Talk:Vanderbilt University/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Archive 1 Archive 2 →

Contents

Compliment from 2004

Bravo, 129.59.26.63. A very sensible rearrangement of the alumni list. RivGuySC 05:08, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Importing a template form WikiProject Universities

Structure

The article should start with a good introduction, giving the full complete official name of the college/university, detail about location (in suburb, downtown, where?), founder and founding name, and affilation with any larger university system, if applicable. Give other names for which the university may be known (e.g. Cal, and bold them, too). Also, add a few facts about the college/university that make it unique.

Next, there is a table about the college/university. A template for the table can be found at the bottom of this page.

Sections of the article:

  • Campus -- Describe the overall shape and size of the campus. Mention any famous buildings and their architects.
  • Organization -- Mention the administration, including leading officials. If this college/university has a special organizational structure, such as a residential college system, then it should be mentioned here. Then, in bullet point form, list the schools, colleges, etc. of this university. If appropriate, also list the faculties and departments at the university. If there is a special course system or requisits for enrollment, mention them here, too. If the university is part of a larger system (as in University of California), mention this connection and provide requisite links.
  • Students and faculty -- State the number (and any other useful statistics) of the students. Distinguish between undergraduate, graduate and postgraduate students; also state the number of faculty members. Distinguish between tenure/nontenured, full- and part-time (if possible).
  • Sports, clubs, and traditions -- Mention the sports team(s) of the college/university and what is notable about them. Here is also a good place to mention specific traditions of the college/university, like students' union activities, a student newspaper, fraternities, regular activities, etc. The heading may be changed accordingly in regard to the importance of sports, clubs, traditions, students' unions etc. For example, alternative headings could be Students' Union, Sports and Traditions or Students' Union Activities.
  • History -- Describe the history of the college/university, including noteworthy milestones in its development. (incomplete)
  • Noted alumni -- Bullet list of Alumni that are notable/famous. Mention the graduation date and degree and give a short description why they are famous.
  • Noted faculty -- Bullet list of active and former members of faculty that are notable. If they are alumni/alumnae, mention them here in parenthesis, including the degree and graduation date. For all give a short description why they are famous.
  • External links -- Give a link to the website of the college/university, preferable in English language.


Improvement drive

Grameen Bank has been nominated to be improved on Wikipedia:This week's improvement drive. Vote for it there if you want to contribute!--Fenice 10:41, 12 August 2005 (UTC)


When Diversity isn't Enough

As Vanderbilt and other universities around the country work on creating more diverse student bodies, they should also consider creating some programs that foster openess and teach the value of integrating cultures. A student there notices...

“The diversity on campus is good but the self-segregation is what hurts the campus. All the races on campus stay to themselves and never mingle with anyone else. It kind of defeats the purpose of forming a diverse student body.”

from the College Prowler guidebook, Vanderbilt University - Off the Record

Logo needs to be updated

The Vanderbilt logo needs to be updated to their new logo. Kaldari 22:18, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

The new logo has been up for a while. Right now it's down in the Student Life section of the article. Hugh Manatee added the old logo citing something or another about the Wal-Martization of logos (I think) and I'm not about to get into a another tussle about edits. Feel free to restore the new one if you feel its necessary. Ttownfeen 23:49, September 12, 2005 (UTC)

I think the so-called "new logo" is just that: a contemporary marketing logo for the University. The "old logo" down in the student life section is in fact the reverse, "tails" side of the seal of the University, which is unchanged since I attended years ago. The "heads" side of the seal has a profile of Commodore Vanderbilt. Keep both the seal and the logo in the article.

