from both FSU and UF.  We have, since the 1940s, been closely associated with both universities.  Never has UF been named "flagship" in any official manner, as such would generate substantial publicity and considerable Legislative interest.  To be certain the FBoG has not designated a flagship university as any such action would be widely publicized as a power grab from the Florida Legislature, in addition to the dispute over the title to UF, alone, or any other state university.  But don't believe me, read the articles below.  You are merely showing what some say about UF, not official policy.  This flagship issue in Florida amounts to WP:BOOSTERISM pure and simple.  Further, you cannot demonstrate any Florida state law calling UF "flagship", which would be essential.  The FBoG will not dare take such a step without explicit legislative approval.  While the FBoG is a state constitutional body they fear the Legislature with good reason.  You can tell from the listed reports this "flagship" detail is a very contentious issue today as it has been in the past.


 * Here are a few articles where FSU was also named "flagship":
 * 1. Higher education tackles search for quality (St Pete Times, 9/17/1979) In this article both FSU and UF are named as flagship universities in Florida. http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=eFBSAAAAIBAJ&sjid=cnwDAAAAIBAJ&dq=Higher%20education%20tackles%20search%20for%20quality&pg=5927%2C2102735


 * 2. Florida Governor Jeb Bush refers to FSU and UF as "flagship" universities here: http://www.puaf.umd.edu/puaf650-Fullinwider/handouts-AA-Florida%20Plan.htm In this article we find that then Gov. Bush explicitly calls FSU and UF "flagship universities":


 * ''Among the notable impacts of One Florida: Of the additional 3,202 first-time-in-college students entering the university system whose race and ethnicity could be determined, minority student enrollment accounted for almost 40%, or 1,234, of that increase. Each of the 10 universities increased the percentage of its entering class who are African-American. Furthermore, the rate of growth for minority students at Florida State University and the University of Florida far outstripped overall university system growth and the growth of white students. For example, while system-wide enrollment grew by approximately 11%, the number of African-Americans at Florida State University grew by 21% and the number of African-Americans at the University of Florida grew by 33%. In addition, the number of Hispanics at Florida State grew by 24%, while the number of Hispanics at the University of Florida increased by 19%.


 * In addition, the "cascading" effect, or the reduction of minority students in our flagship universities that many critics of the One Florida plan predicted would happen, did not occur. In fact, minority enrollment actually flowed upwards toward the flagship universities. Combined, Florida State University and the University of Florida enrolled 577 more African-American and Hispanic first-time-in-college students than were enrolled last year. Governor Bush and Chancellor Herbert were joined by presidents and provosts of universities that showed some of the greatest minority gains, including University of Central Florida President John Hitt, and Provosts Larry Abele of Florida State University, David Colburn of the University of Florida, and Richard Osborne of Florida Atlantic University.''


 * 3. USF cost may grow (St. Pete Times, 4/24/2007) http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=gO1RAAAAIBAJ&sjid=fHQDAAAAIBAJ&dq=florida%20flagship%20university&pg=5602%2C4091416 In this article both FSU and UF are acknowledged to be flagship universities.


 * 4. USA TODAY's 2006 College Tuition & Fees Survey (USAToday, 9/5/2006) http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/education/2006-08-30-tuition-survey_x.htm  In this survey both FSU and UF are acknowledged to be "flagship" universities.


 * We should recognize that this matter of flagship universities in Florida is not decided by the Florida Board of Governors. Indeed, the most recent highly publicized fight over this issue, where UF supporters in the Florida Legislature tried to have the title written into state law were soundly turned back:


 * UF "flagship" status doesn't last long as critics attack Senate bill (The Florida Times-Union, 4/12/2010) http://jacksonville.com/news/politics/2010-04-12/story/uf-flagship%E2%80%99-status-doesn%E2%80%99t-last-long-critics-attack-senate-bill


 * "Flagship" cut from bill that would rank universities (The Gainesville Sun, 4/7/2010) http://www.gainesville.com/article/20100407/ARTICLES/4071008 In this article, published by the cheerleader newspaper for the Univ of FL, FSU President Barron resists the bill, widely believed in Florida to name UF the state flagship university.  The result was the bill was reworked and the term dropped.


