Talk:University of Chicago/Archive 2

Opener

Statement in question:

Notorious for its uniquely rigorous devotion to academic scholarship and intellectual life, the University of Chicago is sometimes jokingly referred to as the school "where fun goes to die."

I can't see any problem with the "where fun goes to die", but I think it is weasely to state that Chicago has a UNIQUELY rigorous devotion, I'm sure the rest of the Ivy League, Oxbridge and numerous other ancient and academic institutions across the globe merit this definition. If anything, from a non-US point of view, Chicago for me is not 'academic' in the scholarly sense but more dynamic and practically orientated...

In any case I'm changing it to "Known for its rigorous devotion to academic scholarship and intellectual life" JDnCoke (talk) 13:56, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

With all due respect, I suspect you do not know much about Chicago: within the US academic community, and certainly within the university itself, it is seen as extremely theoretically oriented, even opposed to or dismissive of practicality. Its law school, business school, and medical school are notable and necessary exceptions; but most of its Ph.D.-granting committees and departments are if anything notorious for their emphasis of theory over practice. — Dan | talk 21:02, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Section on the Copy Right / Chilling Effect Letter

This seems out of place in the article. The person who did it is not famous. The question is whether the act is a significant event in the school's history, which I think would be a hard claim to make.

I agree. The University has sent out similar notifications before (like during the Napster days). There's no reason this should be on the page; I don't even think it's controversial. It's not even in the right section. Furthermore, it looks like a joke, prank, or some activist being sneaky (change was made with the comment "rv vandalism"). Removing it. Illuminatedwax 02:09, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Am I not allowed to edit the article simply as an alumni? The text was removed because it was incorrectly placed and not acceptable per WP:Notability. How could this edit have been biased? Illuminatedwax 05:58, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Some obviously cares enough to keep it up there. Annoying but true. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.135.133.203 (talk) 23:16, 25 April 2007 (UTC).

can there be a photo gallery section?

i dont know how to include photos but the schools website has many great pictures that could be used in the article

Chicago does not claim to have the most nobel laureates

It merely claims to have a high number. By the standard Chicago employs, which it by no means created, no more than a bear creates the catagory animal, Columbia verifiably has more - likewise, Cambridge. Further, I think the articles that are linked can be more concretely discusssed. They take up too much space for commentary of somewhat dubious validity. They seem to miss the fact that the other schools count credentials is the matter most fitting to their stature, notably Cal Tech and Harvard.

Prior to the awards given out this year, Chicago did have the most affiliations of any university within the U.S. The article has since been amended to accommodate the listings tally for the 2006 awards. Furthermore, please STOP vandalizing the article with your ridiculously biased and incoherent accusations. -- mcshadypl ^TC 22:33, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

"Prior to the awards given out this year, Chicago did have the most affiliations of any university within the U.S." So you are saying it no longer does, and secondly, given the claim has been dropped, once again, the articles seem off base. Hardly vandalism. If anything you seem to be implying the material as it stands is wrong. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.137.170.128 (talk) 08:06, 14 December 2006 (UTC).

Sub Pages and Formatting

Photos have been added to several of the divisional subpages, but they are oriented incorrectly and the formatting is poor. It would be advisable for someone with some good wikipedia coding skills to correct the errors.

Persian Heritage

No really that important in the University's history. Took the section verbatim and added it to the article on the Oriental Institute where it was seemed misplaced in the see other section.

It is still relevant. Our goal should be to expand the history section rather than restrict it from containing recent events.128.135.199.202 08:13, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Important for the Oriental Institute I guess, but for the University? It just seems out of place. It would be like including the Duke University LAX scandal in its long-term history section.

House System

The college housing system is NOT at all patterned after Oxbridge. On the contrary, a few years ago the trustees of the University considered such a move, under which the College would have ended up with four or five large Colleges, each with their own dining facilties, akin to the system at Yale or Princeton (explicitly using the term "residential colleges" and naming them after large benefactors). It was shot down after the cost projections proved to be untenable, and the housing office discerned that too few students would stay on with their college in the way one is expected to at the aforementioned Ivies. The Max-P, freshmen oriented dorm was the alternative to try to build school spirit, i.e. future alumni donations.

This page is out of control

To much information is trying to be put on the main page rather than being subtended to the articles. Also, coverage of specific discoveries has become to extensive for readability. Nuclear reactions, REM sleep, the consitution of Japan should all be in a neatly composed single paragraph. Their own articles are more than sufficient description.

The information regarding the nuclear reaction should definitely be included within the article, as the Pile will always be associated with the university. REM sleep is not even elaborated on. Which 'specific discoveries' are you referring to? The references to agent orange, the liver transplant, and so on, are only briefly mentioned within one compact section. -- mcshadypl ^TC 23:48, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Introduction

I think it's safe to say the University of Chicago page has come a long way in just the past few weeks. In order to better serve the article, I have cleaned up the Talk Page and archived past discussions so that we can focus on current concerns facing the page. Hopefully, it will also inspire better use of the Talk Page.

--Crimson3981 23:14, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

POPULAR CULTURE being pulled down until consensus can be reached

I think in general this section is of dubious validity. There are a handful of school where this might be relevant, but it seems so trivial for the U of C. The only noteworthy movies who be films that would seem to directly center on a given school.

The College of the University of Chicago

The article's framework has been laid down, and is now linked through the main article. Major improvements in both content in formatting are needed!

WikiProject University of Chicago?

Anyone for starting a WikiProject for the University of Chicago? I've noticed that -- among other things -- there is no category for notable Chicago alumni, that the alumni list itself is woefully incomplete, and that there is enough to write about the University's history, campus, and overall accomplishments to fill many more articles.

--Crimson3981 03:36, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I definitely support this idea. Personally, the university's article is my primary focal point at Wikipedia, and I would certainly be willing to devote more time and effort if this officially became a joint collaboration. I agree that various sections can be further expanded, particularly the History. The alumni list within the article has been a subject for debate for quite some time within the Talk page, but a well-organized section within the article (instead of the run-on paragraph) incorporating these names would be ideal. I am all for this... mcshadypl 04:17, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Other sub-pages could include History of the University of Chicago, Sports at the University of Chicago, University of Chicago Scavenger Hunt, List of presidents of the University of Chicago, Architecture of the University of Chicago, List of campus buildings at the University of Chicago, List of Nobel Prize laureates affliated with the University of Chicago, etc., etc. Spikebrennan 18:13, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

World's first self-sustained nuclear reaction

I'm reinserting

Historically, the university is noted as the site of the world's first self-sustained nuclear reaction

into the lead. This event is of transcendant historic importance and is likely to be remembered long after the name of Rockefeller is forgotten. If Prometheus had discovered fire at Harvard and if the wheel at been invented at MIT these would be events of comparable importance. As for

It is perhaps most famous for its affiliation with more Nobel Prize laureates than any other university in the United States,

even with that weaselly "perhaps," I don't buy it. I doubt that this factoid is "famous" to anybody but University of Chicago boosters. Dpbsmith (talk) 18:11, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Sure it is boosterism generally, but the Nobel connection is overwhelmingly the fact most people know about Chicago. A self-sustaining nuclear reaction is not something that the vast majority of people even understand, let along affiliate with a particular school. The reality is when people think U Chicago they think economics, the graduate of business, the law school and Nobel prizes. I think to leave it out of the article would be foolhardy since the schools utilizes it so actively as part of its identity.