The Fugitives and Agrarians

The entry should contain information on the two major intellectual movements that originated at Vanderbilt: the Fugitives and the later Agrarians. See the Wikipedia entries for both. I am not qualified to write the sections. The alumni section is pretty incomplete. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.255.9.68 (talk • contribs) 10:30, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Oh, don't be so down on yourself. If you can write coherent sentences and have adequate resources, you can add to Wikipedia articles. Be bold! as TPTB say. :) Ttownfeen 17:36, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
Response: I'd like to think that someone in the English Department would write that section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.255.9.254 (talk • contribs) 21:54, 8 February 2006 2005 (UTC)

template

I think faculty is just fine for the template. For one thing, it's one of the option listed for the template. Second of all, in the template talk for that template, there's all kind of discussion about which is the proper term of use.

--Ttownfeen 02:09, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

alumni

I think it would be nice to have Alumni/Notable list to include just grads. That would bump Gore and Amy Grant. Nothing political, Gore just dabbled at the university, let's put him on the linked page. You can bring back Tipper, she graduated.

How about using Tipper and Lamar Alexander. And bumping attenders Amy Grant and Al Gore, Jr. to the Vandy People list. Unless there is objection, I'm going to make the edit in about 2 weeks.

If a free image of Mrs. Gore can be found and uploaded to Wikipedia, then I'll gladly agree to showcase her, an actual graduate. As it stands, Gore and Grant are there to add instantly-recognizable faces (which, unfortunately, would most likely not be attributed to Robert Penn Warren or David Brinkley) to the article. --Ttownfeen 01:17, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
I've argued with people (non-Wikipedians) about this before: including someone like Gore as an "alumnus" seems somehow disingenuous. However, the common definition of alumnus includes both graduates and former students. So I guess Al's still entitled to call himself that if he likes, and it's technically quite correct for him to do so. Esrever 06:09, 23 February 2006 (UTC)\
I think we've accumulated enough notable people with a wikipedia picture to remove Gore and Grant. Esrever, I agree that in some cases an alum can be a non-graduate, but I think it's in our interest to use the strict definition of alums as graduates only. --Ttownfeen 20:55, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't think Kyanka is qualified to be listed on this page. He only attended Vanderbilt for 2 years and he's not really famous.

It doesn't matter that he didn't graduate, as I noted in my edit summary. Al Gore doesn't have a Vanderbilt degree, either, but no one disagrees that he's an alum. You'll notice the intro to that paragraph reads, "Among the notable people who have attended or graduated from Vanderbilt . . ." As to whether he's famous or not, I don't think you can disagree that he's a notable person. He does have a Wikipedia page, after all.  :) Esrever 21:03, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I have replaced the images of alumni that were deleted. These are covered by "fair use" policy. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Fair_use#Images --Zeamays 20:21, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

"Confederate"

Like it or not, the official name of the building is now just Memorial Hall, so it makes no sense to label the picture as "Confederate Memorial Hall." Esrever 14:50, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Photo of Vanderbilt memorial?

Please post a photo of any Vanderbilt memorial monument at the school. Thanx! Americasroof 02:28, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

About the only thing that comes close is the statue of Cornelius Vanderbilt in front of Kirkland on West End. --Ttownfeen 23:08, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your prompt reply. It would be great if you could post an "official" photo of Cornelius. He was one stingy SOB. I will shortly post a photo of his statue at GCT. Vanderbilt University is basically the only big endowment that he gave. Americasroof 03:58, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately, school has ended and most everybody has gone home, so it might be a while before somebody will be able to fulfill your request. --Ttownfeen 17:11, 19 May 2006 (UTC)


"Secret Society"