 * Even from the website of the FBoG themselves we have an article the FBoG saved regarding this dispute - Our Opinion: Flagship schools (News Clips 04/12/2010 - Tallahassee Democrat 4/11/2010): http://www.flbog.edu/pressroom/newsclips_detail.php?id=8441


 * The FBoG is not blind to this issue in the slightest. We should note that on the FBoG main pages for each university there is no mention of "flagship" on any university page: http://www.flbog.edu/aboutsus/universities/


 * We should also note that UF has, since perhaps the 1980s, had alumni from its journalism program try and insert this self-awarded reference informally whenever possible. In the intense rivalry that is the FSU-UF relationship as manifested in state politics such recognition was never allowed in any official determination.  It never will be. Sirberus (talk) 17:59, 27 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Here's another article from the St. Pete Times (now the Tampa Bay Times) calling the University of Florida "the Sunshine State's flagship university" - http://www.tampabay.com/sports/basketball/college/no-15-florida-gulf-coast-beats-sdsu/2111044


 * Here's another article from Florida Times-Union calling the University of Florida "the state's flagship university" - http://jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/042900/met_2940542.html


 * Here's another article from the Tallahassee Democrat reposted in the flbog.edu's news clips page (which simply reposts article related to Florida schools, not exactly from the FBoG themselves) calling the University of Florida "the state's flagship university" - http://www.tallahassee.com/article/20080806/BREAKINGNEWS/80805023/FAMU-UF-officials-ask-Crist-release-rainy-day-dollars


 * Here's another article from the Gainesville Sun calling the University of Florida "Florida's flagship university" - http://www.gainesville.com/article/20120720/COLUMNISTS/120729972?p=2&tc=pg


 * Here's another article from USA Today calling the University of Florida "the state's flagship university" - http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/education/2009-05-13-university-florida_N.htm


 * This may be stating the obvious, but perhaps we can agree that newspapers use the term inconsistently and cannot be used as reliable sources?


 * Above, I posted links to the Florida Department of Education, the Florida House of Representatives, and the Florida Board of Governors all referring to the University of Florida as the state's flagship. If none of those entities have that authority (even though the Florida Board of Governors' authority comes directly from the Florida Constitution), then who do you theorize does, and how did you reach that conclusion?  173.170.235.213 (talk) 23:14, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Response 2: Why don't you create an account and reveal more information about yourself? It's easy and you are more readily identified than trying to post anonymously.

The answer to your position is simple. Those references you list are not authoritative. They may carry the opinion of the author, even if misinformed or biased or carrying an agenda. But NOT from a position of authority. The term is essentially undefined and used to mean many things, some innocent, some not.

Can you post a Florida state law? No, you cannot; because one does not exist. So what UF supporters do is try to sprinkle the word "flagship" into wherever they can to try and bring their desire to reality. I am here to tell you its not going to happen, because if it could happen it would have occurred by now. UF tried repeatedly in the Florida Legislature as their members grew, but they could never deliver due in no small part to the members aligned with Florida State, the oldest school in Florida. Sirberus (talk) 03:12, 28 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Perhaps it would be better for everyone if you were here to pursue verifiable truth and the best method of communicating same accurately to Wikipedia's readers. For the record, I am a 2005 UCF graduate with no dog in this fight.  With all due respect, your own beliefs will not take you far unless you are able to support them, and your conspiracy theory has no place in this talk page.  I do not say this lightly and I'm sorry to say it at all, but I believe you are letting your closeness to this subject matter affect your judgment in what you post on this page.  173.170.235.213 (talk) 04:18, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Response 3: Truth is not being sought here. If it were, this issue would be left aside and there would be no mention of "flagship" universities in Wikipedia, as such loaded terms reflect political power, not academic worth. If academic worth were the measure, then Harvard, Stanford, Yale, Cornell and so on would all be on this list, but are not. Certainly the Univ of Miami would then be declared the Florida Flagship University and not the Univ of FL. Therefore the use of this term in Florida means something else, and it is not likely to be egalitarian. Do you honestly think professional academics would care about such meaningless terms if it meant nothing? In Florida the terms means a lot; and it has more to do with power and money - this is why university presidents and state legislators care so deeply. This is also why alumni care deeply.

