Talk:Beloit College

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Wisconsin (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wisconsin, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Wisconsin on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Universities (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Universities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of universities and colleges on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.

Dr. Mark Moffett should be added to famous alumni. He is known as the "Indiana Jones of Entomology" and has recently made appearances on Conan O'Brien and The Colbert Report.

you got the wrong tome mcbride on the link he is still alive!

Oscar Mayer[edit]

I thought he just gave money and was not an alum.

His son attended the school, which is why he gave money. I don't recall if the son graduated from Beloit, or if he only attended for a short time. (talk) 03:29, 17 March 2009 (UTC)Former BC tour guide


The text on the subject page came from How do we know it's not a copyright violation? Even if it isn't, is it Wikipedia policy to post material like this? To me the tone doesn't seem quite right for an encyclopedia. -- isis 05:02 Sep 29, 2002 (UTC)

Not all of the material was from the website. Will ensure that no copyright violation exists and report back tomorrow. --Banshee
I agree on both counts; it should be reworded both to to avoid copyright problems and to make it sound less like an advertisement. The history of a college is a fine thing to have in an encyclopedia, but let's make sure it is written from an outsider's point of view, and covers things that would be informative to the general audience. --LDC
All but the first para is a direct copy and paste from the official site. Secretlondon 00:49, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)
The copyvio was apparently deleted. I have written the brief article which is now at Beloit College. Jwrosenzweig 18:33, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Noted subjects[edit]

I strongly question the subjects Beloit is noted for, particluarly everything except antro, creative writing, and International Relations.Barkeep49 03:26, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Why? SReynhout 03:04, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
Now granted it's been 5 years since I really last looked at these books, but when I was looking these were not the subjects mentioned in college guides nor do they conform to my own, admittedly biased, experience. It seems that we would need some sort of authority beyond one's own experience in order to put this in an encyclopedia.Barkeep49 21:39, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Per Barkeep49's question above and the fact that the past few edits have been focused on adding/subtracting "Prominent Departments," maybe we need some sort of standard way of defining what, exactly, makes a department prominent? We should get some citations here; independent groups are better at determining whether a department is notable than the students in those departments. CartesianAngst 08:47, 25 March 2006 (UTC)


I added the NPOV template to the page (trying to be bold and just doing it now without having a big debate on here). I'm doing college research at the moment, and use Wikipedia as a sort of portal to the college's website - I read the overview here and then check out the website. You expect the college website to be biased in its favor but I would hope better for Wikipedia - while the other college articles I've looked at have had positives and negatives, different points of view, this one just lists nothing but positive raw-raw Go Beloit things. I'm not saying Beloit isn't a good school, but I can't imagine that it doesn't have ANY commonly acknowleded flaws. Aerothorn 20:58, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, it is a highly-regarded college, that's hard to get around. I don't think the issue here is that there has been any opinion specifically excluded. In fact I've fixed some over-the-top, unverifiable claims myself, replacing them with documented and published evaluations (like the 40 colleges list). I'm aware of some longstanding issues that generally plague small colleges of the same ilk (e.g. strained town-gown relations, capital shortages, recruitment of minority students & faculty), but that's not necessarily especially notable, and difficult to document in a way that suits the verifiability guidelines. I don't think the issue is "rah rah" so much as editors with information not coming forward; that doesn't mean we have anything to change, and it's a sketch unfair to tell people to go out and find bad news rather than volunteering it yourself. Thus, unless you have specific claims you're disputing, or specific wording criticisms you would like to see changed, I think the tag is inappropriate. --Dhartung | Talk 21:45, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
I know it's a highly regarded college - but so are the other ones I looked at, and the articles do not contain nearly as many positive adjectives. It seems that this article either needs to go a lot more in depth ala Sarah Lawrence College, so as to avoid the sort of positive generalizations this article is filled with, or it could devote a section to any controversies in the school, ala Clark University.
No, I don't have any specific points to dispute, because I don't go to Beloit and am not an expert on it - that's why I came to the article. I will remove the NPOV tag, I suppose, as I don't have any specific points of contention other then the fact that the article includes every positive thing it can possibly think of (Beloit students broke a frisbee record!) without anything negative or even neutral/controversial. Aerothorn 17:54, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
Your complaint doesn't make any sense, just because there are no bad headlines about Beloit we should go look for them? user:danieljluebke 15:33, 8 April 2007 (UTC)


Why is Beloit College called a Private University instead of Private Liberal Arts College in the box to the right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:00, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Corrected. Not sure how long that's been there; it may have been chosen because Beloit has offered a Master's in Education in the past, but that seems to have been discontinued in 1996; the accreditation profile of the school shows no graduate degrees or students in other departments. --Dhartung | Talk 02:26, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Prominent Alumni[edit]

This section should be examined following recent vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Armenite (talkcontribs) 23:31, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Notable faculty members?[edit]

The section lists 20+ staff as 'notable', when not one of them has a Wikipedia entry. Can someone objectively cut this section down to those that might genuinely be considered noteworthy, or delete it entirely. (talk) 10:36, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Mindset list[edit]

The non-notable list might be mentioned in this article. I doubt it, but I'm open to suggestions. It doesn't seem to have adequate notability to live on its own. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 18:43, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Why is this list non-notable? It makes no sense to put it here and it is definitely notable enough to stand alone. Try a simple google search of "The Mindset List". It's mentioned by scores of newspapers and media outlets annually. Joeklein (talk) 22:11, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
Little evidence of notability has been provided, although the Google search lends credence to notability (and to it having been genericised, so that the trademark is invalid.) — Arthur Rubin (talk) 01:09, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
I admit I'm jumping into this discussion midstream but "little evidence of notability"?
As Joeklein said, it's picked up by major and minor news outlets every year, specifically citing Beloit College as the originator. Doesn't that alone pass the qualifications for Notability? StellarFury (talk) 21:04, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Due to a seeming lack of interest in the discussion regarding the mindset list, and due to notability being established, I'm going to remove the merge suggestion.Joeklein (talk) 18:12, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm reverting. Notability has not been established, although it has been suggested by the evidence, and lack of discussion was primary due to lack of arguments against merging. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 19:05, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

2008 elections[edit]

An editor is insisting on mentioning that Chewbacca received 5 votes. There are three reasons why I removed this. The first is that it seems statistically like a non-notable event (2% of the votes cast), especially when a few "joke" votes seems to be written in every election over the past few years. Second, there were write-ins for other "joke" candidates: Boba Fett, Richard Nixon, Yogi Bear, Dr. Who, Sarah Palin's Downs Syndrome baby, Barack Obama and Satan. Third, Satan received four votes for President and was thus the highest write-in vote-getter for any one office. So, a) why are we including "joke" write-in votes, none of which garnered more than 2% of the total vote across all offices, and b) why, if we are going to include one, are we including only Chewbacca and not including them all -- including eligible write-ins like other students?--Lhakthong (talk) 04:02, 28 October 2010 (UTC)