Alumni/faculty list--single addition

Are there any objections to me adding Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens to the alumni list within the main article? Since Scalia is already included, it would be reasonable to include Stevens, as well. After all, he is a very noteworthy individual-- probably more so than several distinct people already within in. mcshadypl 05:46, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

On that note, I reject the idea that the alumni/faculty list should include only Nobel Prize laureates. I think the basis for an inclusion should be notability. Most Nobel Prize winners aren't household names, but Carl Sagan, John Paul Stevens, Allan Bloom, John Ashcroft, et al. come pretty damn close.

--70.240.110.55 20:32, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Categories and infoboxes at bottom of page

The City of Chicago and University of Chicago infoboxes at the bottom of the page overlap the list of categories. Can this be fixed?Spikebrennan 21:05, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

They show up fine on my browser: [1] The university's infobox is misaligned for some reason, but I will try to fix that. mcshadypl 03:08, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

"Popular Culture" citations

Would direct references to IMDB.com be suitable citations for those entries? mcshadypl 04:53, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Personally, I certainly think imdb.com counts as a reliable source. If the link to imdb.com is to a page that is a) about the movie and b) specifically mentions the University of Chicago, in a plot summary, or in a list of filming locations, or something like that, that would be fine.

Also, there are many encyclopedic books about movies and a Google Books search is often rewarding. Just as an experiment, let's try a Google Books search on "When Harry Met Sally" "University of Chicago". First hit is

The Staff of the New York Times (2004). The New York Times Guide to the Best 1,000 Movies Ever Made. St. Martin's Press. ISBN 0312326114. p. 1104 where it says "When Harry and Sally first meet, they are University of Chicago graduates driving to New York together." [2]

I'll go put that one in myself.

Parenthetically, I'd add that if a mention of the University of Chicago can't be found in a description of the film in a reference like that or in imdb, it's a pretty good indication that the University of Chicago isn't very important in the film and doesn't merit mention in the article. Dpbsmith (talk) 13:52, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Alumni list organization

The page is obviously lacking an appealling, expanded, and informative alumni list. The existing compacted list does the university and its alumni little justice since it only lists very few select people, yet many more are certainly recognized and renowned for their individual achievements. Although a separate page does exist for this, the university's article should, in my opinion, have its specific expanded section. I noticed that the page of Cornell at [3] is able to display its noted alumni very effectively in a well-organized fashion with very brief identifying descriptions of each person. Any opinions on whether something like this should be incorporated here? Mcshadypl 23:02, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

I think it's a bad idea unless you first get a solid consensus for a nice, clean, bright-line criterion as to who is important enough to go in the main article.

Unless you have such a criterion, the section will just explode until it dwarfs the rest of the article.

Without such a criterion, you might as well just merge the whole List of University of Chicago people into the article, as that is what will happen without it.

And I don't think much of Cornell's section, now that I look at it. "Three Nobel laureates, a Crafoord Prize winner, two Turing Award winners, a Fields Medal winner, two Legion of Honor recipients, a World Food Prize winner, four National Medal of Science winners, two Wolf Prize winners, four MacArthur Award winners, four Pulitzer Prize winners, 14 Alexander von Humboldt Award winners, two Eminent Ecologist Award recipients, a Carter G. Woodson Scholars Medallion recipient," and a partridge in a pear tree. Do you really give a flying fig how many World Food Prizes Cornell people have won? Dpbsmith (talk) 23:41, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

"Popular Culture" section

It has been suggested that the section be entirely removed, but I strongly believe that it should be left within the article. Many university pages on Wikipedia contain such sections, and I can't see how they conflict with the article itself. I agree with the suggestion that certain entries should be removed, particularly ones that cannot be cited and those from films or tv shows that would generally be unknown to a given audience. mcshadypl 23:22, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I see two legitimate kinds of item for such a list.

First are movies, books, television series, etc. in which the University of Chicago actually figures as part of the story. It's not good enough to have a character who could just as well have gone to Generic U, but happens to mention "University of Chicago" in passing for no particular reason, or because the movie is set in Chicago, or because they wanted a couple of shots of a nice-looking campus. If you can change the "University of Chicago" to "University of Wisconsin" and the story still makes sense, it's not worth mentioning.

Raiders of the Lost Ark should not qualify, for example, because Indiana Jones is loosely based on Roy Chapman Andrews, who had no connection whatsoever with the University of Chicago. Even if the lecture scenes were actually filmed at the University of Chicago, as I believe they were, they could just as well have been filmed in any classroom that had the right period look.

Is there any reason at all why Harry and Sally couldn't just as well have met at the University of Illinois?

By the way, it's more important that the setting be recognizably patterned on University of Chicago than that it be named University of Chicago. Animal House deserves mention in the Dartmouth College article even though it takes place at "Faber College."

The second category would be a very compact, brief catalog of movies that feature location footage of the University of Chicago--not just a blink-and-you'd-miss-it cameo, though. That's harmless and amusing to those who know the buildings. (Especially amusing would be scenes, if any, in which the university is masquerading as some other university or other kind of location altogether... or scenes where some other location is masquerading as the University of Chicago. Like Central Tech High School in Toronto playing the role of MIT in Good Will Hunting. Dpbsmith (talk) 00:29, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

"Is there any reason at all why Harry and Sally couldn't just as well have met at the University of Illinois?" Movies name-drop schools like Chicago, Harvard, Yale, etc. as shorthand for "These characters are intelligent and well-educated," regardless of whether the schools themselves factor significantly into the movie's plot. The namedropping helps shape an educated viewer's conception of the character. Anne Hathaway plays a Northwestern grad in her new movie, though the name is only mentioned once in passing. Ellen Pompeo plays a Dartmouth grad on Grey's Anatomy, but we only ever know it from the shirt she occasionally has on. Why didn't Anne Hathaway's character go to the University of Wisconsin, or Ellen Pompeo's character to the University of Alabama? The same reason why Harry met Sally at the University of Chicago, not the University of Illinois.