In the great State of Florida, the Legislature occupies the whole ground on education and always has; to the benefit or detriment of the education of its citizens. The Legislature may delegate power to local boards and even tolerate a (so-called) co-equal constitutional body, but don't press your luck. For example, the former Florida Board of Regents became too resistant to a College of Medicine at Florida State University and were promptly dissolved. FSU got it's med school - over the objections of UF. FSU even paved the way for UCF to later get a med school. You say you have no dog in this matter but I beg to differ. UCF, USF, FIU, FAU and all the others all have positions on this matter. The volume of your posts alone attests to considerable interest in an otherwise reasonably esoteric matter.

There is only one standard of reference of authority in this area for the State of Florida - the Florida Statutes. There is nothing else. Sirberus (talk) 09:18, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

This link shows a 2013 decision by the Florida Supreme Court regarding constitutional supremacy in Florida. The Legislature is supreme, in sum. Sirberus (talk) 17:31, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Link and comment added in after the fact**: http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/01/31/3210389/florida-supreme-court-legislature.html


 * You offer no citation for your theories, but it doesn't particularly matter:


 * :Florida Statute 1001.706 - Powers and Duties of the Board of Governors (2) REGULATORY AUTHORITY.— (a) Pursuant to s. 7, Art. IX of the State Constitution, the Board of Governors has the authority to regulate the State University System


 * Florida Constitution, s.7, Art. IX - "The Board shall operate, regulate, control, and be fully responsible for the management of the whole university system."


 * May I suggest we take a breather? I'll be finished with a draft of my subsection incorporating the list in a day or two.  Once I've added that to this talk page, we can (civilly) discuss the actual language included and the reliable sources that verify or contradict same.  173.170.235.213 (talk) 12:44, 28 March 2013 (UTC)


 * JohninDC - SB2442, as amended, and called the "State Universities of Academic and Research Excellence and National Preeminence bil" was vetoed by Governor Scott, see: http://www.alligator.org/news/campus/article_be0448b4-90b8-11e1-a14a-001a4bcf887a.html It is not law.  173 - To give you the benefit of the doubt, I am also not seeing anything in the FBoG declaring any flagship university.  Mere mention of some other study by the FBoG is not sufficient to establish this authority in Florida. Sirberus (talk) 15:21, 28 March 2013 (UTC)


 * You should conduct and check your own research rather than relying on someone else's and making this talk page even longer without verifying your facts. The revised form of SB 2442 was its companion bill HB 7237, approved by the governor and passed in May of 2010.  The State Universities of Academic and Research Excellence and National Preeminence Bill, also known as HB 7129, was first filed in February of 2012.  Completely different bills covering different topics.
 * http://legiscan.com/FL/bill/H7237/2010
 * http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/sections/Bills/billsdetail.aspx?BillId=49134. Eidolonic (talk) 15:59, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Response 4: My apologies for speeding through a response and confusing the two bills.

However, I have read through this increasingly ponderous discussion and your references and find your conclusion the FBoG naming UF "flagship" because they reprinted some third party material (from the College Board) unpersuasive. You seem to be concluding that mere inclusion of third party data by some staffer at the FBoG indicates ratification of a title which is known to create a firestorm of resistance clearly recognized by the Florida Legislature (and as evidenced in the written press) as recently as the 2010 legislative session. You appear to overlook the obvious FBoG lack of ownership of the data through clear attribution of the source on Slides 2 and 3 of your reference and in the hyperlink itself: http://www.flbog.edu/about/_doc/budget/tuition/2012-13-College-Board-Tuition-and-Fees-By-State.pdf You are basically saying since the College Board has set forth this academic term of art (ostensibly for convenience purposes as a snapshot of state higher educational attributes) in a PowerPoint presentation this means the State of Florida has accepted it. Assuming I am reading your sources correctly, this is your case in chief for declaring UF Florida's flagship by the Florida Board of Governors. Wow, but I beg to differ. This is really lacking as a probative fact on a hotly disputed political issue.

