Talk:University of Chicago

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
A mortarboard 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.
Former FA This article is a former featured article candidate. Please view its sub-page to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Peer review University of Chicago has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.
Peer review University of Chicago has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.
Past discussions are archived at Archive 1.
Good articles University of Chicago has been listed as a good article under the good-article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do.
If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a review.
This article is within the scope of the Big Ten WikiProject,

a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the Big Ten Conference. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary on the comment page to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
To-do list for University of Chicago: edit  · history  · watch  · refresh


If you attend or have attended the University of Chicago, you can add this template to your userpage:
{{User UChicago}}
to display this userbox on your userpage:
This user attends or attended the University of Chicago.

This will also add you to the category:
Wikipedians by alma mater: University of Chicago


Contents

[edit] 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.

[edit] 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

[edit] 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).

[edit] 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.

[edit] 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.

[edit] 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.

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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.

[edit] 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!

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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.

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] "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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] "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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)


[edit] 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)

[edit] 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.

[edit] 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.[1]

[edit] 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. -- mcshadyplTalk 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.

[edit] 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? mcshadyplTalk Cont 03:52, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

What about James Watson?

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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).

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../u/n/i/Talk%7EUniversity_of_Chicago_1b08.html"