Talk:The Ivy Club

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For a January 2005 deletiondebate over this page see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/The Ivy Club

Removed text:

The least prestigious of the Princeton eating clubs. Founded in 2004 by Shaka Akwasi Smith.

This appears to be a prank, by an anon with a history of disputed edits. Andrewa 20:30, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Unless there are objections, I'm going to roll the text of this into Eating clubs (Princeton University) and make it a redirect. This article is highly unlikely to grow longer than a stub unless someone wants to go to Princeton and track down random out-of-print books on eating clubs at Firestone. jdb ❋ 04:32, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ny times article

Since there have been a number of unexplained removals and unexplained reinstatements of the information from the New York Times article, I thought I should say that while I fixed up the information about the NYTimes article that was addied, I hardly think that the line in the wiki is the "take home point" in the NYTimes article, and I hardly think that an NYTimes article is the most significant thing that has happened in the decades of Ivy's existance - I for one would be for the sentence being removed. Sirmob 07:23, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

The description in the article may not be the defining quality of Ivy, but it (ostensibly) falls under the question of whether Ivy is still as elitist as it used to be. More sources may be desirable, but the New York Times article doesn't appear to violate any of the principles of WP:A. In any case, removal of a properly cited statement without anything in the edit summary is definitely suspect. dcandeto 09:24, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
I agree that your reversions were correct, things shouldn't be removed without discussion (the "unexplained reinstamtents" comment above was, in retrospect, not a fair analogy and came of snarky instead of rhetorical, my apologies). I meant to start that discussion, I think that unless anyone wants to put work into a more robust overall article, this random tidbit from this random article is out of place. (There was a rebuttal, for instance, in the New York Times on May 23, 1999, "Stereotyping the Ivy Club" that only addresses the bicker process, which is the real point of the article). Sirmob 13:51, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
The information removed on March 16 was either
  1. uncited and marked with {{fact}}
  2. had been discussed above on the talk page (see immediately above)
  3. the James Houge line, which I searched an afternoon for verifiable citations for and, finding none, invited the person adding the line to add a citation to on their talk page.
Some people on Wikipedia don't use Talk pages, and I think the changes were reasonable. So I'm removing it, and discussing on the Talk page :) Sirmob 14:12, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
OK, I've just made these two edits. dcandeto 17:01, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Probably a good call :) Sirmob 20:54, 17 March 2007 (UTC)