Then you cite a National Science Foundation paper (http://www.nsf.gov/nsb/publications/2012/nsb1245.pdf) discussing funding of public research universities which again cites the term of art used by the College Board in Footnote 80. You insist this too must be indicative of public policy of hot-button politics in Florida. You must have overlooked the fact Florida State hosts the ONLY National Laboratory in Florida which has the highest NSF funding investment of any Florida university while looking through NSF data.

You suggest a number of other external sources, apparently suggesting such material surely pushes the Florida Legislature to name UF the State of Florida Flagship University. You have a reference from a then-sitting Florida Governor, (Bush) in his keystone Talented 20 Plan (one reference is here: http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2000-09-01/news/0009010215_1_jeb-bush-florida-state-minority-students) refer to FSU and UF as Florida's flagship universities but you dismiss this and decide to weigh two reprinted PowerPoint slides as authoritative.

Pardon me, but it appears obvious that a "flagship" school to the College Board is merely a handle to simplify the public discussion of higher education through apparently representative schools and nothing more. This is entirely different from the way a state would designate a flagship school, which would be in command of lesser schools. This distinction is why this article and the list is so troublesome. The risk is an entirely innocent and convenient term of professional educators is morphed into a command and control structure in a state university system - merely through the power of perception. Since Wikipedia detail is copied in one form or another to a myriad of different online references we need official state policy here, not a PowerPoint slide. You have not met this need so far.

Is this all you have? Do you have anything better from the Florida Board of Governors? I have looked and have found nothing setting forth such a policy. Assuming good faith on your part...but there would have to be a clearly articulated policy from the FBoG on this especially sensitive issue. Sirberus (talk) 22:05, 28 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I've cited significantly more than what you're crediting/dismissing and you're free to look through this page to confirm. You are welcome to the last word for now though, since a breather is in order (as has been suggested several times by ElKevbo and myself).  Let's reconvene when I've posted my draft for the list section.  173.170.235.213 (talk) 22:51, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Action item 1: I am contacting the Florida Board of Governors to determine any such official policy during this lull. I'll post what I find out. Sirberus (talk) 03:31, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Whatever you learn, ask them to post it on their site and/or publish it. Otherwise it's not accessible and we can't use it.  WP:SOURCEACCESS  173.170.235.213 (talk) 04:34, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Action item 1 - Results:
 * I have an answer via email from:

Nancy C. McKee, Ph.D. Associate Vice Chancellor

State University System of Florida Board of Governors 325 W. Gaines Street Tallahassee, FL 32399-0400 (850) 245-9676 | Fax: (850) 245-9685

Dr. McKee states without equivocation: 1. The Florida Board of Governors has NOT defined a “flagship” university for purposes of use in Florida. 2. The Florida Board of Governors has NOT officially declared any university in Florida the state “flagship” university. 3. The Florida Board of Governors has NOT unofficially declared any university in Florida the state “flagship” university.

