Talk:Ohio State University

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article nominee Ohio State University was a Social sciences and society good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
October 6, 2007 Good article nominee Not listed
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Universities (Rated B-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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
Note icon
This article is currently the Collaboration of the Month.
WikiProject United States / Ohio (Rated B-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Ohio.
WikiProject Glass (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Glass, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of glass 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
edit·history·watch·refresh Stock post message.svg To-do list for Ohio State University:




Ohio State University vs The Ohio State University[edit]

Okay. Here's a suggestion for a compromise. Instead of demanding that the "The" be either added or stricken entirely, we should remain objective. How about this: in the first sentence of the article, it is referred as "Ohio State Univeristy" but then goes on to say "(commonly referred to as Ohio State, OSU, or The Ohio State University)". This acknowledges the presence of its title while remaining neutral. The general public knows Ohio State as Ohio State University, while insiders know it as "The Ohio State University" for various reasons. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeffrey S (talkcontribs) 23:58, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

The way I see it, the title of the article should be named as the subject is most regularly referred. See Honda or Chrysler and not their entire names as examples. The true name of the subject is The Ohio State University (I hope no one is stubborn enough to make me prove that). The full name of the subject should be mentioned in the article and not as "commonly referred to" but as its true name. From this current version, the only thing that I think should change is the name over the seal in the info box. OlYellerTalktome 18:37, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
It should be The Ohio State University. Any Buckeye will tell you that. Its not a made up name, its on every piece merchandise about the school.--Jojhutton (talk) 18:46, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
I agree. Everything says "The Ohio State University". Look at the logo. Look at the LAW! The wiki rule says that if it's frequently used then we can put "The" in the title and for debate to be this fiery it's obvious that "The" is used. People against the move are probably from rival schools. Le Douche? But of course! (talk) 17:08, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Comment I'll buy that the real name is "The Ohio State University" and also buy that many people call it "Ohio State University" and/or "Ohio State" -- but the question comes to what should the article be called? Here's a few examples:

  1. Homer Woodson Hargiss (his full real name) was often called "Bill Hargiss"
  2. James Earl Carter, Jr. (his full real name) went by Jimmy Carter

There are countless examples where one subject has a "full" name and the article is named after the "common" name of the subject, and then there are countless other articles where the "full" name is the article name. And the bottom line is that none of it matters--what matters is what does consensus think we should do with this article?--Paul McDonald (talk) 20:18, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

William Marshall Rice University and Leland Stanford, Junior University are the full and official names of other universities, it doesn't mean they are the names of the article. As a point of reference, the Dept. of Education, Carnegie Foundation, and NCACS accrediation all refer to Ohio State University without a "The". Madcoverboy (talk) 22:16, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Comment I agree with Jeffrey's suggestion. Enigmamsg 22:25, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
It seems to me that any school should be listed by its official name. Redirects should be used to remove any confusion. I don't think anyone would be shocked to search for "Ohio State University" and be ridirected to "THE Ohio State University". Moreover, when in use in discussion in other articles, the university should be mentioned using the official name. By naming the article the official way, you users can simply wikilink the name like this: [[The Ohio State University]], rather than this: [[Ohio State University|The Ohio State University]] or, even worse, this: The [[Ohio State University]].
As for the other University examples given, I posit that the school articles SHOULD be listed using their formal name with redirects used as needed. The same logic follows University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. There are many colloquial terms for this school ("UNC," "Chapel Hill," "Carolina," etc.) but the article is literally University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, even though that is rarely the common usage in conversation.
Moreover, what is "common" in one area or to one person may be something completely different in another area or to someone else. For example although most people might attribute "Carolina" with University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, many alumni of University of South Carolina, people in the area of Columbia, SC, and people associated with other schools in the Southeastern Conference would disagree. The same can be said for "USC" (University of Southern California vs. University of South Carolina).++Arx Fortis (talk) 14:57, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
I suggest you review the relevant Wikipedia guideline on common names before insisting that the official name be used. As I pointed out above, several reliable sources (including the organization accrediting the university) already refer to the university without the prefixed article. Madcoverboy (talk) 15:32, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
FWIW, Google bombing to assess common name usage reveals that "The Ohio State University" returns ~3.9m hits while "Ohio State University" returns ~10.2m hits. Although it is not the case here, for ambiguous acronyms such as USC, that query appropriately returns a disambiguation page. Madcoverboy (talk) 15:41, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
School names change (regarding the name at accreditation). If the situation wasn't ambiguous, we wouldn't still be having this conversation. The school identifies itself with the prefix and the US gov't recognizes the prefix as can be seen on tax forms. If we want to actually move forward with this conversation, I think we need to decide if its 'official' name even matters and what we define as 'official' because those seem to be the two points of contention. OlYellerTalktome 15:48, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
(At Madcoverboy)The Common naming convention is a good idea, but there are too many assumptions being made here. First, Madcoverboy seems to assume that what he/she considers the common name for the school, is what everyone else assumes is the common name. Not only is that not true, but historically, this has been a problem for like, ever. Secondly, Madcoverboy, assumes that wikipedia policies are binding, and not subject to interpretation. I can most likely safely say that just about every policy and guideline on wikipedia has seen a "consensus overrule" at some point or another.
Now, this seems to be more or less a POV issue, rather than a straight up and down issue or common name conventions. As so, since the local common name, as well as the official name of the school is THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY, common sense dictates that the full official and local common name be used.--Jojhutton (talk) 16:53, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
I am assuming nothing, I'm simply stating extant consensus, operant guidelines, and facts from the world at large. User:Jojhutton has just articulated the I just don't like it argument for overturning stable Wikipedia guidelines. I don't believe anyone is disputing its official name is "The Ohio State University". This is stated unambiguously in the first sentence. The issue is whether or not the title of the primary article should include "the". Wikipedia guidelines specify that the common name used by reliable sources, rather than official name, should be the name used for the article. Given that the Department of Education, Carnegie Foundation, and NCACS all refer to the university without the "the" and clear preferences of approximately 7 million websites referring to it sans-"the", the common name of the university clearly has no "the" and thus the article should remain named exactly as it is now. Madcoverboy (talk) 17:03, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
In my opinion, the 'sense' can't fundamentally be 'common' if a discussion spanning a few years can't be concluded. Like I said, let's discuss what our definitions of 'common' and 'official'. Is 60%/40% no-prefix/prefix mean common or does it need to be 80%/20%? The percentages are representation of whatever metric we determine. If we decide that we'd like to use the official name because the common name is too ambiguous, is 'official' determined by the highest gov't body's usage, the school's usage, publications' usage, etc.? Like I mentioned before, the IRS and OSU use the prefix but Macoverboy showed that the body that gave OSU its accreditation and some other large gov't bodies don't use the prefix. We're all basically spouting out (presumably) facts without actually getting anywhere. I'll start a new section with a more structured discussion when I get some time today. OlYellerTalktome 17:11, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
(undent) WP:COMMONNAME clearly states: "Common usage in reliable sources is preferred to technically correct but rarer forms, whether the official name..." Again, to the extent that there needs to be any more discussion, it should ensure that the article is titled in a way that reflects the common usage in reliable sources. As I stated before, no one is disputing the official name. Madcoverboy (talk) 17:20, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
No Change as per Madcoverboy and others, WP:COMMONNAME is very clear use Ohio State University. The Ohio State University already redirects to the page so Arx Fortis's point about easy linking is moot. Codf1977 (talk) 17:48, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Change as per Jojhutton and others, I don’t believe WP:COMMONNAME is as clearcut as some may have us believe. It also states, “Do not place definite or indefinite articles (the, a and an) at the beginning of titles unless they are part of a proper name…” (emphasis mine), and the legal, official and proper name is The Ohio State University. Hammersbach (talk) 18:16, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
But you have to look at the examples given on WP:COMMONNAME-Bill Clinton (not "William Jefferson Clinton"), Snoop Dogg (not "Cordozar Calvin Broadus"), Hulk Hogan (not "Terry Gene Bollea") and Venus de Milo (not "Aphrodite of Melos") coupled with the banner on the main website which omits the The, and the results from google analysis by Madcoverboy ("The Ohio State University" returns ~3.9m hits vs "Ohio State University" returns ~10.2m hits.) all point to the common name being "Ohio State University". Codf1977 (talk) 08:52, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Good examples, and bad, for both sides can be found all over wickedlypedia. 3.9m Hits on Google, while not the most, clearly show that its use is common. Hammersbach (talk) 13:14, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Point of order Should this discussion be listed on WP:RM? Madcoverboy (talk) 19:33, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
My comments about the official name are with regards to the direction this conversation usually takes. If it's not disputed, that's great. The only reason I'm hesitant to apply WP:COMMONNAME is the section that says, "..technically correct but rarer forms." I interpret this to be talking about situations where the technically correct name is used far less often than the common name. Also in this case, the the commonality of both methods is disputed and should be addressed more adequately. In my opinion, determining a metric off the bat would be the best method of determining 'common' in this case. As for listing the discussion at WP:RM, I don't really care either way. If we don't have enough editors here to come to a intelligent consensus, then maybe we should list it there. The problem I usually see happen is that many editors who are unfamiliar with WP guidelines/policies get involved and try to turn it into a vote. I'd like to keep the discuss informed unless we need more eyes but I wouldn't say we should attempt to hide the discussion in any way. OlYellerTalktome 20:03, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
OlYeller, since you have suggested (three times now) that a "metric" be established, would it be possible for you to maybe take a swing of the bat and actually recommend one? Hammersbach (talk) 13:14, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Ya, I realize I've been doing a lot of talk and not backing it up. I've been pretty busy the last two days and haven't gotten the time to start it out. Sorry about that. I'll get to it within the next two hours. OlYellerTalktome 13:36, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
If you check google images under "ohio state university", you'll see that the school itself can't decide what its "common name" is. For example, note this basketball game shot.[1] Their shirts most definitely do not say "THE Ohio State". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 13:57, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Ya, adding "THE" would cost extra.--Jojhutton (talk) 15:01, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
They also don't say "University"... your evidence is anecdotal at best. You could show the same with a huge number of other school sports' uniforms. OlYellerTalktome 14:59, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
I agree. The position that a T-shirt would always use an official name is unsound. By that logic, Clemson University would just be "Clemson." University of Southern California would simply be "USC." Examples abound. ++Arx Fortis (talk) 16:16, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
  • Comment I still think the common name is Ohio State University. Certainly the official name is "The Ohio State University", and that's duly noted. However, this article certainly should not be moved until someone can prove that "The..." is the common name. Everything I've seen points to "Ohio State University" as the more common usage. Enigmamsg 17:25, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Thgeneral, 20 June 2010[edit]


