Talk:List of Harvard University people
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Universities, an attempt to standardise coverage of Universities and colleges. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this notice, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
Contents |
[edit] Order
It's hard to see categories of people in this listing. For example, if you want to know how many Harvardks served on the Supreme Court, or are working the media and entertainment fields, or earned a Nobel, you have to use the "find" button a lot, whereas other college listings have them conveniently grouped.
I'm not sure what advantage an alphabetical order provides, since all modern browsers allow you to "find" a name if you're looking for it. - User:4.227.175.60 May 24, 2004
- There are numerous problems with categorization:
- there are people who belong in multiple categories, or for whom it is unclear what category they belong in. Is a person a "writer", a "poet", an "author", or a "journalist"? Is a person primarily a "mathematician" or a "physicist"?
- there will be certain limited categories with only one person
- it is often unclear how exactly to name categories
- it is often unclear what categories fit into which other categories: if we have a category called "politicians," do we put all politicians under that category, including Presidents of the United States? Or do we put Presidents in a separate category? What if Harvard has a lot of Senators? Do they also belong in a separate category?
- what if a person is regarded by some to be a certain type of person, but perhaps himself or others denies this?
- Alphabetical order avoids putting people into absolute categories, and it avoids double-listing people. Like you said, modern browsers have a Find button, and it's not that hard to use to find everyone involved in whatever you're looking for. --Lowellian 20:26, Sep 23, 2004 (UTC)
A Find button doesn't get the job done when you're looking for foreign leaders (for example) where there is no common title that they all share. A categorization need not be MECE. -- M Pinck 18:58, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Article name
This article is badly titled and violates the naming conventions. Move it to List of people affiliated with Harvard University, or better, split it into List of Harvard University alumni and List of Harvard University faculty. --Jiang 03:59, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- Note: At the time the above comment was written, this article was located at [[Harvard University people]]. It has since been moved to [[List of Harvard University people]]. —Lowellian (talk)[[]] 09:08, Oct 31, 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Seperate list
Why is there a seperate for Notable non-graduate alumni of Harvard? This list includes several non-graduates - should they be on the other list, or should that list be merged with this article? 172.213.5.133 15:29, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Adding citations
It's time we finally add citations to each entry in this list. This will help clean it up, allow verification, and avoid future incorrect additions. Please pick a few from this list to verify, and add a simple citation after the degree of the entry. Thanks! Gzkn 13:57, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Removing date of birth/death
I also believe that that date of birth/death for each entry should be removed from this list. As I'm going through this list and cleaning it up, I am finding many entries who have already passed away but are still listed as alive here. As this list grows, it will become harder and harder to maintain the accuracy of whether or not those on this list are alive. If there are no objections after five days, I will begin removing these dates so that readers are not presented with false information. Gzkn 02:04, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Sorting the List
What do people think of sectioning off this list into groups (such as at List of Yale University people? Would make it easier to browse in my opinion. Gzkn 02:08, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Gzkn
Nearly thirty radical edits, deletions and redirects in just a few days is just way over the top. There was no need for radical surgery - nor the gut and butchering that was employed here. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.253.202.168 (talk) 00:41, 8 December 2006 (UTC).
- I'm disappointed that you attack my good faith edits (which included slogging through the A's and parts of the B's and adding sources, removing nonnotable people, and reorganizing the lead) as "radical", "over the top", and "butchering". If you want to own this page, feel free. I'm done trying to improve this list. Gzkn 05:37, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