--65.67.159.243 05:54, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Interesting point. I partly buy it. But, specifically, what is a screenwriter trying to communicate by having someone name-drop the University of Chicago? What exactly is the Chicago je-ne-sais-quois (and can it be documented by source citations? )

In the particular case, of course, I didn't choose a good comparison. The University of Illinois is a good (U. S. News #42) public university with no particular social cachet while the University of Chicago is an excellent (#16) private university with some measure of social cachet. So, yes, I take it back. If you want to script two people who are on track for a high-income career in New York, and you need a car trip of about the right length, then you want to start from a) some reasonably sophisticated non-coastal city and the Second City is the obvious choice... and you want b) a famous private university.

I probably should have asked why not Northwestern. The obvious answer here is that if you have characters coming from Chicago it's a lot easier to put them at the University of Chicago since everyone knows what city it's in, whereas Northwestern might trigger a split-second of cognitive dissonance wondering whether it might be in Portland or Seattle or something.

I still don't think that the University of Chicago is important to "When Harry Met Sally" in the same way that, say, Harvard is to Love Story or The Paper Chase or Notre Dame is to Rudy (film) or MIT is to Good Will Hunting. Nor is it important the way, even unnamed, the University of Wisconsin is to Back to School or Dartmouth College is to Animal House.

I haven't seen Proof or Chain Reaction but based on their description I'd think these are significant examples of "the University of Chicago in films." Dpbsmith (talk) 12:48, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I think that the reference in 'When Harry Met Sally' is one that should remain in the section. The entire opening scene was apparently filmed at the Hull Gate-- a specific location at the university. A caption within the film's opening even listed the setting as the university. Yet, the films with references to Leopold and Loeb probably should be removed, particularly since those films were merely BASED on the case and did not depict any actual events, obviously not ones that directly pertain to the U of C. I doubt that the university was even mentioned within those films. The other entries such as 'Chain Reaction', 'The Fugitive', 'The Core', etc. explicitly refer to the Uof C in some way and should, therefore, be left alone. I can't really think of any reason why the entire section is constantly being deleted, as dozens of university pages have nearly identical sections. See Columbia University's page for an example. mcshadypl 19:39, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Margin reset....

(What other university pages have is irrelevant. Wikipedia articles vary in quality and problems in some articles do not mean these problems should be propaged to other articles).

OK, OK. "When Harry Met Sally" is a borderline case and I don't really have any objections to it (I was the one who provided the reference for it, by the way).

Speaking only for myself, I dislike "popular culture" sections because of my perception that they attract large numbers of poorly researched items of dubious relevance. I'd be perfectly happy with no such section. I'd also be perfectly happy with a section that was fairly closely monitored and that contained only items a) with source citations, b) in which the University of Chicago has a significant presence in the film.

Incidentally, at the moment it is possible to make a quick check on that by seeing whether our article on the film mentions the University of Chicago.

When Harry Met Sally: Yes.

Raiders of the Lost Ark: No.

Red Dragon: No.

Manhunter: No.

My Best Friend's Wedding: No.

Proof: Yes.

The Runaway Jury: No.

The Core: No.

X-Men: No.

Chain Reaction: Yes.

What's Up, Doc: No.

The Fugitive: No. (Chicago, yes; University Of, no).

Rope: No.

Compulsion: No.

I'm going to remove the "no" items accordingly. Dpbsmith (talk) 20:18, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Criterion for inclusion of notable alumni?

What is the criterion for whether an alumnus is so notable as to deserve mention here in the main article? Dpbsmith (talk) 20:36, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Robert A. Millikan? Carl Sagan? T. S. Eliot????

On looking over the new list of notable alumni, three entries immediately leap out at me.

I associate Robert Millikan with Caltech.

I associate Carl Sagan with Cornell University.

I don't associate T. S. Eliot with any university in particular, but have a vague impression he went to Harvard. To tell the truth, I barely associate him with the United States.

I'm using the Columbia Encyclopedia as one touchstone because it's a) available online, and b) concise, therefore its editors are forced to make careful judgements about what's most important.

The case for Millikan having a strong association with Chicago is good. His Columbia Encyclopedia entry mentions "grad. Oberlin College, 1891, Ph.D. Columbia, 1895, studied in Germany. He taught (1896–1921) physics at the Univ. of Chicago and from 1921 to 1945 was chairman of the executive council of the California Institute of Technology." As a physicist, he's best remembered for the the oil-drop experiment, which he did while at the University of Chicago. However, as an educator, he's best remember for building the Throop College of Technology into Caltech. Still, I think he's associated about equally with both schools. I wonder whether the list shouldn't be limited to people who are primarily associated with Chicago.

In the case of Carl Sagan, in the Columbia Encyclopedia's entry on him the only university mentioned is Cornell.

In the case of T. S. Eliot, our article on him does not even mention the University of Chicago. Neither does his obituary in The New York Times (Jan 5, 1965, p. 1) no university is mentioned at all until the tenth paragraph ("a graduate of Harvard College"); nothing more on education until about the 27th paragraph (Milton Academy and Harvard); there are several paragraphs about his return to Harvard in the 1930s as "a sort of poet in residence" and about how he drank tea, "his long and tabescent fingers grasping the handle of the silver teapot" (tabescent? What's that? Must look it up), "crossing and uncrossing his tweed-covered legs." Somewhere around the fortieth paragraph he is teaching at the Highgate School in London in 1914. The article goes on for, I've lost count, at least twenty more paragraph. No University of Chicago mentioned. Not once.

His Columbia Encyclopedia entry is content to say "He studied at Harvard, the Sorbonne, and Oxford." Dpbsmith (talk) 22:25, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

P. S. Nobel Prize laureates by university affiliation lists him under Harvard and Oxford. He's not one of the numerous entries for the University of Chicago. Was T. S. Eliot connected with the University of Chicago at all?????? Dpbsmith (talk) 22:28, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

P. P. S. Tabescent means "progressively wasting away." Dpbsmith (talk) 22:32, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

P. P. P. S. A biography of Eliot makes two references to his having delivered "a series of lectures at the University of Chicago" in November 1950, entitled "The Aims of Education"[4]. Nothing else.