In the athletics section, there is the sentence, "Ohio State is one of only three universities (the University of Michigan and the University of California at Berkeley being the others) to have won national championships in all three major men's sports (baseball, men's basketball, and football)."

It leaves out the fact that Stanford University has also won a title in all three sports. Football, 1926 Basketball, 1942 Baseball, 1987 and 1988

Thgeneral (talk) 18:11, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Sources please, before I change it? CTJF83 pride 05:18, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
Feel free to restore the editsemiprotected tag when these souces have been provided. Thanks. Set Sail For The Seven Seas 216° 24' 30" NET 14:25, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
The proper source is, with the histories of the individual sports (lists of annual champions) being at .../history/baseball/d1, .../history/basketball/d1, and .../history/football/fbs. Since it was unprotected, I made the change w/cite. GWFrog (talk) 20:04, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Prefix or No Prefix[edit]

FYI, I have informed everyone that I could find that has recently taken part in this discussion and informed them that the discussion is taking place. I don't want to tell you want to do but I'd like to request that we steer clear of any WikiLawyering or incivility. I feel that we have a pretty competent group here for this discussion and I'd like to see this discussion come to a strong conclusion so that we can put this to rest. OlYellerTalktome 15:23, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

“I'm going to wait to add my own opinion until the discussion gets started.” Actually OlYeller, since this is your idea I think we would all benefit if you were to be the first to offer up an opinion. Hammersbach (talk) 16:13, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Fair enough. I'll go type it out it my next edit. OlYellerTalktome 16:53, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Added below. OlYellerTalktome 17:08, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Definition of Common[edit]

Per WP:COMMONNAME, "Articles are normally titled using the most common English-language name of the subject of the article." meaning that the commonly used name should be used for this article. I'm not sure that the pasted definition can be argued but the definition of common seems to be disputed so I would like to try and reach a consensus on a metric that determines what the definition of 'common' is (i.e. how many Google hits it receives, how its used most by reliable sources, etc.). OlYellerTalktome 15:08, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Metric Discussion[edit]

I think it would be best if we try to discuss this metric in terms larger than that of this article. We're obviously not setting a precedent for all of WP here but I think it's the best way to come to a consensus. Please discuss your opinions here and we can create a list of criteria for the metric in the section below. OlYellerTalktome 15:08, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

