Talk:University of Virginia Darden School of Business

What's encyclopedic?

 * 1) Should a Wikipedia article list (and link to) every club at Darden? Or even any clubs?
 * 2) Should a Wikipedia article list (and link to) every prominent alum, even if they don't already have Wikipedia articles?
 * 3) Should it have so many external links?

My own opinions, based on experience editing other Wikipedia articles are: "no", "no", "not if they don't already have articles", and "no". See the policy article, "What Wikipedia is not".

This article should not be a sales pitch for Darden but an encyclopedia article. --A. B. 21:17, 24 November 2006 (UTC)


 * PS to the extent that alumni currently without articles meet the requirements of Notability (people), go create some articles. Also, any companies should meet Notability (companies and corporations)--A. B. 21:43, 24 November 2006 (UTC)


 * All has been addressed... a long time coming, but I got to it with my red pen.  Qb  | your 2 cents  17:08, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Rankings in lede
SerAntoniDeMiloni is insisting that the rankings of this school be included twice in the lede, that the lede say that all teaching at the school is done using case methods, and that a list of previous deans of the school not be included in this history section but be included in a separate section at the end of the article.


 * 1) There is no need to include ranking information twice in the lede. More importantly, information about rankings in the lede must comply with the current consensus about how and if this information should be included in the lede at all.
 * 2) It's extraordinarily unlikely that all teaching at the school uses only case methods. That would mean that there is no mentoring, no experiential learning (i.e., clinics, internships), etc.
 * 3) Information that is primarily historical in nature - including a list of previous deans - should be in the section focused on the institution's history.

SerAntoniDeMiloni, please explain why you've begun an edit war about all of these issues. ElKevbo (talk) 11:47, 6 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Hey ElKevbo. I think one revert isn't an edit war, I just want a bit of collaboration/discussion here (as in the Wikipedia spirit) :) I've worked on quite a few schools, and written many articles; given the lede is a summary of key information, I think objective ranking examples, or a rough idea of where a school sits is important. Twice may be a mistake (thanks for pointing out), and thanks for fixing. Thanks for fixing the previous dean and case methods too – completely agree, and you're right there. Would be great to get some discussion in here to improve the page. Thanks, SerAntoniDeMiloni (talk) 13:10, 6 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Why are you thanking me for making edits that you reverted? ElKevbo (talk) 22:30, 6 July 2023 (UTC)


 * ElKevbo I wanted to be cordial, and didn't realise you had made those valid corrections (a mistake) – I thought you had just undone my edits regarding rankings (which per current consensus against P1 I thought were valid to include). SerAntoniDeMiloni (talk) 10:45, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

Rankings in lede (round 2)
An unregistered editor is insisting that the lede of this article include a sentence about this school's rankings. Unfortunately, (a) they keep using sources that are nowhere near the quality and type that we need to support such a statement in the lede and (b) this is not discussed in the body of the article.

For example, here is their latest attempt to add this to the lede:


 * Darden is consistently ranked as being among the top business schools in the U.S. and in the world.

That source is nowhere what we need to support this kind of statement in the lede of an article, according to the current consensus about this specific material. Moreover, it doesn't even support the claim that is made as the source is only from one year of one ranking organization. And, as mentioned above, this isn't mentioned or discussed in the body of the article. ElKevbo (talk) 23:04, 23 February 2024 (UTC)