Talk:New York University

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the New York University article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability
Archives: 1

	New York University has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles 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 reassessment.
Article milestones Date Process Result July 16, 2007 Good article nominee Not listed September 20, 2007 Good article nominee Listed October 9, 2007 Peer review Reviewed Current Status: Good article

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

WikiProject New York City     (Rated GA-Class) NYC Portal This article is part of WikiProject New York City, an effort to create, expand, and improve New York City-related articles to Wikipedia feature-quality standard. Bulletin: The next New York City meetup is Sunday June 1st. GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale. High This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale. New York State WikiProject (Rated GA-Class) (Rated high-importance) This article is part of the New York State WikiProject, an attempt to better organize and improve articles related to the U.S. state of New York. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. Bulletin: The next New York City meetup is Sunday June 1st. GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale. High This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale. WikiProject Universities (Rated GA-Class) Portal 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 or contribute to the discussion. GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.

Archives

Archive 1: Aug 2004 — Jan 2007

Contents 1 Public transit 2 Editing 3 Criticism 4 Fair use rationale for Image:Nyuseal.gif 5 Need better pictures 6 GA fail 7 Image explosion 8 GA Review 9 Princeton Review Rankings 10 Dream school vs. attending 11 Merge proposal

[edit] Public transit

Surely the public transit section in the template box thing can be expanded to be more comprehensive. --Jonathan Williams 17:09, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Editing

I edited the whole New York University article on Wikipedia. Please let me know what you think.

Omnis7

[edit] Criticism

Why is it that NYU (along with all the colleges) does not have a criticism section? Pretty much all the other articles on many different subjects have criticisms but the articles on colleges do not. It does not feel objective and always puts the school in a positive light instead of showing both sides of the story. By not including criticisms, I feel it is very misleading to people who may later on find out that NYU has some negativities that they did not know of beforehand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.149.42.127 (talk • contribs) 16:08, 25 April 2007

One, new items for discussion on the talk page should go at the bottom of the page and not at the top, and this can be easily (and automatically) done by simply clicking on the + next to edit this page on all wiki talk pages. But I lowered this section to its appropriate place for you.

Two, a quick peep at the table of contents on this talk page alludes to an already extant section on Criticism(s). This anonymous user did not get a very helpful response, but if I may I will tell you that any and all criticisms you find pertinent to any information with regards to New York University or any article on wikipedia can be added -- provided they are wholly verifiable and not original research. So a criticism such as "NYU is too expensive/doesn't have D-1 sports/it seems like all the guys are gay" is not welcome on this page. However, if you have a criticism such as NYU doesn't have an Engineering school, or a certain department is a bit lacking in comparison to other peer schools and there is some published documentation that corroborates your criticisms, then it is more than welcome to be added to this or any wikipedia page. JesseRafe 23:33, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Oh alright sorry about that. The thing is, I don't know any books that would actually have criticisms abou NYU although I've heard from many people about how NYU hardly gives any financial aid, have TAs many of the time instead of real professors etc etc. Still, I don't have a reputable source so I wouldn't be able to put that there. Is that why none of the colleges have criticisms (because there aren't any reputable sources criticizing it?) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.149.42.127 (talk • contribs) 21:06, April 25, 2007

No problem, it happens to all of us just starting out. Also try to remember to "sign" each discussion item with four tildes "~~~~" which will show your name (or IP address) and the time you wrote it. And if you want to indent responses to make the flow of the conversation easier to follow, add a colon to the beginning of the first sentence.