This settles it. Florida has NO official flagship university. Anyone who wants proof can contact Dr. McKee at the listed information or via the FBoG website. I am willing to send my copy of the email to any Wikipedia administrator requesting a copy (within reason). 173 - stop screwing around with Florida and your choice of flagship university. You are the only editor in this discussion pushing your POV over everyone else. You have nothing which supports your claim the FBoG has designated one. Your conclusions about this reference (http://www.flbog.edu/about/_doc/budget/tuition/2012-13-College-Board-Tuition-and-Fees-By-State.pdf) are completely wrong. Your other references mean nothing in Florida except opinion. Florida should NOT be included in any list of "flagship" universities as such list does NOT reflect the official policy of the State of Florida. I urge all editors with an inclination towards such a flagship list to demand official authorization from the state before publishing such a list, on a state-by-state basis. Sirberus (talk) 16:58, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Sorry but the FBOG doesn't control this or any other Wikipedia article. If other reliable sources count UF, FSU, or any other institution as a flagship then that deserves consideration.  The FBOG's position should be noted in the proper place and in the proper manner but we have not - and likely will not - settle on a definition of this term that only relies on state legislation and executive action.  Once again, the term is a broad one that has entered the public lexicon and our description of the term must reflect that fact. ElKevbo (talk) 17:10, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * ElKevbo, the Florida Legislature and/or Florida Board of Governors have the sole authority to declare an official flagship university for Florida. While Wikipedia, as a private website, may have this or that as an example of a so-called "flagship" university in the view of the various (mostly anonymous) Wikipedia editors, it most certainly is NOT official, nor even officially representative of public policy in Florida. This distinction is important as at least one editor on Wikipedia has represented a reference in this area as official State policy of Florida, which proved completely untrue. Sirberus (talk) 09:21, 1 April 2013 (UTC)


 * It seems pretty well inarguable that only one or another arm of the state has the authority to designate official flagship(s) of that state. (And by "designate" I mean, issue some kind of affirmative, express declaration to that effect.)  Legislatures routinely declare official birds, flowers and rocks (not to mention any number of "special days", both serious and frivolous) and we would insist on such an act before describing any of those things as an official state-anything in a Wikipedia article.  We have seen a lot of refs and cites fly by in this discussion, so perhaps I'm wrong, but I don't recall seeing in any of them any actual act of state that designates or declares any official flagships.  To the contrary in fact.


 * ElKevbo is 100% right when he says that this discussion can't be confined to legislative or executive action. Indeed there wouldn't be much to discuss if it were.  He is also 100% right that " the term is a broad one that has entered the public lexicon and our description of the term must reflect that fact" - and that is why discussion should not, cannot, discount or elevate certain otherwise reliable classes of sources.  JohnInDC (talk) 11:51, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Ending the AfC process on the "flagship" university section
After substantial and unabated debate we failed to achieve a consensus on the wording and content of the "flagship" university subsection of this article. At the suggestion of an administrator an AfC work was created to try and build a consensus and bridge the differences. Since that time, about two weeks ago from today, editors anonymous 173.170.235.213 and Eidolonic have twice tried to end the AfC process and move their version of the article to the main page without major rework or consensus. I have twice tried to slow this process down to allow for a consensus to develop on the AfC effort but my efforts at this have apparently failed. I hoped that slowing the process down would improve the chances for agreement and a better article. During this time I have performed substantial research into the area and drafted replacement text. Today editor Eidolonic has asked that the work be forwarded to the main page regardless of the AfC status, citing the lack of a clear deadline. This means to me that the AfC effort now becomes superfluous and all work on revision and correction should occur on the main article. Sirberus (talk) 15:42, 15 April 2013 (UTC)