I think he should be removed from University of Chicago and List of University of Chicago people, but I'll let someone else to it. Dpbsmith (talk) 22:50, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

When I expanded the list to include the phrases prior to the listed names, I left ALL of the names that had already been present. I added a few more, although I now admit that I should not have. I included Sagan, because he is a very recognizable and noteworthy person who is associated with the University of Chicago-- as the sentence introducing the list states (which is why Eliot is on there). Feel free to remove the names that I included, as I should have mentioned it before making the edit. Even so, I can't see why certain people such as Sagan and Ashcroft were not on the original list....after all, they ARE affiliated with the university...mcshadypl 04:21, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Robert Millikan first performed his oil-drop experiment at Chicago. TS Eliot was a member of the Committee on Social Thought ([5]). Carl Sagan did his undergraduate work here (see [6]). So, although YOU might associate most with those schools, there is an undeniable association with Chicago, too. 70.231.245.202

Lascivious Costume Ball

I have added this because it is one of the more memorable attempts at a 'tradition' I have encountered. The nature of the entry fees are from my own experience with the ball when I went there in 1974 through 1976 and are consistent with other descriptions of the event. I have found several internet references to the event, including the one cited, which comes from the University's own web site. I am sorry that they discontinued this event.

L. Greg 07:22, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Featured Article Nomination

Request a review for potential Featured Article status, meaning please add your recommendations for changes to the article before it is nominated. Please add your suggestions here. --69.15.166.1 18:01, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Notable Alumni Addition

I think that Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar should be added. He had a very long tenure, won the Nobel Prize in physics, and the Chandra X-ray Observatory is named after him.

68.4.248.18 10:46, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:University of Chicago

Template:University of Chicago has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you.

I listed this for deletion because there is an exact duplicate at Template:UChicago - and the UChicago one was used on all but 2 pages. I updated the template to the UChicago one on this page and at Chicago Maroon. --Trödel 15:38, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

The inclusion of a majors/degrees section

I have added the following section within "Divisions and Schools", but it was promptly removed. Is anyone else opposed to the addition of it to the article? The inclusion of majors offered at a university seems to be common amongst other pages.

Majors and degrees

The College of the University of Chicago grants Bachelor of Arts and Bachelor of Science degrees in 52 majors and 14 minors in the biological, physical, and social sciences, as well as in the humanities and interdisciplinary areas. A major may provide a comprehensive understanding of a well-defined field, such as anthropology or mathematics, or it may be an interdisciplinary program such as African and African-American studies, environmental studies, biological chemistry, or cinema and media studies. Joint B.A./M.A. and B.S./M.S. programs are offered in a number of disciplines. Degrees are awarded in the following majors: African and African-American studies; ancient studies; anthropology; art history; astronomy and astrophysics; biological chemistry; biological sciences; chemistry; cinema and media studies; classical studies; comparative literature; computer science; early Christian literature; East Asian languages and civilizations; economics; English language and literature; environmental studies; fundamentals: issues and texts; gender studies; general studies in the humanities; geography; geophysical sciences; Germanic studies; history; history, philosophy, and social studies of science and medicine (HiPSS); human development; international studies; Jewish studies; Latin American studies; law, letters, and society; linguistics; mathematics; medieval studies; music; Near Eastern languages and civilizations; philosophy; physics; political science; psychology; public policy studies; religion and the humanities; religious studies; Romance languages and literature; Russian civilization; Slavic languages and literature; sociology; South Asian languages and civilizations; South Asian studies; statistics; tutorial studies; and visual arts.

I am opposed to its inclusion. It is bulky and unnecessary considering very few people would actually read through it. It also seems self-promoting, the kind of thing you'd see in a viewbook: "look at all the majors we offer!" Many articles may do it, but not many featured articles do. See Duke University#Undergraduate. I think we should model our section on theirs, personally. – DroEsperanto^{(talk|contribs)} 18:12, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

more diverse photos needed

We ought to have a photo of a class lecture and one of a research lab, too many quad photos right now.

I go back to Chicago in about a week (SECOND YEAR BABY) and I will be sure to get some great ones before fall sets in. :-)

--Crimson3981 02:54, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Really? Classes for the undergrads begin on Sept. 25th. -- mcshadypl^{Talk Cont} 03:17, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I will work on this shortly. I am trying to get a good elevated shot of the science buildings to show the continuity between the modern and past. I am also thinking of getting something for the GSB center abroad.

Adding Bertrand Russell to alumni list

I propose the addition of Nobel Prize-winning philosopher Bertrand Russell to the alumni list. Any objections to this? mcshadypl^{Talk Cont} 03:52, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

What about James Watson?

Good article and PR... what about featured?

What do you guys think? --Neverborn 23:19, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Actually, now that I've read through the entire article, I think that it has a legitimate chance of becoming a featured article. A few more citations are needed, but it is otherwise in great shape. -- mcshadypl ^TC 03:54, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

I've just submitted a request for another peer review for the article. It will give us an idea of its current status with respect to other featured articles. -- mcshadypl ^TC 18:37, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

I have nominated the article to be featured. I feel that it is superb. Please see the link at the top of this discussion page. -- Noetic Sage 22:15, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't think that we were ready to nominate the article as a FA just yet. The history section, in particular, needs to be expanded and its points of notable achievements should be elaborated on instead of just being listed. Many important statements still have to be cited, including the alumni list. The nomination probably won't come through at this point, but contributors to this article should be forewarned prior to a FA nomination next time. -- mcshadypl ^TC 05:26, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Suggest Adding George R Price of Manhattan Project and More

I suggest adding George R. Price. See his wiki page to see why. And now I'll leave it up to others to add him if they so desire. --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling 00:41, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Proust Institute

More information converning this International Institute of Proust scholars is needed. A list of memebers and faculty would be helpful.

Speaking of Proust, I think that the statement that Proust was on the faculty of the Committee on Social Thought must be incorrect. Proust, to my knowledge, never lived oustide of France. And he probably died before this committee was organized. Doctorice 21:07, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

tradition?

how can the tradition section not mention Jimmy's?