"As of spring 2006, Vanderbilt's first secret society has been founded. Rumor has it that its name is PRIUS LETUM, when tranlated means 'before death' and is modeled after the Skulls. If this information is correct, then Vanderbilt University would be one of the first non-Ivy League schools to harbor a secret society." It seems to me some Vanderbilt student just formed a secret society and is trying to get its name out there. This passage would appear to be both non-notable and quite possibly incorrect (for one thing, several non-Ivy schools, such as UVA, have much more well-established secret societies and, for another, there is no way to tell if "Prius Letum" is Vanderbilt's first secret society). Thoughts? Schuyler colfax 06:42, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Looks non-notable to me. Most secret societies don't stay really secret for long. If there's any currency to this claim, we'll add it later. For now, I'm deleting it. I don't understand how I failed to notice this being added. --Ttownfeen 07:02, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
Okay, I went ahead and deleted "PRIUS LETUM," as it does seem to be a silly attempt to get some recognition for a "secret society." On a related note, is it even worth it to include the sororities that no longer have active chapters at Vanderbilt? Esrever 16:29, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
My gut instinct would be to take them out, but, again, I'll defer to someone with greater experience. Schuyler colfax 20:55, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
Earlier this month, I was actually looking for information on Greek houses at Vanderbilt that are no longer active. Such information wasn't available from any official university or fraternity source, so I was both happy and surprised to find it here.
I have nothing of real value to add here, but I wanted to agree with the deletion. "one of the first non-Ivy League schools to harbor a secret society"?! Really - it seems to me that just about every University, ivy or not, has had a secret society or two, including UT. http://www.answers.com/topic/secret-society. I wonder if the originator of this language has heard of Phi Beta Kappa - no longer secret, but originally so and from a school that is now public no less.

Sources

Are there any sources for the following:

  • the school still retains a very distinctively Southern feel, much more so than Duke, Emory, Tulane, or Wake Forest, which represent Vanderbilt's closest "Southern" competitors.
This seems like it would be a hard thing to quantify in any way. I think it's got to be based much more on one's own perception (in which case I'd say it's largely true) Esrever 17:18, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
I think that you are right that it is a matter of perception. However, having lived near all but one of these three, I can tell you that there are people at each who think that there school is the exception to a general rule that private Southern schools aren't really Southern. What that means as far as how to edit here, I couldn't necessarily say. Cka3n 19:01, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't think Vanderbilt is as southern as it used to be and that the statement should be removed. It is silly to cite Vandy as being more "southern feeling" that the largest aberrations (Emory, etc). Vanderbilt is definitely more national than the vast majority of the schools in the south. Even other academic elites (ie. Washington and Lee) would be more southern feeling. I'm a current student from the Northeast and the "southern feel" has not been my personal expierence.


  • The Vanderbilt fight song, Dynamite, written by student Francis Craig in 1924, is unique in college sports. (Does this just mean that Vanderbilt is the only school to use Vanderbilt's fight song?)
No clue. I doubt the tune to Dynamite is unique, though the words would almost certainly have to be. Esrever 17:18, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Does the article really need to note that the words about Vanderbilt are unique? Cka3n 19:01, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
No, and it doesn't say that. It notes that the song itself—tune and words—is unique. I don't know if the tune truly is, but that's how it reads to me. Esrever 18:45, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
My point was not that the current version reads that way. My point was that, if the tune is not meaningfully unique, there is no need for language saying the song is unique in some trivial way. Of course the "song" -- tune and words -- is unique: virtually every college's fight song, I'd hazard, is unique. Cka3n 23:26, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
I've got no objection, really. Esrever 04:17, 6 July 2006 (UTC)


Also, are the African-American greek organizations not recognized by the university?

No, African-American greek organizations are recognized by the university under the umbrella organization, NPHC (National Pan-Hellenic Council). --Ttownfeen 16:15, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
The text was edited accordingly. Cka3n 19:01, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

PSK October 2006

I removed a recent edit that added information under Greek Life about "PSK." I don't know whether the information is true or not (it needs a source), but it makes no sense where it's been inserted. I think it's fine to add it back, so long as it has a citation and is put somewhere where it's relevant. Esrever 22:19, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

PSK January 2007

This is the questionable line:

"In the 1960s and 1970s the roster of recognized fraternities included a distinctive locally-based
 organization, PSK, which included a more diverse membership than typical of such groups.[citation needed]"

Three months, no verification. Intriguing. Items in article history:

17:40, 03 October 2006 UTC: added by anonymous user 12.101.11.132 (contribs).
22:16, 08 October 2006 UTC: removed as per post above.
17:56, 15 October 2006 UTC: replaced verbatim by Zeamays (contribs) (talk) (logs).
01:24, 19 October 2006 UTC: {{fact}} tag added.
→ n.b. Contribs analysis suggests that 12.101.11.132 and Zeamays are one and the same.