 * 1. The AfC was created to reach a consensus concerning primarily the treatment of a wikitable originally found in this article (and removed during the interim).
 * 2. ElKevbo suggested the AfC, not an administrator.
 * 3. I've made one edit to the Flagship page in the last three weeks.
 * 4. That edit incorporated non-contentious fact statements with supporting citations to address an incomplete stub during this interim period.
 * 5. If you've drafted replacement text using substantial research for the AfC, please add it to the AfC.
 * 6. A 2,100-word AfC is not rendered superfluous due to a paragraph being added to this article during the interim.
 * 7. The appropriate response when you disagree with someone regarding an edit is not to try and shut everything down.  173.170.235.213 (talk) 16:29, 15 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Please calm down Sirberus. At no point did I ask that the AfC be forwarded to the main page. That's a fairly egregious mischaracterization. IP 173's edit to this page improved the page and provide information for both sides of the issue for the period of time until a consensus is reached on the AfC. It shouldn't be reverted just because a derivative AfC exists, and the AfC is not "superfluous" just because edits happen on this page. Eidolonic (talk) 17:57, 15 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Sirberus, you've deleted the first paragraph of the Education section and added a large amount of new material, and now the Education section is once again larger than the rest of the Flagship article combined. There is no structure. Strong claims are only marginally or indirectly supported by the cites given. Other statements are given no cite at all. NPOV is lacking and editorializing is prevalent. An unexplained prominence is given to one survey, which uses flagship synonymously with carnegie ratings, over the many others. Parts of the new material are duplicative (Idaho). You've included an unrelated statement regarding a Florida bill that doesn't discuss flagship universities at all, and original research is present throughout. Example - "The University of Utah may be one of the purest forms of a public flagship university as it can rightfully claim age, dominance and offspring." Please move your additions to the Talk page of either this article or the AfC for discussion prior to adding it to the Flagship article. Eidolonic (talk) 19:15, 15 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Sirberus, as you well know, I'm not nuts about the prior text that was here; but I figure it'll sort out when we sort out the AfC process and it may as well stand until then. Setting aside the undiscussed new direction your edits seem to take the article, you shouldn't be editing a live article and leaving it in a half-finished state.  I've reverted it to the prior version and suggest that you post here what you'd like to change so that we can discuss it first.  Thanks.  JohnInDC (talk) 19:22, 15 April 2013 (UTC)


 * John, Lots need to change in the current text - which I still think needs much work, if used at all. If you were going to revert, it should have been to the previous text and the AfC process continued.  After two different efforts by the other editors to circumvent this process dues to an apparent desire to get this done ASAP (which I have twice resisted, what's the rush?) we have apparently abandoned that labor.  I am fine with moving the work here.


 * My draft is raw, incomplete and designed to present much more than just a list on this contentious topic. There are few, if any, reliable discussions of this material as a whole so we will need to tolerate a bit more discussion before moving to the various types of flagship aggregations, and why they were accumulated to start with.  This is permitted on Wikipedia.  My direction will be to identify the variety of definitions, provide examples of them, then cite the various aggregations and why they are aggregated.  In doing so I hope to render the discussion as free of WP:BOOSTERISM as possible.  The goal is for the reader to learn a lot about the term as applied to universities, how it is used, why it was used and who used it.  If possible, I'd also like to look into the intent of the various list builders if evidence can be found.  As to including any lists since all were opposed in the RfC there won't be any. Sirberus (talk) 02:12, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Draft starts:

Definition and examples
When applied to a university the term flagship can result in different interpretations. Merriam-Webster’s dictionary definition is the “finest, largest or most important…” but few, if any, state universities are defined in law as a “flagship” university, likely due to command and control associations with the term from military organizations. Private universities, such as those in the Ivy League would almost certainly qualify as flagship universities in terms of age, rankings and resources, yet seldom is the term “flagship university” applied to Harvard. In 2004 a study of university tuition published by the National Bureau of Economic Research researchers defined ninety-one flagship universities as being Research I and Research II institutions meeting standards specified in 1994 by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. The study added schools from seven states which did not meet Carnegie standards to exploit tuition, enrollment and grant policy variations found in the states. The University of Utah may be one of the purest forms of a public flagship university as it can rightfully claim age, dominance and offspring - BYU in Provo, UT.

Opposition and controversy
The term flagship has been viewed as politically incorrect by professional academics. In 2012 the Board of Education for the State of Idaho removed the flagship terminology from the mission statement of the University of Idaho, explaining the term carried "too much weight and suggestion of special prominence over other schools". However, the school still declares itself a flagship university. In the State of Florida political contests in the Legislature over awarding the term to any state university have occurred for decades and remain hotly contested. Resource allocation is the basis for the disagreement, as ex-University of Florida President Marshall M. Criser explains in an oral history about an executive failure to establish a system which concentrates resources in Florida's two major research universities. In April, 2013 the Florida Legislature passed a bill establishing "preeminent research universities" in Florida by determining if a university meets enough performance benchmarks.