It doesn't have to be a book per se, as you can see most articles on wikipedia cite relevant, reliable websites. Mostly only the genuinely "scholarly" articles cite proper books, like history-type prototypical encyclopedia articles. For an article on NYU a source such as the US News and World Report's rankings is an adequate source. Yes, it is true that NYU gives poor financial aid and has many TAs -- but these are subjective. "Not having enough TAs" is an opinion, however, "Having less TAs teaching per capita than X" would be a fact, but the fact that X and NYU are (or ought to be) compared, is, again, subjective. If you're interested try to follow the article and talk page on NetFlix. That discussion illustrates rather well the difficulties in properly criticizing an institution, which is different than criticism of a public figure or a work of art -- things which are expected to be criticized and as such it is easier to document the criticism.JesseRafe 20:53, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Nyuseal.gif

Image:Nyuseal.gif 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 insure 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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:16, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Need better pictures

Come on, this is New York City. I'm sure you can find more aesthetically-pleasing pictures of the campus.--143.58.196.120 14:14, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA fail

This article has some good information, but it is missing crucial citations (beyond the "citation needed" tags) and some sections of the article need to be slightly revised.

• The following sections need more citations (some have none): History, Student life, Athletics, NYU faculty and alumni
• The lead needs to be a standalone summary of the article per WP:LEAD (please read).
• The "Cultural setting" section could probably be reduced; right now, it seems like a list of the famous people who lived in Greenwich Village. It would be a good idea to either relate those people to the university or simply cut much of that.
• The beginning of the "Academics" section is loaded with rankings. I would use those rankings when discussing the schools themselves.
• The "Schools and colleges" section does not describe any of them. A few paragraphs would be helpful, rather than simply a list of names.
• I would suggest adding more on the university's budget and fundraising. Although this is not the most exciting element of a university for students, it is vital to a university's livelihood and often a matter of hot dispute. Also, any recent major gifts should probably be listed.
• The most prominent prose problems were: repetitive diction, awkward syntax and wordiness.
• The "NYU in film and literature" section is a trivia section (see WP:TRIVIA). It should be moved to another, more appropriate, page OR made into coherent paragraphs OR integrated into the article.
• A few more images might not be amiss, such as Washington Square Arch, since it is associated with NYU.
• As a graduate student myself, I was disappointed not to see any mention of NYU's labor disputes. They made national news, so I thought they might be mentioned (especially when the suicides were). Perhaps this is my own bias, though. :)

If you have any questions about this review, please feel free to drop me a line at my talk page. Awadewit | talk 12:24, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image explosion

I'm thinking we're getting a little too enthusiastic with the images - the campus and sports sections are terribly cluttered now with the multiple left and right-hand side images. Perhaps we should prioritize which to include, or create a {{gallery}} instead? --ZimZalaBim ^talk 02:55, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree that we should prioritize and make the images flow better. I am simply including better images per the Good Article nomination comments. Also, using featured university articles like Michigan State University should serve as indicators of quantity and quality of images. -- Noetic Sage 03:18, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA Review

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   a (fair representation): b (all significant views):

5. It is stable.

   

6. It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.

   a (tagged and captioned): b lack of images (does not in itself exclude GA): c (non-free images have fair use rationales):

7. Overall:

   a Pass/Fail:

Nice job. --Тhε Rαnδom Eδιτor 19:14, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Princeton Review Rankings

They have no methodology; most are based on self-selecting surveys. why are we using them? i am specifically referring to the "dream school" ranking. what does this mean? and how is it measured? obviously not by yield, one of the best measures of a school's popularity and desirability among admitted students, since NYU's is relatively low and no where near the top of the list.

and if we are going to use Princeton Review rankings, even though they are unscientific, we need to use all of the rankings that the company has on NYU, not just the ones that reflect favorably on the school.

i am tired of college and university articles that read like admissions literature.

those other rankings are as follows:

#8 Long Lines and Red Tape
#14     Professors Make Themselves Scarce       
#1      Students Dissatisfied with Financial Aid        
#3      Gay Community Accepted  
#11     Intercollegiate Sports Unpopular or Nonexistent 
#5      Nobody Plays Intramural Sports  
#7      Dodgeball Targets       
#10     Great College Towns     

i will be adding them in soon, unless we just exclude Princeton Review rankings entirely, which i think would be best. please do not remove the new rankings.