I'm removing this

• The Woodlawn Tap aka Jimmy's - It is the last bar left standing on 55th Street near campus after the South East Chicago Commission's "Urban Renewal" efforts during the 50's and 60's.

because no source was cited to show that it is truly considered a "campus tradition" and not merely a popular bar frequented. If you can show that it really has the status of a tradition, e.g. a novel or movie where students are shown attending like the L Street Bar and Grille in Good Will Hunting, it can be reinserted, but please cite a source. Dpbsmith (talk) 23:43, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

And all past or present residents should recognize the locale of this rendezvous from Barbara Michaels' academic mystery, Search the Shadows: "We ended up on the South Side, near the university....The place he chose was obviously a popular student hangout; two patrons had their heads bent over a chessboard and I noticed a row of encyclopedias on a shelf behind the bar." Jimmy's, in case you hadn't guessed. http://magazine.uchicago.edu/9504/April95Writers.html

a) Does the novel (as opposed to the reviewer) identify the "popular student hangout" as Jimmy's? b) Does the novel says more than its being a "popular student hangout?" To be called a "tradition" I'd expect something more than a popular student hangout, of which most campus neighborhoods have dozens. Dpbsmith (talk) 23:43, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

The Amazon search-inside-the-book feature has the page with the "popular student hangout" quotation. The hangout does not appear to be named. Amazon says "no references to jimmys" and "no references to woodlawn." Dpbsmith (talk) 23:47, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Did you go to the University of Chicago? When Jimmy died, the Illinois state legislature acknowledged that fact: # ^ http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/legisnet91/hrgroups/hr/910HR0335LV.html , when the bar was in danger of closing in 1999 or 2000, because they needed a new liquor license, with Jimmy being dead, and there was a new ordinance that prohibited bars from being with a 100 feet of a church or school, St. Thomas, who ran the school, and the whole neighborhood got the city to grant an exemption: http://chronicle.uchicago.edu/000330/jimmys.shtml

As a current University of Chicago student (not just a first-year), I do not ever recall hearing about any traditions or lore relating to Jimmy's/Woodlawn Tap. Doesn't seem to be that important to me. Liuzerus87 06:00, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

I knew of it as an undergraduate, but I never went in personally and I doubt more than a small fraction of the school did. Further, I don't see how it is a tradition, any more than Salonica or other Hyde Park restaurants are. That, and it is no longer the only pub left near campus. Right across the street there is some higher end buppie joint that certainly has a liqour liscence. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.135.226.160 (talk) 04:14, 4 February 2007 (UTC).

Changed this out. I don't know why anyone would posit it is the only private bar near campus, especially when there is another one directly across the street. This seems to be of dubious merit. I agree that it is just one store in all of Hyde Park. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.135.96.69 (talk) 22:05, 5 February 2007 (UTC).

It would be considered a tradition for older alumni. After the on-campus "Pub" opened, some (most?) of the students I knew went there. Older people that I meet ask me if I went to Jimmy's though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.144.209.8 (talk) 18:32, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Adding Jeannette Piccard to alumnae

Hello. Jeannette Piccard who received her masters in organic chemistry from the University of Chicago may belong in the alumni list. May I or would someone here add her? -Susanlesch 05:36, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

• Hearing no objections I've added Dr. Piccard. -Susanlesch 06:13, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

U Illinois Library

On this page it states that the University of Illinois Library only holds 7.5 million volumes, and that this will be passed soon by U Chicago. As an Illinois alumnus, I can personally attest to the celebratory banners placed around campus when UIUC purchased its ten millionth book. This is referenced as well:

http://www.library.uiuc.edu/administration/collections/collections/ http://www.library.uiuc.edu/geninfo/history.html http://www.publicaffairs.uiuc.edu/facts/facts.html

As well as in Wikipedia's own article concerning U Illinois. As such, I will edit this article to correct the error.Chiwara 03:17, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I tried to clarify the language. The claim is not that the University of Chicago has a larger library. University "libraries" usually consist of collections in several different buildings. Only a fraction of the books in the Harvard "library" are contained within the Widener Library building, for example, and many cannot be "browsed," that is visited directly, but must be ordered from offsite storage.

The claim is that the University of Illinois currently has 7.5 million volumes within a single building, that this is currently the biggest collection of books in a single building, but that the University of Chicago will have a larger collection of books within a single building. Dpbsmith (talk) 18:41, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

If that is the case, I fail to see how that is at all an important aspect of a university library. I've never heard of someone measuring "most books contained within a single building." But if you choose to make that an important part of the article, so be it.Chiwara 01:06, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Modern university libraries store large quantities of books in offsite storage. Instead of being able to browse a book, you have to request it, and it is delivered. This takes at least 24 hours. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.144.209.8 (talk) 18:35, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Gallery of alumni

Hello. Could an editor familiar with this article, or may I please add one of Wikipedia's free images of a female to the gallery of images? The choices are very hard to make as I have seen while editing a list of the most notable persons for a city. Hannah Arendt or Katherine Dunham might be good guesses but which? Thoughts? -Susanlesch 16:09, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

• Evidently gallery is four wide (an alternative may be a wikitable to fit five). I put the images in alpha order, and removed Obama who is running for office, swapping in Dunham who received awards in another field though I don't know much about her. From my point of view, OK in advance to revert or change to Image:Hannah Arendt by Fred Stein 2.jpeg (Arendt taught mainly elsewhere so I chose Dunham) or a female "fresh face." Thank you. -Susanlesch 17:33, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

---

With respect, including Obama's photo is in the line of "George Washington Slept Here". He lectured a single year at the law school. Considering the current controversies surrounding him, wouldn't it be proper to replace his photo with, say, Paul Sereno, who adds significantly to the prestige and value of the institution? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.173.7.124 (talk) 22:58, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually, Obama has lectured part-time at the Law School for 10 years. He lives in Kenwood, his wife has worked for the UC Medical Center, and his children go to the Lab School. He's as much part of U of C as anyone there. -Dxia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.227.183.147 (talk) 01:14, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Nobel Laureates

I was doing a class project on UChicago and, after looking at the links in the Notable faculty and alumni section, noticed that most of the claims made about the school's Nobel Laureates were pretty much unverifiable, despite the presence of citations. Just thought you should know. Bolt Vanderhuge 21:31, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Motto Translation

Two conflicting translations of the motto have been posted here. 1: Let knowledge grow from more to more; and so be human life enriched. 2: Let knowledge increase so that life may be enriched. Both do appear on the University's site, although the first appears far more often, and on far more prominent, official pages, such as the one I cited in making the last revision. I realize this qualifies as original research, but in my four years here, I had NEVER heard the latter translation until I saw it used here, then searched the University's site. The former translation is used at Convocations, Aims of Educations, and appears in official Admitted Student materials. The former translation is the more accepted one, and should be used on this page.

Addendum: "Crescat scientia, vita excolatur" can also be found in the printed versions of the Encyclopedia Britannica. I know, my 1976 edition, the 30-volume set dedicated to Pres. Jimmy Carter and Queen Elizabeth, the Macropedia, Micropedia and (?) Propedia books all had it on the very first page.