Draft ends.

List ?
The article could probably use a list of famous/notable flagships, maybe sorted by date and having a country flag, picture, etc. Ikmxx (talk) 23:49, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Queen Anne's Revenge
Hoping to avert an edit war, I figure to start this discussion. The issue: Should the article include a description of Blackbeard's flagship, Queen Anne's Revenge? My own view is, no - that the article exists to convey the concept of flagship, not a series of particular examples, and that the two famous flagships already (briefly) discussed are sufficient as exemplars. That's not to say that the information about Blackbeard's ship isn't interesting - who knew pirates had flagships? - but rather that the entry seems more about that ship than about the concept, "flagship". So I'd leave it out. JohnInDC (talk) 12:04, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree that the information is interesting. But it's not about a flagship: when the Queen Anne's Revenge was captured by the French, she ceased to be a flagship. While controlled by France and by pirates, she was not an exemplar of "flagship". Maproom (talk) 12:40, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Content
When the article is introduced as "A flagship is a vessel used by the commanding officer of a group of naval ships", why are there sections about education and retail? I was confused by this. Or maybe there's something I've misunderstood, anybody care to clarify? Ramthecowy (talk) 10:42, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
 * You are right. They shouldn't be. Wikipedia is not a dictionary. But some editors have put a lot of work into those sections. Maproom (talk) 10:56, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 one external links on Flagship. 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:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20160304032936/http://www.postsecondary.org/last12/241_712pg1_16.pdf to http://www.postsecondary.org/last12/241_712pg1_16.pdf
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.puaf.umd.edu/puaf650-Fullinwider/handouts-AA-Florida%20Plan.htm
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110918015141/http://www.tamu.edu:80/about/facts/ to http://www.tamu.edu/about/facts/
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.umich.edu/news/index.html?Releases/2006/Jan06/r011006a

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:24, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Flagship University List
I posted this two other places but it deserves to also be listed here to clear up any potential confusion and offer more input.

Below I have listed the respective flagship universities of each state. One for each of the 50 states. The source is College Board and an annual survey of colleges. College board has been putting out this type list comparing flagship prices for many years now, and it just got updated for the 16-17 year.

I will also include some other sources like from the US Department of Education - ERIC which lists each state flagship, recognized by the United States Government- https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED495096

And from the Washington Higher Education Coordinating Board (government report) - http://www.wsac.wa.gov/sites/default/files/TuitionandFees2009-10Report-Final.pdf