34african34 (talk) 06:56, 6 February 2008 (UTC)34african34

Are the other rankings relavent to an encylopedic article? Perhaps the financial aid and gay community ones. The others, not so much. RogueNinja_talk 17:52, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

The other rankings can be worked in as well. They are all related to NYU-the focus of this article. This article has already ceased to be an "encyclopedic" article. An encyclopedic article about NYU would state its location, constituent schools, founding date, and that's about it. It would probably be about one to two paragraphs long. The other rankings are as relevant or perhaps more relevant than the fact that the Skirball Center hosted the recording for the third season finale of the Apprentice, just to name one random piece of information in this article.34african34 (talk) 03:16, 13 February 2008 (UTC)34african34

[edit] Dream school vs. attending

I just made this removal for the 2nd time (I think). These are two separate and unrelated facts: (a) a large number of people consider NYU their "dream school"; and (b) only 37% of those admitted decide to attend. There is no necessary relationship between the two, thus no "despite". The only way "despite" would be appropriate is if we knew for a fact that of those who applied, this was their "dream school" and then they got in, and then they chose not to attend. For all we know, a million people consider NYU their dream school, but never even apply (no hope of getting in, can't afford, etc). So the ultimate statistic on who choose to enroll is unrelated. --ZimZalaBim ^talk 22:53, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Exactly. Of course, those million people could still apply, but not be accepted. It doesn't say that NYU accepts all its applicants and only accept 37% - that'd be what the "despite" would be appropriate. If NYU offers admission to 20% of applicants that means 80% didn't go to "their dream school", and if only 37% of them accept, then only 7.5% of those applied attend. JesseRafe (talk) 01:52, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

But one would think that if NYU was such a "Dream School" that all of the people who were accepted would attend, and make all the sacrifices necessary. Yield measures the desirability of schools, and this Princeton Review rankings claims to do the same. While the PR ranking says that NYU is the most desirable school in the nation, the yield says otherwise, hence the usage of the word "despite." I was just trying to tell both sides of the story, something that any unbiased source of information should try to do. The NYU yield provides information that is counter-factual to this silly ranking and that is hard information, unlike the PR ranking. The two pieces of information, even though they might not measure the same thing as you said, contrast, and one sheds light on the other. If we look at yields to determine desirability of colleges, we get schools like Harvard and Yale being the most desirable, and that seems to be a more believable conclusion than NYU. But, alas, obviously the only editors who view this page frequently are going to be NYU people who have unconditional positive regard for the school, and therefore I am pushed out my sheer mob rule. Things like this are what make Wikipedia so great.34african34 (talk) 03:04, 13 February 2008 (UTC)34african34

First, and above all, assume good faith with your fellow editors. Second, you have a number of logical fallacies in your argument above. For example, "But one would think that if NYU was such a "Dream School" that all of the people who were accepted would attend, and make all the sacrifices necessary." No. that would only be true if all the people who were accepted also describe NYU as their dream school. Further, NYU would have to be their only dream school. Neither of which is likely the case, and certainly neither of which has been verified here. There really is no logic to connect the two statistics. (Perhaps there is value in listing them separately). --ZimZalaBim ^talk 03:54, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Throwing around the term "logical fallacies" here is just a way of de-legitimizing my argument without truly engaging it. Your arguments also have "logical fallacies." The term "dream school" implies that NYU would be a first choice, and therefore there cannot be more than one "dream school" as you said. A candidate can only have one first choice school, or else it would not be his or her first choice at all. The problem here is that it is really unclear what the term "dream school" really means. Because of that including the "dream school" ranking comes down to an attempt to contribute to the positive notions of NYU's prestige/standing as a good school, without adding information of any substance. Nonetheless, I give up on the issue.152.23.82.62 (talk) 18:16, 13 February 2008 (UTC)34african34

(I'm presuming the IP edit was also by 34African34). You said: "The term "dream school" implies that NYU would be a first choice, and therefore there cannot be more than one "dream school"". No, that's not necessarily the case. Regardless, using the connection "despite" only applies if those who were accepted but decided not to attend also were those who described NYU as their "dream school". Like I noted above, there might be good reason to include both pieces of data, just not connected in such a way. --ZimZalaBim ^talk 19:32, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

You people like to argue a whole lot about nothing.--216.165.32.224 (talk) 10:19, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Merge proposal