Most of 707 google hits today for PSK Vanderbilt were for Phase Shift Key/Keying, pre-shared keys, pSK in molecular biology, and the initials P.S.K. used by various people signing posts. Two exceptions were found in Vanderbilt University Archives, Heard Library Annex (listing order, duplicates and years in 'first date / last date' columns in the documents verbatim):

Student Affairs, Record Group 700
PSK (Fraternity) 1967 1971
PSK (Pages, Squires, Knights) - Independent Fraternity 1965 1967
PSK Fraternity 1965 1975
PSK Fraternity 1965 1975
Vanderbilt Plant Operations, Record Group 855
PSK Fraternity - 2507 Kensington Place 1972 1973

Unless and until verifiable and notable facts (i.e. "distinctive"and "more diverse membership than typical" as in the insertions) are established, it should not be in the article. I have removed it. Athænara ✉ 01:52, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

The PSK data is the personal knowledge of the person, a former member, who added it. No citation is needed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zeamays (talk • contribs) 03:34, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Wrong. It is in violation of Wikipedia:No original research, which (with Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:Verifiability as previously cited above) all editors of Wikipedia articles need to read, understand and accept. Æ. ✉ 03:59, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Postscript: These three Wikipedia policy pages commonly referred to as WP:OR, WP:NOTE and WP:VERIFY. Æ. ✉ 04:10, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
A well-known fact that is known to many people in a large group cannot logically be described as "research". It is a fundamental principle of scholarship that well-known facts do not require citations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zeamays (talk • contribs) 16:34, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
↑ Please sign your own posts as per Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages.

Original research is a term used in Wikipedia to refer to material that has not been published by a reliable source. (Statement in WP:OR, quoted verbatim.) The problem here in an encyclopedia, not a blog, is that PSK is not "well-known." An internet search confirmed that it once existed, but the description/characterisation remains unverified.

Note that the information displayed when the cursor hovers over a "[citation needed]" tag is a link. Note these statements in the Wikipedia:Citing sources document to which it links:

"Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Verifiability, which are policy, mandate the provision of sources. Attribution is required ... for material that is challenged or likely to be challenged. Any material that is challenged and for which no source is provided may be removed by any editor." ... "If you don't know how to format the citation, provide as much information as you can, and others may fix it for you. Cite It!"

Provisionally, the PSK item is now in the Fraternities section where it is most pertinent. It is now also included in the disambiguation section on the PSK page. Have you considered writing an encyclopedic "PSK (Pages, Squires, Knights)" article for Wikipedia? Æ. ✉ 01:31, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Zeamays, you removed (diff) the only internet evidence that (1) PSK existed and (2) VU recognised it as "PSK (Pages, Squires, Knights)," and removed the {{fact}} tag which an unsubstantiated description in an encyclopedia article needs. What part of "Encyclopedic content must be verifiable" (stated clearly under every Wikipedia edit box, directly above the edit summary field) is mysterious to you? Athænara ✉ 08:32, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
I've got to agree with Athaenara here. While PSK may indeed have had a glorious history at Vanderbilt, Zeamays's own personal experience doesn't make it verifiable. And without some sort of citeable outside reference source, there's really no proof that it's even notable enough to be included here. Anyone can start a club at Vanderbilt with a minimum of effort, but there's no reason to include those organizations that have neither lasted for a while nor made a significant contribution to the university's history. Indeed, Wikipedia's own definition of "notable" ("A topic is notable if it has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial published works . . .") clearly excludes PSK. I think it should be removed from the article entirely. Esrever 17:02, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Zeamays (diff) again removed the {{fact}} tag. Athænara ✉ 05:21, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

The limits of my tolerance of the obstruction of negotiation in good faith, and the limits of my tolerance of the obstruction of collaborative editing in accordance with clear baseline Wikipedia policies, have been exceeded. I posted the problem on Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts and have removed the item.