I feel that there are a few ways to determine the definition of 'common' regarding the name of an article. Per WP:COMMONNAME, "determining what this name is, we follow the usage of reliable sources, such as those used as references for the article." which in my opinion implies that only reliable sources are to be used when determining the common name. To me, that means that the number of Google search hits that a name receives is not to be used when determine how common a name is. I'm not saying that anyone suggested it was the best way but I think it's best to be clear that it not be included at all in the metric. The next step, in my opinion, would be to determine how we would measure the usage of each name by reliable sources. Books and newspapers would be the easiest to check but we obviously won't be able to get a census of the usage. That being the case, my schooling would tell me to take a random sample of a predetermined number of reliable sources, find their usage, and use that information to determine to a certain degree that one name is used more than another. In short, my first point in the metric criteria would be something to the effect of "A random sample of reliable newspapers and books is to be taken to find which name is used more than the other (The OSU or OSU). We may be able to try and swing a census with a Google Books search and Google News Archive search but that's not really my expertise. Point to would be something like, "The reliable sources that are randomly sampled are to be published between date X and date Y" so that the most common name at the time could be used. Any thoughts? OlYellerTalktome 17:06, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
I don't really know what is going on with all these sections, so I'll just post here. Google News "the+ohio+state+university"&cf=all returns ~26,300 results for "The" and "ohio+state+university"&cf=all ~123,000 results without "the". Given the general Google web search results above as well as the accreditation, Dept. of Ed, and Carnegie Foundation sources I pointed out, I haven't seen a whole lot of evidence to the contrary regarding the institution's common name. Madcoverboy (talk) 22:20, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the input. So then regarding the metric, your opinion is that pure Google News hits is the best way to determine 'common'? OlYellerTalktome 13:20, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
I've added two criteria to help others understand this discussion format. I would have liked to have waited to add to that section until the discussion was fleshed out in more detail. Is there really no one that has seen this format before? OlYellerTalktome 13:20, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
I didn't say that pure Google News is the best way. I've already demonstrated that 3 undisputably reliable sources, Google web search, and now Google news all present very clear evidence about what is the common name of the university. Since no editor has presented either guideline or factual evidence to refute my claims about the obvious common name of the university, I don't see why the goalposts keep shifting towards more baroque means of determining the common name. What is left to discuss? Madcoverboy (talk) 13:29, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
For the record, Google Books has ~1.1 million [2] without and ~560,000 [3] with. What's next? Madcoverboy (talk) 13:34, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Are you suggesting that a Google Web search is a reliable source or are you suggesting that every use it finds is from a reliable source? I hope that I don't have to explain to you that both cases are incorrect. You also don't-say that Google News is the best way to determine common then immediately say that it should be used. If you don't think it's the best way, what do you think is? If we follow your criteria, the article should be called "Ohio State" because it returns 722k news hits (the other two uses were excluded as "Ohio State" would show up in the other two as well). As "Ohio State" doesn't adequately describe what the article is (is it an article about the state of Ohio?), I don't see that WP:COMMONNAME can be used. It seems that you think that this is a simple discussion and it's most obviously not or this issue wouldn't consistently brought up; it would have been solved years ago. The metric and the discussion on it are to determine a way to eradicate opinions from the discussion and follow facts. We can call it a guideline if that's more familiar to you. OlYellerTalktome 13:45, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Please don't use straw man arguments. Madcoverboy (talk) 13:54, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
You're deflecting. I'm sorry if I've made you defensive, if that is in fact what you're being (I'm not trying to put words in your mouth). Can you answer any of the questions I've presented? OlYellerTalktome 13:59, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
(edit conflict)Note - The section below is for criteria that has been decided upon in this discussion. The only reason I added anything was because you didn't understand this discussion format which is widely used in the business world. You apparently agree with two of the criteria though so I left those. OlYellerTalktome 13:59, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I removed the accredidation body from the criteria because it's only one body and by definition cannot determine common. Common would at least be determined by its used by more than one person/organization. I also removed Google Search hits because the search itself is not a reliable source and it's not a search of all reliable sources (most likely there are relatively few reliable sources in a Google Search, in my opinion). OlYellerTalktome 14:01, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Please don't use straw man arguments: no where have I advocated that an article should be named solely by the most popular relevant Google search term. Your suggestion that I have is a discredit to your otherwise good-faith attempts to build consensus on this trivial and easily decided issue. Madcoverboy (talk) 13:54, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
So you unilaterally get to decide what is or is not evidence? You also get to decide whether I'm making good faith attempts at consensus? No where have I advocated that an article should be named solely by the most popular relevant Google search term. Your attempts to distort my arguments and suggestions that (1) I fail to understand the complexity of the discussion and (2) would suggest employing such a facile criteria is a discredit to your otherwise good-faith attempts to build consensus on this trivial and easily decided issue. I leave it to other editors now to refute the evidence I have provided because it's obvious that editors can't decide this without resorting to bad faith assumptions. Madcoverboy (talk) 13:54, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
I would offer that the assumption that this is an "easily decided issue" is rather flawed given that it has been debated for quite some time now... Hammersbach (talk) 14:18, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
No I don't unilaterally get to decide but you don't either. As you (1 person) and I (1 person) disagree, I don't see how it can be added. I never implied that you're doing something in bad faith; I'm not understanding where I could be perceived as doing that. I'm not trying to distort your arguments and don't see that I have. If I'm misunderstanding, please help me to understand; that's all I've been trying to do. Again, I'm sorry if you feel attacked; that wasn't my intention at all. We disagree on some points but let's not be disagreeable. I'll be back after a few hours or tomorrow. OlYellerTalktome 14:26, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Metric Criteria[edit]

  1. Take the number of Google News hits per name and see which name is used more often.
Yes check.svg Done Without prevails. Madcoverboy (talk) 13:38, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
  1. Take the number of Google Books hits per name and see which name is used more often.
Yes check.svg Done Without prevails. Madcoverboy (talk) 13:38, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Official Name[edit]

Discussions never seem to reach a consensus on what the official name of the University is. I sort of hope that we don't have to get this far but this section is dedicated to determining a metric for the official name if we get to that point. OlYellerTalktome 15:08, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

According to the university's own FAQ page, the name was officially changed to "The Ohio State University" in 1878 as mentioned here. Common usage, including within the university, dropped the "The" but in recent years the University has re-claimed the "The." Thus, I do not see how the official name of "The Ohio State University" can be in debate. The question at-hand is whether or not this article should be labeled with or without the "The." ++Arx Fortis (talk) 16:06, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Right. There have been arguements that WP:COMMONNAME should be ignored and the official name used. I agree about the official name but others have had differing opinions in the past. Again, we can probably ignore this section for now if not completely. I only added it so that discussions about what the official name is wouldn't be included in the discussion on the common name. As I see it, they're two totally separate conversations. OlYellerTalktome 16:56, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
No, I don't think that there was any real question of the official name. Its clear from the website, its only about common name usage. But, what some consider the common name of the school, may not not what others consider the common name. Local common name should be greatly considered over what may be common in say, Northern Michigan.--Jojhutton (talk) 17:17, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Check out the archives. I don't really have time to find the discussions for you. OlYellerTalktome 17:22, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
(edit conflict) I agree with Arx Fortis in that there is no question about the Official Name, but the common name is IMO just "Ohio State University" - if you were to ask 100 English speaking persons across the globe "Name a university in Ohio" the answer you would get is "Ohio State University", I also accept if you asked 100 residents of Columbus the same question you would almost certainly get more answering with the "The" included. But the name that is used commonly in the English seeking parts of the globe is with out the "The". Codf1977 (talk) 17:24, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
I mean no offense to you but your opinion about how the globe names the subject is irrelevant. For one, it's an opinion based on no stated facts and all I have to do is disagree with you and we're both not-wrong and back where we started. The metric is to help end this discussion with evidence. Again, the official name doesn't matter right now; your reply probably should have been in the section above. OlYellerTalktome 17:29, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