List below copied from https://trends.collegeboard.org/college-pricing/figures-tables/tuition-fees-flagship-universities-over-time University of Alaska Fairbanks	AK University of Alabama	AL University of Arkansas	AR University of Arizona	AZ University of California: Berkeley	CA University of Colorado at Boulder	CO University of Connecticut	CT University of Delaware	DE University of Florida	FL University of Georgia	GA University of Hawaii at Manoa	HI University of Iowa	IA University of Idaho	ID University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign	IL Indiana University Bloomington	IN University of Kansas	KS University of Kentucky	KY Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College	LA University of Massachusetts Amherst	MA University of Maryland: College Park	MD University of Maine	ME University of Michigan	MI University of Minnesota: Twin Cities	MN University of Missouri: Columbia	MO University of Mississippi	MS University of Montana	MT University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill	NC University of North Dakota	ND University of Nebraska - Lincoln	NE University of New Hampshire	NH Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey: New Brunswick/Piscataway Campus	NJ University of New Mexico	NM University of Nevada: Reno	NV State University of New York at Buffalo	NY Ohio State University: Columbus Campus	OH University of Oklahoma	OK University of Oregon	OR Penn State University Park	PA University of Rhode Island	RI University of South Carolina	SC University of South Dakota	SD University of Tennessee: Knoxville	TN University of Texas at Austin	TX University of Utah	UT University of Virginia	VA University of Vermont	VT University of Washington	WA University of Wisconsin-Madison	WI West Virginia University	WV University of Wyoming	WY AlaskanNativeRU (talk) 15:15, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * The issue of "flagship universities" has been discussed and debated extensively here & on several other pages. Probably the most extensive & comprehensive single discussion took place at Talk:Flagship/Archive_1, where it was noted (among other things) that 1) there is no workable, agreed definition of "flagship university"; 2) there is no definitive source for what are, and what aren't, "flagship universities"; and 3) in a Wikipedia article, it's a POV morass.  Scroll to the very bottom for the conclusion that a school-by-school listing here is not workable or appropriate.  JohnInDC (talk) 15:52, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Scrolling further up the archive from that linked entry will show several other prior discussions about a list - which was once in this article - and shed some further light on why in the end it was removed. JohnInDC (talk) 15:57, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I echo John's politely worded request to please do your homework on this extensively discussed topic. I don't agree with him that a listing is impossible but if we were to create such a listing then we definitely could not have just one institution from each state since there are many competing and changing (and often implicit or unstated) definitions that often result in several states having multiple flagships especially those with multiple systems e.g., University of Texas and Texas A &amp; M.
 * I also recommend examining your sources much more closely and critically. For example, you wrote that "I will also include some other sources like from the US Department of Education - ERIC which lists each state flagship, recognized by the United States Government- https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED495096."  The publication you cited is not a publication of the federal government; like nearly everything else in ERIC, it's just a document that is (re)hosted there.  Further, it doesn't claim to have a listing of flagship institutions "recognized by the United States Government [sic];" the endnotes clearly state that "We acknowledge that not every state designates one of its public universities as its flagship institution, and that some states might recognize, at least informally, more than one flagship institution." ElKevbo (talk) 16:43, 22 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Why only flagship universities of the US? Why not Canada? Why not Australia (my country)? Why not England? Why not Wales? Why not China? Why not Thailand? Why not Mozambique? Wow, this list is getting long and we have barely touched the number of countries in the world. Do we really want a list like this being longer than the rest of the article? Or do you want to make the US somehow special among all the other countries of the world?  Stepho  talk 20:47, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I didn't know that they went in for this nomenclature in other countries, but if they do then yes, that's another good reason not to add a specific list to the article. JohnInDC (talk) 20:55, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Flagship. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121001161549/http://www.virginia.edu/insideuva/2005/08/flagship.html to http://www.virginia.edu/insideuva/2005/08/flagship.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060901121313/http://www.president.umd.edu/testimony/2006/delivering.html to http://www.president.umd.edu/testimony/2006/delivering.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071107172410/http://www.mhec.org/mhecwww/pdfs/tuition%26fees07mar.pdf to http://www.mhec.org/mhecwww/pdfs/tuition%26fees07mar.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110706095356/http://www.jointcenter.org/sites/default/files/upload/research/files/FullHarper%20-%2025%20pages.pdf to http://www.jointcenter.org/sites/default/files/upload/research/files/FullHarper%20-%2025%20pages.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130616083416/http://www.intered.com/storage/deptofed/EdSector_DebttoDegree.pdf to http://www.intered.com/storage/deptofed/EdSector_DebttoDegree.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130731092654/https://sstievents.org/content/comment-raises-warning-flags-ualbany to https://sstievents.org/content/comment-raises-warning-flags-ualbany

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 09:12, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Flagship. 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.umich.edu/news/index.html?Releases%2F2006%2FJan06%2Fr011006a
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20130411025340/http://voices.idahostatesman.com/2012/02/29/krichert/a_single_outdated_word_board_president_addresses_u_i_flagship_fl to http://voices.idahostatesman.com/2012/02/29/krichert/a_single_outdated_word_board_president_addresses_u_i_flagship_fl

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:25, 2 October 2017 (UTC)