Wikipedia's own definition of "notable" ("A topic is notable if it has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial published works . . .") clearly excludes PSK.

Esrever's citation is a bull's eye which deserves large type. Athænara ✉ 10:53, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Approximately half or more of the information on Wikipedia does not have any literary documentation. When something that is added in good faith is repeatedly deleted, it seems that someone has an axe to grind, being selective about where they want to rigidly apply the rules. Perhaps the people who find it so objectionable to add to an article a bit of information about an organization that had a few hundred members over the years of its existence (and so clearly not just my own personal knowledge) do have some axe to grind:
"The limits of my tolerance of the obstruction of negotiation in good faith..."
This seems a bit strong, some might say high-handed, or perhaps your threshold of tolerance is not the same as mine.
In the face of this rigidity and apparent bias, I will stop adding PSK until I have got a suitable document. Since I don't live in Nashville, that will be somewhat inconvenient, but one can estimate that the Vanderbilt Hustler mentioned PSK approximately once or twice each year (more in years it participated in intramural sports), so it should not be difficult for someone with access to the Vandy archives to obtain the necessary proof. Zeamays 18:01, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
It is both inaccurate and unkind to malign as "rigidity" and "bias" the willing efforts which found the (so far only) reference and situated the line in the article appropriately. Athænara ✉ 22:38, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
I have added back to the article the existence of PSK, since that has been verified, and have cited the source (mentioned above). I am concerned that the removal of this fact (which is not a matter of WP:N - that policy deals with articles, not individual facts within an article) may have crossed the line described in WP:POINT, and I ask that it not be removed without further discussion here. (Feel free to edit it with regard to wording.)
I have also posted on the talk page of User:Zeamays a comment regarding that user's interpretation of WP:V and WP:RS and WP:NOR with regards to the description of the fraternity (as opposed to its existence). I suggest that any further discussion on this matter be done there, since the Zeamays has agreed to stop adding PSK to this article with providing a source (and, it's possible, may be satisfied with what I have put back). John Broughton | Talk 19:15, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
I first removed the line several days ago as per the reasoning in Esrever's October post and in the absence, for months, of any substantiation of the description.
Rather than removing it a second time, however (because after all my good faith efforts the {{fact}} tag was still being removed every time it was placed), I should have done nothing further after having asked for intervention.
Thank you for stepping in, it is appreciated. Note: The initials alone, without the full name by which the university recognised it, are an anomaly in a section where all other fraternity and sorority names are given in full. Athænara ✉ 22:41, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
The problem here is you seem to think that the name in full was something other than PSK. But like the "S" in President Truman's name, it actually was just the initials. The "Page, Squire, Knight" was an assumption by some people, but actually not the correct name used by the oranization itself. Just because, for example Phi Beta Kappa is used publicly as the accepted name for ΦΒΚ doesn't mean that an expanded name is accurate for all organizations. You are right, it was an anomoly, but my facts for the name are correct, despite that use in (just) one of the Vanderbilt listings. --Zeamays 16:04, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Radioactive Iron study

This study was conducted at Vanderbilt, and resulted in a barrage of bad publicity for the university when it was finally publicized 50 years later. It might well have a place in the article. The writer of the passage that was recently deleted did not do a very good job of giving the context, though. RivGuySC 04:21, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

The passage noted above was added to the article's History section 21:56, 16 October 2006 UTC, by anonymous unregistered user 64.151.143.84 (contribs):

"On February 2, 1994 the New York Times published an article regarding a lawsuit filed on behalf of 800 pregnant women who were given radioactive iron without their consent or knowledge as part of a nutrition study performed in the late 1940s. Some of the unborn children in the study later died as a result of cancer. On July 27, 1998, federal Judge John T. Nixon gave final approval of a $10.3 million settlement in the case."