THE Ohio State University in the lead[edit]

Although, as one editor stated in a recent Edit summery, this has been gone over time and time again, the editor must be mistaken as each of the discussions that the editor must be referring to, have been regarding the article's title or name. The article name is and always has been the common name per WP:Name. As it should be. Yet the lead sentence should be the official name of the school. This would be consistent with just about every single article on wikipedia pertaining to colleges and Universities. Here are 15 examples:

University of Notre Dame, UCLA, Rutgers University, University of Alabama, University of Texas at Austin, Pennsylvania State University (which is similar to this article), UCSD, University of Miami, The College of William & Mary, Stanford University, United States Military Academy, University of Oklahoma, Florida A&M University, University of Southern Mississippi, and University of South Dakota.

So please explain why this article should be the only United States College or University article on wikipedia that does not begin the lead with the official name of the school. Putting it back in to be consistent with every other article--Jojhutton (talk) 00:49, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Want to finish the above conversation so we can put this issue to sleep and have the ability to just point at a link instead of having to write out replies like this? I'm not saying I agree or disagree but I think it would make things easier on all of us to have a conclusive conversation that we can just point to when newbies come editing? OlYellerTalktome 14:55, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
What Conversation???? This is about the lead sentence. Is there a reason why this article should be the only article that does not begin the lead with the official schools name? And whose sock puppet ip, who just made a revert, are we dealing with now? Like I said before, Duck, Duck, Goose.--Jojhutton (talk) 18:35, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
Relax guy. I agree that it should begin with the school's official name but apparently someone others don't (or one person if I follow your socking theory despite the lack of presented evidence). A discussion which concludes with a consensus would allow us to place an edit notice on this page regarding the The so the 2-3 years of bullshit regarding the The can finally end. History shows that a simple discussion will not result in a consensus so I suggest continuing (and possibly expanding) the discussion above. What says you? OlYellerTalktome 18:41, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, I was in my "Being ganged up on" hat. Its difficult to tell when there are so many "stinky socks" in the drawer. I began this section with the intent of using it as dispute resolution. I am aware of the two above discussions, but they appear to be about the articles name, and I didn't want the lead section discussion to be clumped up with that one, because some people seem to not be able to differentiate between the two. Those other discussuins seem to have stalled, as they usually do, so if this discussion focuses on this just one topic (the lead only), then it should go much smoother.
Also, no one person has ever denied that the official school name is The Ohio State University. Every single other school has its official name in the lead, but I have already stated this, so why is this one being reverted so much?--Jojhutton (talk) 19:03, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

The article stood like this until Jojo switched it on sep 8. everyone was fine until then. [4] Husounde (talk) 15:09, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

it's because it not how articles on colleges and universities are written. Please state why you think this should be the only single article on wikipedia that does not feature the official name in the lead. The question was posed, but you failed to come up with a reason before reverting. You just changed it for no policy reason.--Jojhutton (talk) 21:52, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

This discussion on the official name in the lead is still open. If anyone would like to chime in as to why this article should be the only article on wikipedia that does not begin the lead with the schools official name, any suggestion would be appreciated. But just reverting and saying "I don't like it", or "thats how the article was before.." or "get consensus", without communicating on the talk page your opinion is becoming disruptive. This section has been opened for two weeks now, and so far only two other editors beside myself have officially stated opinions on the subject.--Jojhutton (talk) 18:38, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Most articles on WP open with the article name, so I don't think your point is well made, as far as I can see either opening is valid, but leaning towards the pre Sept 6th version. This is not something to which you should edit war over, as far as I see there is no consensus to make the change and WP:BOLD comes into pay and think that Jojhutton should revert until a clear consensus supporting any change emerges. Codf1977 (talk) 18:49, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
It appears that the evidence brought forward on Universities seems to contradict the article name in the lead theory. Why should this be the only article that does not follow that pattern?--Jojhutton (talk) 18:54, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
cos sometimes that is how things are, there does not appear to be a consensus for your wording - so banging on with the same point is not going to help, it is not a NPOV issue or a factual problem, it is a copy-editing difference, not worth getting worked up about or getting a block over. Codf1977 (talk) 19:02, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
Who said antything about getting worked up or a block? Its a consistancy issue with similar articles, plain and simple. No reason to have this article be the only article that doesn't follow that pattern, unless one is just trying to be pointy. The reason, I feel, that this article gets this type of attention from so many is that Ohio State has so many haters who try and use wikipedia as a way to detract from the school in any way they can. Its the same with many BLPs. That is why we use WP:BLP as a policy to keep the POV to a minimum, but when it comes to schools, there is no such policy to point to. Its not NPOV to single out this article as a way to detract from the school. If the other articles follow this pattern, as has already been established, then this should as well. If you want a policy to state this as fact, I'm sure one can be written, otherwise the pointiness needs to halt and we need to move on.--Jojhutton (talk) 19:15, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
you need to accept that consensus is against you. Husounde (talk) 21:07, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
And what consensus are you referring to? I believe that for consistancies sake, the overall majority consensus appears to agree that ALL college articles should begin the lead with the school's official name. Can you find a consensus that may say otherwise?--Jojhutton (talk) 23:34, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
No, the consensus on THIS ARTICLE is against you. Look at the article history and stop with the consistency arguments. the article is full protected because you keep edit warring against consensus. Husounde (talk) 15:24, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
consensus in article history. did you not notice that you were the only one changing it to your version, against a bunch of varied accounts and IPs? Husounde (talk) 15:29, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

While you work this through, I've protected the article so it maintains some stability. GedUK  21:28, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

SOLVED I just flipped a coin. It came up "heads", which means the article is "Ohio State University" and the lead sentence in the article is "The Ohio State University" ... that's about the only way we'll ever get closure on this issue is with a coin toss and everyone to buy into it.--Paul McDonald (talk) 02:10, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