Transgender Institute

I have heard of this transgender institute, but the section on it needs expansion.

GA comment

For the article to maintain its GA status, the logos need detailed fair use rationales. Look to other passed GA/FAs for examples. Let me know on my talk page if you have any questions. --Nehrams2020 06:23, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Core

Core classes are NOT capped at 25 or taught by professors. Ive had a core class over 30 and about half of my core was taught by graduate students.

Like what? I know that intro science courses were somewhat larger (100 tops), but graduate students? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.144.209.8 (talk) 18:37, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

I had a SOSC class this past year that was taught by a grad student. -- mcshadypl ^TC 01:58, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Section on the Chicago Review & Naked Lunch along with the Consortium on Chicago School Research (CCSR)

Are either of these matters relevant? As it is this article is rather long, and neither seem that notable. Likewise I question the importantance of the failed merger with Northwestern, but I suppose a case could be made for it.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.247.125.209 (talk) 21:22, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

What was Werner Heisenberg doing in the University of Chicago?

The University of Chicago counts 79 Nobel prize winners among its faculty members, students or researchers. One of them is Werner Heisenberg. Heisenberg was in Chicago only for few months! He didn't studied or did some major research at the University. VjShRi 05:33, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

History section is missing the 1960s

there is a conspicuous gap in the history section of this article. it jumps from 1959 to 1978. a more cynical person might say this is a deliberate omission, since that's when hyde park turned into a giant dump.

could someone with knowledge of this period please fill out this section? i don't know much other than the that university wanted to relocate california. which should be in the article too.

I was not able to find any information regarding a relocation to California. Otherwise, the history section itself should be more thoroughly expanded, anyway. This is the main reason why the article failed to become a Featured Article when we had nominated it. -- mcshadypl ^TC 18:52, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

The University website ([7]) provides the following information about the '50s and '60s. It's a little biased, so I hesitate to just add it to the article.

"In the early 1950s, Hyde Park, once a solidly middle-class neighborhood, began to decline. In response, the University became a major sponsor of an urban renewal effort for Hyde Park, which profoundly affected both the neighborhood's architecture and street plan. As just one example, in 1952, 55th Street had 22 taverns; today, the street features extra-wide lanes for automobile traffic, the twin towers of University Park Condominiums (I. M. Pei, 1961) and one bar, the Woodlawn Tap.

"The University experienced its share of student unrest during the 1960s, beginning in 1962, when students occupied President George Beadle's office in a protest over the University's off-campus rental policies. In 1969, more than 400 students, angry about the dismissal of a popular professor, occupied the Administration Building for two weeks."

Willow1729 22:41, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

University of Chicago crime rate

I am trying to add a section with information on the recent death of Amadou Cisse, a Ph.D. student at UofC. This could fit in a larger section on campus crime rate - anyone want to venture adding a first attempt? Most Chicago residents are aware of how dangerous Hyde Park can be - and the current Wikipedia page does not do justice to this highly relevant aspect of student / faculty existence.

It is not my desire to start an edit war. If you feel like this section should not be a part of the wikipedia entry on UofC then please provide your supporting arguments here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.230.9.81 (talk) 04:00, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

I think we should incorporate information on the crime rate into the history section---not the section on rankings and reputation. It seems we could divide the history section into several subsections: one on educational innovations, one on science, and perhaps another on crime and controversy at the university.Willow1729 (talk) 17:58, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't think the material on the recent death of a Ph.D. student belongs here. This is very topical and tragic as it may be at the moment it doesn't really belong here. Information on the crime rate probably would fit better in the article on Hyde Park, Chicago rather than in this article.Gomez3000adams (talk) 04:02, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

I would tend to agree. I would not object, though, to the incorporation of at least some such information into the history section as proposed by User:Willow1729. I'll also note that a quick survey of a few other universities entries didn't show any sort of crime section when I expect their crime rates are equal or higher (it'd be nice to have some numbers here to see if the crime rate in Hyde Park is different enough from most college areas to warrant mention).--Dpryan (talk) 18:24, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

I would just like to add a word of encouragement to the creation of this subject. As a graduate student here, interactions with the surrounding crime and poverty are a defining characteristic of my time at the university. Any discussion is incomplete without their reference.--75.21.88.146 (talk) 11:26, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree with moving the subsection under History. I disagree with removing it. I do appreciate the point that this is not a current news page - to address that we should add an overview of the UofC crime rate - the recent murder can be mentioned there briefly in that context. By way of background, my girlfriend is currently a Ph.D. student at UofC and I agree with the poster above - the high risk area around Hyde Park defines both our lives as I have to go pick her up from the University (we live downtown) whenever she has to leave at dark - we do that because only weeks ago a colleague of hers (a 28 year old female) was nearly abducted in the middle of campus by 4 males in an SUV around 8pm at night, and she only escaped by fighting for her life. Making no mention of this on the main UofC wikipedia page amounts IMHO to censorship and sanitization of an important subject. Additionally, if crime sections are missing under other university wikipedia entries, perhaps those pages should be enhanced as opposed to having an arbitrary blanket interdiction on crime rate information for all universities. A (brief) crime rate section for any educational institution is warranted irrespective of whether the crime rate is unusually low / average / high. Think of all the international students that have no information and no way of knowing what a certain campus is like. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.22.160.1 (talk) 20:33, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

What would be best is if we could find some sources discussing crime and its impact on the University itself. A simple recitation of statistics doesn't really establish that crime is relevant to an article on the University. And, not to minimize the personal experience of the last two posters, but personal experience cannot be used as a source on Wikipedia. Natalie (talk) 21:07, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

I am an alumnus and a staff member at the University. The personal experience described by the poster does not reflect my own experience of attending school, living, and now working in Hyde Park. A comparison of the rate of crime in the Hyde Park-South Kenwood community to that of the rest of the city (from the Chicago Police Department/ South East Chicago Commission) is found here: http://commonsense.uchicago.edu/crime-info.html#figure1 . Based on these statistics, there is an argument to be made indeed that where this poster lives (downtown Chicago) may be more of a "high risk" area than Hyde Park. So both from my own (and indeed, others') personal perspective and from these admittedly impersonal statistical reports, I find the suggestion that crime defines campus life at the University quite ridiculous. This of course only demonstrates the difficulties with such personal accounts in this context. I am, like many in the community, outraged by the events surrounding Cisse's death, but to highlight his murder (both as a History subsection and in its length relative to the treatment of the rest of the University's history) in a discussion of the University's complex and long history (which includes, among other things, Harper's innovative programs, the many schools of thought to emerge from the University which continue to change our world, Hutchins' Great Books, the Manhattan Project, and the many distinctive personalities that have graced the University) distorts far more than it illuminates. Crime is an important reality in modern American urban life and yes, the University, like other major universities, is an urban university. Yes, the history of the University is intertwined with the history of its neighborhoods (which must also be understood in relation to their rich cultural history). But no, Cisse's death--where the facts are quite scanty still--should not be used/manipulated to essentialize the University or to secure a quite simplistic explanation--which serves no one (or keeps no one safer), much less those "international students" of the poster--for a much more complex phenomenon of urban crime. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.16.232.39 (talk) 00:30, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