Online articles which pertain to it include Vanderbilt University Radiation Class Action (law firm site, detailed discussion of the case) and The Radiation Story No One Would Touch (Columbia Journalism Review, this case among others). The facts of the study and its consequences are encyclopedic (notable and verifiable) and should be addressed with context and references where medical research at VU is discussed in the article. Athænara ✉ 03:04, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
I've tried to put something together about this in the article. Thoughts? Esrever 19:42, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Notes and References

As I added the link to the Chronicle article that talks about VU's newest ranking in faculty scholarly output, I realized that there's not really a coherent set of citations for the article. With that in mind, I tried to standardize the citations I could find, with embedded HTML links in the article, and the use of WP's citation templates under References. If I've screwed something up, please feel free to fix it. Esrever 18:59, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

As a followup to my own note, I think that all the external references are now properly cited in the References section. Esrever 20:48, 10 January 2007 (UTC)


I liked the other Vandy Logo better

It gave the school more of an ivy look. This new logo looks like a cheap sticker sold at the bookstore. how about changing it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.248.172.10 (talk • contribs) 22:51, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree. The one it replaced is the seal of the university. The new one is just a logo.
Zip86 (talk) (contribs) (a user with no other edits under that identity) uploaded it to Wikipedia, added it to the article, and removed the seal.
Perhaps both should be in the article, but a seal deserves more prominence than a logo which is likely to change, as logos often do. — Athænara ✉ 00:41, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Case in point, that's not even the current logo and hasn't been for at least three years. The current logo's the V with the embedded acorn leaf. That's what I orignally put in the infobox way back when. The seal is used sparingly, on diplomas, I think. Otherwise, it's the logo that goes on official university correspondence. --Ttownfeen 00:56, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
For now, I restored the University Seal to the main infobox, and put that logo in the Campus section. If the logo is out of date, perhaps another can be substituted for it. It doesn't look half bad where it is now, but a current one would be better. — Athænara ✉ 01:32, 1 February 2007 (UTC)


Alumni List

Not to demean the list of notable Vandy Alumni, but there has to be more successful people that have graced the halls of Vanderbilt out there. I mean the list is compiled of a lot of famous drop outs or people somewhat associated with the school. This is supposed to be an ivy caliber school. What gives? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.248.172.10 (talk • contribs) February 10, 2007

Be proactive. Find a list of actual alumni who are actually notable. You don't need our permission to bulk up the article. --Ttownfeen 18:38, 11 February 2007 (UTC)


How Prestigious is Vanderbilt

I know its a top 20 but is revered as a Southern Ivy League school like Duke or Rice? Does it have good alumni connections and recognition? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.252.167.85 (talk) 06:16, 28 February 2007 (UTC).

I don't think there's any debate that Vanderbilt is a respected, world-class institution. I'm sure Vandy's alumni connections and recognition are as solid as Rice's, though Duke may perhaps be more recognizable now (a rape case will do that for you). Esrever 22:38, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
Whether it is or isn't is not the scope of this article or wikipedia in general. There are many other websites where these types of issues are discussion. A good one is talk.collegeconfidential.com. --Ttownfeen 01:44, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Well I thought that we could discuss whether or not its prestige should be included in the article. I wanted to know just how prestigious it really is.

redirect

Should Vanderbilt redirect to Vanderbilt University, Vanderbilt family, Cornelius Vanderbilt, or Vanderbilt (disambiguation)? My vote's with the third. --Ttownfeen 17:31, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

If Stanford gets to redirect to Stanford University; Vanderbilt should be allowed to redirect to Vanderbilt University. I'd say the vast majority of people are looking for university information.
Columbia does not redirect to Columbia University. --130.160.203.183 03:16, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Columbia doesn't redirect because there is a country named Columbia. Its the aberration.
Columbia doesn't redirect because there's a greater significance to Columbia beyond just the university. There is no country called Columbia. I'd argue that Vanderbilt University is of greater significance than most anything else bearing the Commodore's name (including himself). Esrever 18:07, 9 April 2007 (UTC)