I guess that's one way to do it it, although I'm not sure all will buy into it. I of course agree with your final assessment, with the title of the article being the common name, while the official name begins the lead, just as every other collegearticle does.Jojhutton (talk) 02:55, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
no, it should go back to way it was before jojhutton started edit warring with everyone to get his version in. Husounde (talk) 15:29, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
Its not "my version" its the correct and consistent version. Its the only version that is consistent with all other similar articles.--Jojhutton (talk) 23:37, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
But does not reflect the consensus of other editors - so it should be reverted to the pre-jojhutton state. Codf1977 (talk) 16:41, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
What consensus?--Jojhutton (talk) 16:46, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
By my reading you are the only editor that that is advocating the change. Codf1977 (talk) 17:21, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
So User:OlYeller21 and User:Paulmcdonald do not count, is that what you are saying? Besides, consenus isn't a vote, its based on interpretation of policy, guidelines, and precedent.--Jojhutton (talk) 18:32, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── well User:OlYeller21 says "I'm not saying I agree or disagree" and User:Paulmcdonald is not advocating anything other than the line his coin took.Codf1977 (talk) 18:39, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Next time provide a link before you misquote someone or take their words out of context. Heres a diff to look at, and its not out of context.] And as far as PaulMcDonald, you don't get to decide how others come to their conclusions.--Jojhutton (talk) 18:50, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
here's a link [5] Husounde (talk) 15:25, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
As someone who hasn't actually been in this discussion previously and rarely if ever puts in any edits other than fixing vandalism, I offer the following: would it help with consensus at all if, say, I pointed out that 1) I agree entirely with User:Jojhutton's actions to maintain consistency, and 2) that I haven't made such edits myself only because Jojhutton usually got to it before I did? (My suspicion is that the answer is "no, it doesn't help much; this is not a popularity contest or vote"). The point remains, however, that for largely inexplicable reasons there are folks who make a point of excluding the "The" from Ohio State's name as a veiled insult, and so sticking to consistency is arguably a Good Idea. And the evidence so far shows that the consistent approach is to have the full name in the article lead. Accusing one guy of fighting a one-man edit war while not showing any non-ad hominem evidence for your position seems to me to not be in the spirit of WP:AGF. Just a thought. --Viqsi (talk) 23:35, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
  • I've looked through this, and can come to no other conclusion but that the article should have "The" in its title, as should the lead paragraph. It's the common usage, and how I got to this article in the first place. It looks very much like Jojhutton is simply edit-warring against consensus, so this page shouldn't be protected, and if Jojhutton continues, s/he should simply be blocked. Lithistman (talk) 19:23, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Still there is no policy or guideline reason given for the POV removal of words from the official name of the school, causing this article to be the only single article that does not have the official name in the lead. Jojhutton (talk) 18:37, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

A discussion on this topic has begun at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Universities.--Jojhutton (talk) 11:22, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

The consensus at the project is to have consistency among the articles, so it should be corrected at the earliest possible moment.--Jojhutton (talk) 16:34, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Still don't see where jojhutton has consensus. It was all settled until he started changing it in August. Husounde (talk) 22:22, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Welcome back. A lot happens when you don't edit for 5 months. The consensus was achieved at the University Wiki-project. The consensus was for article consistency and for all the article titles be the common name, and the "official name" in the lead.--Jojhutton (talk) 00:52, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

{{editprotected}} WikiProject Universities appears to have reached a consensus that university articles should start with the full official name of the university (at least, there hasn't been any further debate on the topic after this was suggested and agreed to by two others present - see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Universities#Article_consistency for the discussion, which is about three and a half weeks old). Jojhutton, two weeks ago, pointed out the results of this discussion on this talk page (immediately above this request, in fact), and there has been no dissenting comment since. I therefore wish to formally request that the opening sentence of this article be changed to the following:

The Ohio State University, commonly referred to as Ohio State or OSU, is a public research university located in Columbus, Ohio.

Thanks! --Viqsi (talk) 04:25, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Not done: {{edit protected}} is not required for edits to unprotected pages, or pending changes protected pages. Avicennasis @ 06:58, 8 Kislev 5771 / 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Harmonization. The question of whether "The" belongs at the front of a name is an irresolvable issue in terms of whatever an institution is free to call itself. But Wikipedia, in its titling, needs to adhere to a common practice. It is a matter of grammatical parallelism. When professional writers form a list, they don't make some headwords in the entries nouns, some verbs, some prepositions, etc., nor do they start some of the noun phrases without "The" and some with it. Besides "The Ohio State University," other institutions have similarly designated their names ("The Pennsyvania State University," "The University of Southern Mississippi"). That is their business. But Wikipedia needs one consolidated, consistent, predictable practice in its listings. Failure to adhere to parallelism (including bypassing of "The" as the first word) will contribute to bedlam or an impression of it. Perhaps the thoughtful people who insist on "The Ohio State University" can be satisfied if the title of this article becomes "Ohio State University, The." If that's the only way out of the dark, I'm for it. Putting "The" at the front of this name is not a consistent option unless it is done for all other institutional names. Rammer (talk) 16:00, 20 September 2011 (UTC)


To the anon ip who is reverting against consensus. Its BOLD, REVERT, DISCUSS...., not BOLD, REVERT, REVERT BACK. Making changes without reason and removing content without explanation is considered vandalism and could and should be reverted.--Jojhutton (talk) 20:46, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

That's User: I left a user talk message for him/her. (talk) 21:40, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Sports controversy[edit]

I pretty much said it in my edit summaries, but if they haven't been seen: it should be mentioned, but not in its own section and as lengthy as it is now. Move the info to other articles as necessary. In addition, the POV tag comes from the last paragraph- the SI article is taken as fact here, but it has come under fire: 1, 2, 3, for example. SpencerT♦C 23:07, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