The honesty of the previous poster is appreciated and the disclosure about being a staff member of the university. A few comments: 1) None of the personal anecdotes of the previous posters have found their way on the the actual wiki page - they do not indeed belong there. 2) The Commonsense website belongs in the much needed section on campus crime as one possible source of information. While I personally challenge the numbers there and find the suggestion that Hyde Park crime is 'low' to be ludicrous and an insult to common sense having lived in Chicago for many years, it should be 100% included in any article on UofC, together with the mention of the recent murder which is a cold, hard, datapoint. 3) The laundry list of University achievements is irrelevant. No one doubts that the University is a firs tier academic institution (and the dozens of pages of listing of its accomplishments on Wikipedia do it more than justice). But that is irrelevant within the context of crime rate. If one is going to get killed on one's way to class then, for the purposes of discussing crime, it doesn't matter that that class is taught by a Nobel prize winning professor. As a staff member you have a vested interest to present the University in its best light. However, the experience that many students actually have differs from the experience that is advertised. Running away, at best and when possible, or, at worst, being beaten, or even raped, and sometimes even killed by armed perpetrators does not jibe with the rosy image of life on campus that you present. Do feel free to add any additional facts (true or imaginary) about crime rates at the University - but don't you dare tarnish the memory of Amadou by censoring the cold hard fact of his untimely death. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.22.160.1 (talk) 14:55, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

If the article looks like a laundry list of achievements, it's because the university has done a lot of important things. It would be absurd to downplay those achievements to improve coverage of crime in Hyde Park. I think we should definitely include information on the current crime rate (assuming there's more crime at U of C than at other campuses) and I think we should discuss the university's urban renewal efforts (see my post in the discussion entitled "History section is missing the 1960s"). However, I think that we should proceed with caution. The recent murder is not the only important event that defined the relationship between the university and the surrounding area, and I don't think there should be an entire section about it. Willow1729 (talk) 17:29, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

If the poster wishes to challenge the crime rate numbers (those from the Chicago Police Department/ South East Chicago Commission) of my original comment, that is fair in the interest of reasoned deliberation; of course, I only request that he provide an alternative explanation beyond "the insult to common sense having lived in Chicago for many years", which, it must be admitted, makes not even a hint of pretension to objectivity! I would also ask the poster to consider that his so-called "cold, hard datapoint" is anything but that; indeed, his simple "datapoint" is visibly laden with, embedded in, and informed by a spurious explanatory framework characterized by, again to use the poster's own quite revealing choice of words, "running away, . . . being beaten, or even raped, and sometimes even killed by armed perpetrators. . .", a quite bewildering choice of words of hurried frantic pace in an explanation that calls for, one might assume given the scarcity of facts to this date, caution and measured response. I should also point out, contrary to the poster's suspicion, that, as a staff member, I do not necessarily have any "vested interest" to present the University in its best light, given, first of all, the anonymity of this platform and, secondly, the recognition that the University does not really require my (or anyone's) help in this regard if the rest of the Wiki page--the "laundry list of University achievements" that the poster describes as irrelevant--has any meaning at all for a balanced view of the University or of campus life. I too was once like those students whom the poster invokes for his purposes (which ones are indeed "true or imaginary", to use the poster's own quite obvious rhetorical move back on him, that is my question!), albeit with experiences not similar to what is being described here by him (experiences that, according to the poster, "many students actually have," and, I might add, which the poster represents on behalf of these unnamed and voiceless students). There is no desire to tarnish the memory of Amadou on my part, as the poster seems to accuse so carelessly; indeed, it is for this reason that I emphatically reject the misuses and abuses of the inclusion of this event, treated now as a "datapoint", in an account of God-knows-what-exactly; such are the inevitable result of any oversimplification so evident in his (unfortunately) quite tendentious and sensationalizing account. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.16.232.39 (talk) 07:50, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Gomez3000adams' remark that a crime section is more appropriate in Hyde Park, Chicago. Most cities (and many other communities) have crime sections. We're really talking about neighborhood crime anyway: his death, like most "University of Chicago" crimes, occurred off campus on a nearby residential street.

In the meantime, I've made Amadou Cisse (student) to cover this event. I think that it fails our notability standards as a biography. I created it to serve as a temporary holding place for this material while an appropriate section is created in some appropriate article. Cool Hand Luke 23:40, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I have removed the mention of Cisse' death from the article. Cisse is, I'm quite sure, not the first UC student to be killed on or near campus; Hyde Park has long been a dangerous neighborhood and students are not infrequently the victims of crime as a result. His death will not be noteworthy in six months time, let along six years, and has no place in the "history" section of this article. Write a separate article about him if you like, but it need not be mentioned here. You can, I suppose, list him as a "notable alumnus", if you like. Chromaticity (talk) 15:42, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree that it's not so notable in the grand history of the school, but he is the first killed in 30 years. We should at least leave in one sentence with a link to his article until we can figure out where to cover crime around the school. Cool Hand Luke 18:03, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree there should be one short sentence with a link to the main relevant article clippings. More importantly, there should be a section on crime. I encourage you to search the current page for 'crime', the only sentence you will find is 'In the early 1950s, student applications declined as a result of increasing crime and poverty in the Hyde Park neighborhood.' It makes it seem like crime hasn't been a problem since 1950. The page as it stands is pure propaganda on behalf of the University and casts into doubt the credibility of WikiPedia as an unbiased source of information. Google 'amadou cisse' and read any of the blogs commentary, you will find plenty of horror stories about the area, both recent and old. The lack of representation of this reality on the Wiki page is reprehensible. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.22.160.1 (talk) 21:57, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Milton-hand.jpg

Image:Milton-hand.jpg 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 this Wikipedia article 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 ensure 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 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 15:06, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Concrete Car?

