Talk:George Washington University

Wiki Education assignment: University Writing 1020 Communicating Feminism MW 1 pm
— Assignment last updated by Penelopearthur (talk) 19:13, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: University Writing 1020 Communicating Feminism TR1 pm
— Assignment last updated by ZhongM (talk) 01:51, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

sentence about first federal university charter is inaccurate?
The second sentence: "it was chartered in 1821 as Washington, D.C.'s first university". But Georgetown University appears to have been first: "President James Madison signed into law Georgetown's congressional charter on March 1, 1815, creating the first federal university charter". (Both Georgetown University and George Washington University are in Washington, DC.) University_charter says: "Georgetown University was the first federally chartered institution of higher education in the United States when President James Madison signed the university's charter into law on March 1, 1815." neatnate (talk) 04:17, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Edit-warring to remove negative information
An unregistered editor is in the midst of an edit war with multiple editors to remove negative information from this article. Their most recent revert removed this image and paragraph:
 * 2024-0428 George Washington University pro-Palestinian encampment 15.jpg at University Yard, April 28, 2024]]
 * On the first day of classes in August 2022, psychology professor Lara Sheehi allegedly made anti-Semitic comments to students. Students also found anti-Semitic comments on her Twitter account. In January 2023, Jewish students filed a complaint at the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights (OCR). As a result of the OCR complaint, school administrators initiated a third-party investigation, contracting independent law firm Crowell & Moring LLP. In May 2023, Crowell & Moring cleared Sheehi of antisemitism charges, having found a lack of supportive evidence to prove the claims. Crowell & Moring, George Washington University administrators, and Jewish students all agreed to pursue remediation. Although George Washington administrators closed their investigation, the OCR investigation remains open.

This has the effect of removing not only a mention of the ongoing protests but also an ongoing investigation of the university by the U.S. Department of Education. I am very sympathetic to arguments that encyclopedia articles should not focus excessively on current news. But a brief mention of these very noteworthy events is reasonable. And focusing solely on removing negative information from the article is, of course, not how Wikipedia works. ElKevbo (talk) 21:16, 7 May 2024 (UTC)


 * There is a section on the page for "controversies" - this paragraph was there until it was moved. The picture was also added, which is meant to draw attention to its importance, so this is not just a brief mention. This paragraph needs to be moved to a controversies section, like other university pages, and this picture needs to be removed, as it does not have the function of showing GW generally- it shows a current event. 73.134.81.186 (talk) 17:14, 13 May 2024 (UTC)


 * "Controversies" sections are typically a bad practice and they're discouraged in general and specifically for articles about colleges and universities. Those events are part of the institution's history and should be placed into larger contexts for readers.
 * And the objection that the photo "does not have the function of showing GW generally" is ridiculous. Nearly all of the photos in the article show specific people, events, or buildings. Are you also going to begin removing them, too? Or are you only opposed to this one because it shows something negative about the university? ElKevbo (talk) 21:47, 13 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Nothing of that statement is encyclopedic and it's not standard to include this type of low-lying current affairs in the article. Harvard University doesn't even mention the 2012 Harvard cheating scandal - why? Because its a current affairs/news that is limited to the here and now - not relevant for an article covering the university and not the current set of students/teachers and their opinions or actions. Cristiano Tomás (talk) 17:38, 13 May 2024 (UTC)


 * It is standard, in many cases, to briefly mention when an institution is under investigation by the government or a similar body (e.g., an accreditor). And the additional text provides necessary context. I'm not opposed to trimming or otherwise editing the text, of course. ElKevbo (talk) 21:47, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * There is nothing brief about the text in question and quite frankly it is really only relevant to an article of the professor, not the university. Cristiano Tomás (talk) 16:41, 15 May 2024 (UTC)