There are users on here who continue to decide to leave up "cited" but incorrect articles. If Time runs a slanderous article, that is proven incorrect, do we still cite it? No we do not. An article for a lawsuit against and then showing that no violations occurred, seconded by the NCAA, proving that these activities did not happen and if they would have been proven true, they would be punished, which they are not. Therefore, the quote should be removed. OSU is innocent until proven guilty, not guilty by one sports illustrated article, then innocent only by public opinion. dabucks (talk) 16:33, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Buckeyeboydabucks (talk) 16:33, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Verifiability, not truth. And I'm particularly disturbed by the idea that you believe a lawsuit making allegations is sufficient evidence for...well, anything but the fact that there is a lawsuit and the parties disagree. With that said, this section does need to be shortened considerably in this article and if this material is removed as part of an effort to address WP:DUE - and it almost certainly should since it's quite detailed - then I'm ok with that.
In the future, it would be helpful if you provided more information in your edit summaries, especially if there is an ongoing discussion taking place somewhere with additional details. ElKevbo (talk) 16:38, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
I would like to know what of the article you find verifiable? The writer has one source listed, a questionable person to being with, then goes on to throw out accusations with no proof. Have you read the article? If you have, please show me where there is any VERIFIABLE proof. If you have not, please read it and find out for yourself. I'm disturbed that a person who has clearly taken an interest on the subject is completely unaware of the situation. The false article part will be removed unless you can give a VERIFIABLE reason to any information in the article. dabucks (talk) 16:47, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
I'm afraid your understanding of verifiability is at odds with how we use the term in Wikipedia. The source itself is verifiable - anyone can locate a copy of Sports Illustrated and check that the article matches (or doesn't match) the way it is cited in the article. The article might be wrong but that, too, must be demonstrated using sources that are reliable (and that appears to be what Spencer is doing above which is the right way to go about it instead of asserting that the article is wrong without presenting evidence which is how you seem to have gone about this).
Incidentally, my interest is more about process than content. The objections initially raised were insufficient to justify removing well-sourced material and that is why I intervened. ElKevbo (talk) 18:36, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Humor me this, if there are articles like this or or even this are from reputable sources, with false information given by "sources", but yet no one would use these to cite any information, why would someone trust a Sports Illustrated article that has no bearing, has been proven false to not only the school, but also by the NCAA and the United States Government, and cite it as a verifiable source? BuckeyeScholar (talk) 00:33, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
I struggle to find a reason why this is given its own section in the article. No other university that has suffered a high-profile athletic scandal (including University of Alabama, Auburn University, University of Michigan, and Indiana University Bloomington) has been given such an extensive section on their pages. Southern Methodist University, whose football program was given the most severe punishment in the history of college football, doesn't even have a section on their university's page devoted to the scandal. It should be mentioned under the athletics section of the article and given much more extensive coverage in the Ohio State Buckeyes and Ohio State Buckeyes football pages, but it shouldn't be given such a prominent place on the university's page. It seems like a blatant attempt to give the entire university a black eye. --buckeyes1186 (talk) 20:11, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

The article title debate - The Ohio State University vs. Ohio State University[edit]

I've read all the debate on this talk page about what the title of this article should be. Clearly, it should be The Ohio State University. For the record, I am not an alumnus of the school, but I do have many friends and relatives who are alumni. But I have thoroughly researched this issue with absolutely no bias, wanting only to learn what is appropriate. Amazingly, the most important key point missed in all the back-and-forth is that, per university guidelines and style protocals, the school name MUST (not "should") always include "The" whenever the full name (including "University") of the school is being used. According to the school, "Ohio State University" is NEVER appropriate and this should be respected by Wikipedia. It IS acceptable, in certain applications and in subsequent usages within the same document or other form, to use the alternate references, "Ohio State" and "OSU." But NEVER in its original reference. Quite simply, when "University" is included, then "The" MUST also be used. And the reverse also applies; when "The" is included, then "University" MUST also be included. When one is not used, then the other is not permitted to be used. So it is perfectly acceptable, for example, to have "Ohio State" on their basketball jerseys. However, it would not be appropriate, or allowed, to have "Ohio State University" or "The Ohio State" on the jerseys. Thoroughly browse the school's Web site ( and you will not find any contradictions to the information I am providing. Most telling is that the university's style guide ( verifies this information. From a lighter, more practical standpoint, I am very confident that if you ask 100 random alumni of the university where they went to school, particularly if they are completing a job application or the like, they will, in almost every case, write "The Ohio State University" or, alternately, "Ohio State." If they are answering the question verbally, they will almost always say either "Ohio State" or, proudly, "The Ohio State University." Rarely will you find an alumnus use "Ohio State University" because the THE is engrained in them. I understand that Wikipedia has "common usage" guidelines. For purposes such as titling an encylopedic article, the common usage, without question, is The Ohio State University. One final note: "The" has been an official part of the university's name since 1878 (see Most colleges and universities do NOT have "The" as part of their name, but this school does, and has for 138 years. I hope this will be properly remedied by changing the article title to The Ohio State University, as it always should have been. (talk) 00:50, 2 July 2012 (UTC) 00:57, 2 July 2012 (UTC) 01:20, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

The official name can be considered, but it is not; in quotation marks, "The ~" gets 1/4th the results; the Biographical Directory of the United States Congress consistently omits 'the' for all current (2 U.S. Senator and 8 U.S. Representative) bios, albeit consistency within a single source. Dru of Id (talk) 01:29, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
First, two administrators advised me previously that using the "help me" on an article's talk page is not only appropriate for problems or concerns with the article, but preferred. Second, I have no idea what you (user "Dru of Id") are talking about or how your very confusing comments have anything to do with the issue at hand. And using the university's URL as an example of why "The" is not appropriate for this article's title is, with all due respect, nonsense. Their protocal and style guide for name usage applies to standard text and oral applications, not their URL. However, as I indicated in my original comments, "OSU" IS appropriate and permitted in specified contexts anyway. If you're truly interested in my concerns, re-read my comments and do your research. (talk) 01:50, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
I would like to have a chat with any administrator who thinks that this talk page should have had a permanent {{help me}} banner since 2004. Those who are interested can watchlist and discuss it here, of course. For those of us who try to help users with questions (particularly those from new users), having to remember that OSU will always be on the list of people who need help—even though it's not a person, and no one here needs help—simply makes no sense. DoriTalkContribs 04:18, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Ohio State is not the only university with a "The" in its official name. The University of Texas at Austin, the University of Michigan, the University of Arizona, etc. etc. None of them have a "The" in their article titles and Ohio State should not be any different. "The Ohio State University" may be official in their style guide but the same goes for a lot of other universities. No change is necessary. I hate to be rude, but 99% of the people who insist upon THE Ohio State University are egotistical alums who like to use that to lord it up over other people. That is not valid Wikipedia policy. --Kevin W./TalkCFB uniforms/Talk 21:00, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
Agreed, it's clear to me that it should be Ohio State University. Enigmamsg 03:37, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
Disagree, it's clear to me that it should be the The Ohio State University. Hammersbach (talk) 03:52, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
I know I'm a little late to the discussion but I think this should be moved to The Ohio State University. Anyone will tell you its The. You see commentators say it during games and the players themselves call it The Ohio State University.--Astros4477 (talk) 22:43, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

OSU College of Optometry[edit]