While on a bus tour of Chicago, our bus driver took us past a curious thing: A vehicle covered in concrete. Apparently a prank done by some students, the dean's (or was it just a professor? I can't remember) car was covered from top to bottom in concrete with a less than a hand height's gap at the bottom (you could clearly see the wheels of the vehicle). The bus driver also told us the police stopped the investigation because they were impressed, but I doubt that.

What I'm asking is, did this really happen? I've scoured the internet for signs of it but all I've found were concrete car stops for sale. I have several photos if people don't quite believe what I or the driver says.. Grayda (talk) 11:08, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

• Never mind. I found out it was a statue by Wolf Vostell and is entitled "Concrete Traffic" [8] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Grayda (talk • contribs) 11:11, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Arts at Chicago

I started a subsection under History to record the artistic contributions of U of C students and faculty. I've included 3 facts and references so far. Please, please talk before reverting because I know I didn't go through the official channels, but your page has requested contributions for the History section. I'm also a U of C alum, so I'm on your side. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dxia (talk • contribs) 00:30, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I added some facts about Saul Bellow and Kurt Vonnegut. I feel like the section is getting a little choppy. If you feel like you can improve the writing, please help. -Dxia —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dxia (talk • contribs) 04:48, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

I included an extra sentence for The Second City and contempo. I feel like most people aren't aware of their significance so the extra explanation may be worthwhile. Dxia (talk) 18:19, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Picture of Doc Films?

I was wondering, why is there a picture of the Robie House in the Doc Films section? They're somewhat close to each other, but I can't think of any relationship between the two. -Dxia —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dxia (talk • contribs) 02:33, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I agree! That confused me too. Can anyone find a more relevant picture for the Doc Films section? And maybe a better spot for the Robie House picture? Because that deserves to be somewhere, but maybe just in a section/subpage on architecture or Frank Lloyd Wright. Bible Study Class (talk) 19:02, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Where Fun Goes to Die

Statement in question:

Notorious for its uniquely rigorous devotion to academic scholarship and intellectual life, the University of Chicago is sometimes jokingly referred to as the school "where fun goes to die."

82.95.229.74 (talk) 00:30, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

So... what was the question again?--Gimme danger (talk) 02:34, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Stop Changing the Endowment!

The endowment is constantly changing from new contributions, distributions, and market value changes. You cannot simply accrue the number on your own without documentation! The best source is the U of C's published number from their annual statement because it has been verified by their auditor.

I'll repeat: STOP SPECULATING ON THE CURRENT ENDOWMENT VALUE

-Dxia

I'll second that. If Harvard's endowment is down 22% on the year, you can bet that whatever capital campaigns and major donations aren't gonna make much of a dent in the total realized loss of a multi-billion dollar endowment in this market.[9] Leave the number and wait for official published numbers to come out. I'd venture it's well below $6b by the end of the year. Madcoverboy (talk) 17:17, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

I think it's quite clear from the former U of C CIO's statements that the endowment is down to $4.9B. He announced on January 23, 2009 that he's leaving the U of C with a current endowment of $4.9B, down 25% from the previous $6.5B because of the market meltdown.

Read: http://www.pionline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090123/DAILY/901239965

Dxia (talk) 03:09, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm nevertheless inclined to use the NACUBO study because its tabulation and methodology is the most standardized and comparable among universities. It may be a few months out of date (which is incidentally a few billion dollars in this market), but I believe it is far more reliable and authoritative than even official university reports which may have different ways of tabulating and including things. The NACUBO numbers are also being used on many other university templates. Madcoverboy (talk) 05:53, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Expanding History Section - 1969 Protests

Since the to-do list suggests expanding the history section, I think adding a link to a separate 1969 UChicago sit-in article would be helpful, following the style of Columbia University's mention of their own protests with a link to a larger article[10] for more information in their history section.

I don't really have the time currently to spearhead this, so I'm reaching out to see if anyone's interested in developing this. I've started a skeletal framework for the page with some good citations if this strikes anyone's fancy.[11]

- TheSlowLife (talk) 19:23, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Barack Obama

The following section has been in the University of Chicago article since last December. Its presence in the article has recently been challenged:

In 2008, the University of Chicago and particularly its surrounding neighborhood of Hyde Park attracted international media attention because of former Law School lecturer Barack Obama's election as President of the United States. Obama taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago for 12 years, from 1992 until his election to the United States Senate in 2004. His wife, First Lady Michelle Obama, also worked for the University, founding the University of Chicago Community Service Center, and later serving as the Vice President of External Affairs for the University of Chicago Hospitals.

The Obamas' two daughters attended the University of Chicago Laboratory Schools and several of his most prominent advisors are affiliated with the University, including: David Axelrod (graduated from the College in 1977), Valerie Jarrett (serves on the Board of Trustees), and Austan Goolsbee (teaches at the Booth School of Business). For this reason, Cass Sunstein has called him a "University of Chicago Democrat", a descriptor noted by several national publications, including the New York Times, the Economist, and the New Republic.

What does everyone think?

--75.57.227.182 (talk) 03:39, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Whittle it down to a sentence or two, not a paragraph or two. This is gross WP:RECENTISM. Madcoverboy (talk) 04:23, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Everything except first sentence is excessive. -- Vision Thing -- 19:25, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree that one sentence is sufficient. Six citations for the one sentence also seems excessive. Alanraywiki (talk) 19:31, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Requested move

The University of Chicago → University of Chicago — naming convention. I also think the move to The University of Chicago was a rather unilateral move. — 71.147.56.247 (talk) 22:16, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.

• Leaning Oppose I believe this is against convention where leading articles are removed from page names. It seems the move has already occurred, however.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 00:33, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose Other institutions that emphasize the "the" article in their names are not included in titles: George Washington University, Ohio State University, etc. I recommend reverting back to University of Chicago. Madcoverboy (talk) 03:54, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
• Leaning Oppose As others have stated, we should stick to the convention. --Dpryan (talk) 19:35, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
• Support (As in I support a revert back to University of Chicago, which I think is the same sentiment as the second poster above) - Other universities with similarly constructed names do not have the 'The' as part of the title of the article. For example, any University of California school (UCLA, University of California, Berkeley), University of Vermont, and University of Arizona, even though both UChicago, Cal, and University of Vermont have a 'the' in their school seal/official logo. So either be clear with conventions and change the majority of other similarly-named universities, or revert this one. I support the latter action. - TheSlowLife (talk) 03:53, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Discussion

Any additional comments:

• I think most of the "oppose" votes were actually "supports" because the requested move was to move The University of Chicago back to the original University of Chicago. Someone had unilaterally moved the page to The University of Chicago before. --71.147.56.247 (talk) 02:27, 15 May 2009 (UTC)