I'm new, and I'm not sure if this is the right place to put this question but here it goes. I noticed that there is a list of Ohio State's colleges in this article and several of them have live links to their own Wikipedia pages. Is anyone planning to make pages for the other colleges and link them to this article? I can't write any of them myself because of conflict of interest. I work for the College of Optometry and would love to collaborate if someone starts working on a page for it. I know I'm supposed to give outside sources, but I've had a hard time finding them. So, as a starting place here's a link to our History page: And this is a link to our Toppled Top page: Can it have it's own Wikipedia page that links to our page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Julie at Ohio State Optometry (talkcontribs) 17:10, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Looking at Category:Optometry schools in the United States, it appears as though few optometry schools have standalone articles. Perhaps creating a subsection within this article and then redirecting Ohio State University College of Optometry to Ohio State University#College of Optometry (neither of which exist right now) might make the most sense. SpencerT♦C 15:25, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
If there aren't sufficient "outside sources" to create an article then it's likely that an article shouldn't be created. ElKevbo (talk) 14:36, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

To not make us an article would go against the WikiProject Universities goal to "Create a page for each and every university and college..." ( To make us a subsection of our university would go against the standard already established by other colleges and universities, which goes against the WikiProject Universities goal to "Standardize the structure and content of all college and university articles." I was hoping the College of Optometry page would mimic the structure of the College of Dentistry's page ([[6]]). I will create something to that effect in my Sandbox. (talk) 15:58, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

First, it's a misunderstanding of the Wikiproject's goal to believe that its members plan to create articles for each constituent part of every college or university. In other words, you're talking about a part of a college when the project is discussing entire colleges and universities. Second, even if you were correct then please keep in mind that small groups of editors (e.g. Wikiprojects, those of us in this discussion) can not overrule broader project-wide consensus. In particular, every article must meet our general notability guidelines and those guidelines depend quite heavily on there being multiple independent sources. That there are other articles that don't meet those guidelines and have escaped broader attention from the community doesn't give you license to ignore those guidelines. But please feel free to work on something in a sandbox and see what you can come up with! ElKevbo (talk) 16:22, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

"The" yet again[edit]

I don't understand why "The" is not included in the title of the article. Based on WP:THE (specifically, the "when to avoid" section), it appears that this page should include the definite article in its title. I don't think anyone would dispute that the university capitalizes it in all of its press releases/kits/etc. I also doubt that anyone would dispute that the usage is "reasonably common" (note that this requirement is a much lower bar than the most common variant). And I also doubt that anyone would assert that common usage has "overwhelmingly rejected the The". Since the usage of "The" is supported by all three litmus tests, it strikes me that those who oppose its inclusion here simply don't like it, when the usage of the definite article at TCNJ has garnered exactly zero objections, for instance. Parsecboy (talk) 16:35, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

As far as I can tell "The College of New Jersey" is the official name of that instutition. And as far as I can tell, the official name of this institution is "Ohio State University", in spite of titling itself with the "The". Calling it "The Ohio State University" appears to me to be a stylistic thing, although if someone could show me where it originated, I might change my mind. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:38, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
It's mentioned in the article, though the link appears to be dead. You can find also find it here, which states "In 1878 the college's name was changed to The Ohio State University." I don't think you can get a more clear-cut statement than that. Parsecboy (talk) 16:52, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
The schools official name is The Ohio State University. I'm not sure where you get the idea that it is not. As far as the title of the article is concerned, many opponents of a name change usually use the naming guideline at WP:COMMONNAME to justify not using the schools official name as the title of the article. Some articles on Wikipedia routinely use the longer official names of topics as article titles. Despite that, there never seems to any clear consensus to change the articles title to The Ohio State University. There have been a few "move requests" over the years, all ending in no consensus, but there hasn't been one in quite a while and I wouldn't object at maybe taking a look at it again to see if consensus has changed on the matter.--JOJ Hutton 16:54, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
I'd argue that local consensus here does not (and more importantly, should not) overrule broader consensus at WP:THE. And the argument to use the common name is based on a faulty understanding of WP:AT, of which it is a part. AT specifically states "Do not place definite or indefinite articles (the, a, and an) at the beginning of titles unless they are part of a proper name" and goes on to cite WP:THE for further guidance on the issue. Policy and guidelines support the inclusion of "The" in the title of this article. Parsecboy (talk) 17:23, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
I wasn't aware of WP:THE. Thats a good argument. I can also use that same argument for page moves I was considering at Sun and Moon as well. Good info to know.--JOJ Hutton 17:36, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
So shall we start an RM? Parsecboy (talk) 09:38, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
See below. Parsecboy (talk) 13:57, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
I haven't quite figured out the whole commenting thing, but the legal name for the institution (per trustee minutes) is "The Ohio State University", it's a pretty commonly asked question apparently. 17:36, 10 June 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tjessberger (talkcontribs)

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 03:32, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Ohio State UniversityThe Ohio State University – This article is currently mis-titled according to WP:THE, which prescribes using the definite article when the "the" is part of the organization's official name, is used in most organizational publications and is "is reasonably common in external sources". Please note that "reasonably common" is a much lower bar than the most common editors frequently cite to oppose including "The" in this article's title (and indeed, WP:THE notes that it prescribes a "weak version of the most-common-name rule". WP:AT instructs editors to "...not place definite or indefinite articles (the, a, and an) at the beginning of titles unless they are part of a proper name." I don't know that anyone will dispute that the proper, official name of the university is "The Ohio State University", or that the use of the full name is not "reasonably common". Some editors may not like it, but the correct title of this article according to current policy (which, as a reminder, represents broad consensus and should only be overturned in very rare cases and for very good reasons) includes the definite article. Parsecboy (talk) 13:52, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Oppose. Most reliable sources don't use The [7]. Zarcadia (talk) 17:28, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Please read the relevant policy pages. The requirement is not that most sources use the definite article. Only that use of the "the" is reasonably common. The two are very different bars. Parsecboy (talk) 18:03, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
  • On the fence, but leaning towards oppose I get that Ohio State is officially "THE Ohio State University", but nobody is going to confuse it with, say, Ohio University. And I attended college in Ohio (Youngstown State University to be exact), so I know how OCD some OSU alum can be on that kind of stuff. I would just leave it as is right now. Jgera5 (talk) 17:50, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Please review why WP:IDONTLIKEIT is an unacceptable reason to oppose a proposal. Do you have any policy-based reasons to oppose the move? Parsecboy (talk) 18:03, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose The definite article may be used in some sources, but it's a less common form. The essence of WP:THE is to avoid definite articles if in doubt, and in conflicts between a WP:COMMONNAME and an official name, the common name wins. --BDD (talk) 18:39, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Except, there is no doubt in this case; it's been the official name for more than a century, and is fairly widely used (at least enough to meet the "reasonably common" threshold). And WP:THE specifically addresses the issue of common vs. official names, and it does not share your conclusion. Parsecboy (talk) 19:29, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Perhaps there is no doubt in your mind; there is demonstrably doubt out there, however. --BDD (talk) 20:56, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
OK, I'll bite. What is you evidence that "The Ohio State University" isn't, A: the official name, B: reasonably commonly used, and C: not explicitly rejected in common usage (you know, the three basic premises in THE). Parsecboy (talk) 23:01, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Which part of WP:THE are you deriving this three-point test from? I was referring to the opposition already voiced here; to say that "there is no doubt" is pretty clearly not true. --BDD (talk) 23:49, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Seriously? You're either being purposely obtuse or your reading comprehension skills need a little work. Either way, I'll quote for you:
Premise #1: "On the other hand, some universities only refer to themselves as "The University of X", even in running text (e.g. The College of New Jersey). If such usage is prevalent on university press releases and press kits, contact information, "about" pages, and internal department websites..."
Premise #2: "...and it is reasonably common in external sources (try a Google search), then it is more appropriate to name the Wikipedia article The University of X."
Premise #3: "Finally, if common usage has overwhelmingly rejected the The, then it should be omitted regardless of university usage."
In essence, if the answers to #s 1 and 2 are yes, and to #3 is no, then one should reasonably conclude that "The" belongs in the article title. And that is exactly the case for this article; the organization refers to itself more or less exclusively as "The Ohio State University" (when using the long form - shortened forms like "Ohio State" or "OSU" are irrelevant to this discussion), it is reasonably common elsewhere, and it has not been overwhelmingly rejected. If you think WP:UCN trumps WP:THE in all cases, then perhaps you need to start a discussion there to get THE fixed, since, as I pointed out above, it specifically addresses your objection and rejects it. Parsecboy (talk) 12:04, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
Quoting from WP:THE, "the default rule is to not include" a definite article. So the onus is on you. We can all agree that condition #1, from the lede of the naming convention, is not met. We disagree on point #2. Sometimes, "The" is capitalized in running text. But it's much more common to omit the article altogether. See for example, this Ngram or this one. As you can see, the university's preferred form lags far behind forms without "the," or with it uncapitalized. THEUNI is explicitly couched in terms of WP:COMMONNAME, which must rule the day. I will not respond further until you can discuss more respectfully. --BDD (talk) 16:33, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
Your first Ngram search actually shows that the capitalized definite article outnumbers use of the use of the lowercase for the past 2 decades, but you conveniently don't mention that (instead, it's only "sometimes" capitalized). And usage of "at Ohio State University" is a red herring; we're trying to determine whether the definite article is capitalized or not in running text. If the official name of the university was up for debate, then usage of "at Ohio State University" would be relevant, but it's not. I can be plenty respectful to those who demonstrate they deserve my respect, but I have no tolerance for people who deliberately misrepresent evidence and make spurious arguments. Parsecboy (talk) 17:22, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose per BDD, with precisely the same logic. Common name trumps official name. Xoloz (talk) 19:18, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Strongly support The one argument that opponents never address is how the university self-identifies. If we follow the argument of opponents the logic is that's how we refer to you, not how you refer to yourself. That's, at best, a crappy argument. "...the common name wins", very encyclopedic. Hammersbach (talk) 01:30, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
It doesn't matter what the university calls itself as we use the WP:COMMONNAME not the WP:OFFICIALNAME. You may not like it, but that's the policy. Zarcadia (talk) 06:13, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
Please refer to Parsecboy's reply to you above. Hammersbach (talk) 10:44, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
No, it really doesn't matter how the university "self-identifies". Wikipedia doesn't buy into the marketing and image campaigns of organisations. I very much doubt that even most staff (unless writing officially), students or alumni of the university would capitalise "The" in running text. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:49, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
So it's your position that if an organization uses its legal, official and proper name then it's merely a "marketing and image campaign"? That's an interesting take... Hammersbach (talk) 14:03, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
Surely you don't think organizations choose their names without considerations of image and marketing. --BDD (talk) 17:08, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Absolutely they do. In fact, this is from a reference that an editor below added showing that “The” is part of the official name, “Those who wanted the name change thought the original name was too narrow in scope, and that it was inadequate for the institution that was the only beneficiary of the land grant act. President Edward Orton was insistent that a new name would separate the institution from other colleges in Ohio” That occurred back in 1878. So the question is as, what point does The Mighty Wik, which has been around since 2001, “buy in” to this fact? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hammersbach (talkcontribs) 19:19, 4 April 2014

  • Move to Ohio State, over the current redirect. A common name is preferred over the official name (the article's first sentence says, it is "commonly referred to as 'Ohio State'"), and its a shorter title per the "Conciseness" characteristic under WP:CRITERIA. Even this page on the university's web site is titled in bold letters, "About Ohio State", not "About The Ohio State University". Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:48, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
I think moving it to Ohio State will cause unnecessary confusion with the state itself, especially for non-US readers. The current title is more recognisable. Zarcadia (talk) 06:19, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose. No, we don't usually use the article. There are some exceptions, but not usually for universities. See WP:THEUNI. I would dispute that most sources writing about this university (or any university) capitalise "The" in running text. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:41, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Please re-read THEUNI - there is no requirement that most sources use the capitalized "the", only that it is reasonably common. Parsecboy (talk) 16:17, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose per above. "The" is a stylistic approach that does not reflect the official, or even most common, name for the university. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:38, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Don't know where you get your facts from, but it is the official name, and WP:THEUNI does not require it to be the most common variant, only that it is reasonably common. Parsecboy (talk) 16:13, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
It does seem to be the official name, by all reliable indicators. See this FAQ from their library, for example. --BDD (talk) 16:36, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
Okay, duly noted and struck. Stand by my oppose per all other reasons. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:51, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
Please read WP:THEUNI, which specifically rebuts the [[WP:UCN] argument in this kind of situation. Parsecboy (talk) 18:39, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Support I must note that there are several articles on Wikipedia that use the longer more official name for institutions National Collegiate Athletic Association over the common NCAA, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals over the common PETA, North American Free Trade Agreement over the more common NAFTA, The Beatles over the more common Beatles, Globe Life Park in Arlington over the more common Ballpark at Arlington, and many more. Common name is one thing, but its not the complete and total rule of Wikipedia. If you you don't like the name thats fine, but its not a justification for not using the schools official title.--JOJ Hutton 17:02, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Those "common names" you cite are mostly abbreviations. The baseball stadium in Texas also just changed its name last month (I think), so it's hardly an apt comparison either. – Muboshgu (talk) 13:27, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose per WP:CONCISE among other reasons. The article is at the perfect title. Red Slash 05:10, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose this is the proper title. "Ohio State" is ambiguous except in h contest where you already know its a university. We might as well call the University of Michigan " Michigan" -- people use just Michigan or Ohio State as an abbreviation when what they're talking about is totally clear, as in a football game summary, but it's always understood as just an abbreviation. DGG ( talk ) 00:44, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.