Talk:University of Vermont

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
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.

POV adgectives, conjecture, lack of citation[edit]

Citations are needed to suppport what appears to be conjecture and opinion. CApitol3 12:08, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

College of Agriculture and Life Science[edit]

home of the Center for Rural Studies—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dmoney99 (talkcontribs) 18:08, 20 October 2006 (UTC).

Is this confirmed: "Randy "Macho Man" Savage, Former WWF Superstar"?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) 04:10, 28 February 2007 (UTC).

The caption of one of the pictures says the building is "University Heights" although the building pictured is actually the Waterman Building. This should be fixed. It's also a low quality picture; it's mostly obscured by trees. 01:25, 23 March 2007 (UTC)


I don't want to get into a reversion war, but I don't think that it is fair to UVM to put "estimated" stuff which includes board and spending money into what, in my opinion, should only be tuition plus fees plus books (the latter is probably similar for most students). It makes college costs seem far too much for the commuting student, for one thing. It may not be comparable with other colleges for that reason. Student7 16:16, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Lack of content/incorrect information[edit]

In the athletics section, the Catamount is said to be "any of various feline species, such as Moutain Lion, Cougar, or Puma." A Catamount is indeed its very own species.

There is no School of Business listed in the academic section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stoyankovich (talkcontribs) 00:13, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Please see Cougar#Naming and etymology in Wikipedia. It will explain naming.
We are all volunteer, amateur editors here. If you have information that should be in the article, please insert it. I do not have knowledge of a School of Business or I would add it myself. (It is nice to insert a reference to a catalog or something after your edit). Thanks. Student7 01:07, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:University of Vermont College of Medicine logo.png[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:University of Vermont College of Medicine logo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:07, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:University of Vermont athletic logo.png[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:University of Vermont athletic logo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:07, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Cleaning up the colleges[edit]

Another editor commented that the colleges explanation sounded like an advert. Maybe copied out of the catalog? Please omit PR type phrases. We're not trying to convey "goodness." We are trying to convey unique knowledge to the reader. Shouldn't read the same as the college catalogue nor every other university in the country. Take a look at the Medical college. All solid facts. No bs. It's pretty clean I thought. Student7 (talk) 21:37, 14 December 2007 (UTC)


Everything needs footnotes. It needs better references than a college paper. Please follow WP:FOOT. Wikipedia wants to be sure that copyrights weren't violated. See WP:COPY.

The article is not about persons. It should not be people spam. It is about the college. If the college isn't responsible for it, it shouldn't be here. Harvard/MIT do not put their Nobel Prize winners in the lead article. They are forked to another article! How desperate does UVM want to appear to readers? Please be careful of who you place under notables!

Notable Attendees[edit]

Who exatly is Megan E. Higgins, ESQ., Currently working with US EPA and Local DEM in RI, research fellow at Roger Williams University? Did you add youself? You don't seem significant at all.Stoyankovich (talk) 16:30, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

May I suggest deleting anyone who is not immediately recognizatble who isn't footnoted to your satisfaction? I don't think you owe them any more than an edit line explanation IMO. Let them justify the entry. We don't have to justify deleting it beyond the edit summary "not notable - no footnote." Student7 (talk) 20:56, 18 March 2008 (UTC)


Extensive changes on April 2 made some improvements that should be added. But it also deleted a LOT of stuff that should be left with almost no edit summaries explaining why. Missing are Kake Walk (embarrassing?), number of graduates (doesn't match up well with number of attendees?), tuition (a rather important figure), marijuana use (embarrassing), naked bike ride (embarrassing), percentage of Vermont resident who attend (embarrassingly low), PLUS adding a lot of PR about Burlington.

This is NOT a PR article for UVM's administrative benefit. This is an encyclopedia. Discuss major changes first please particularly when you are new to the article! Student7 (talk) 21:02, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

(added answer, to which the editor replied on their discussion page)

I recommend adding tution in the fact box to left, not tacked onto text at end of overview.

I will make that edit - and hopefully not screw up formatting

I have removed descriptive copy of Burlington Vermont - that was a cut and paste. Sorry.

There were 2 sections on activism. I have removed the section that was least current. It gets down to a question of how much history to present before a wiki entry gets bogged down - as MANY have. Activism on college campuses is a common and proud tradition. But how much to include... should the demonstrations during the Viet Nam and El Salvador eras be added as well... are there others? Where do we stop? Current issues is the line I propose. Perhaps "student activism" deserves its own page. What is truly informative about UVM by general public standards? That is the Wiki test.

Re: Number of gaduates - that information was randomly attached to a section and appeared above a listing of enrollment figures that were not current and did not match figures in the fact box. There is not embarassment in presenting that information - but it should be correct, consistent, and presented in logical textual content.

The Princeton Review report on marijuana use is not scientific in any way, as the publication itself notes. It lacks authority and is inappropriate to cite.

Is the naked bike ride an important student tradition? If it is, maybe it should be included in that context, not a section unto itself. As you know, the spirit of Wikipedia is not to market, entertain, or shock and abuse as a forum for personal values and interests. Does the NBR hold up to the test of an important fact about the University of Vermont from the general public's point of view? If so, why?

What is included and what is not in itself becomes powerful PR - even if it is factual. That issue must be carefully considered in the editing process.

You could not be more right, Wikipedia is not a PR or personal forum in any way. (talk)19:38, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

The number of graduates should be reinserted. This was from a reputable source. If the college has more up-to-date info, that can be used as a footnote to the new figures. Footnotes, BTW, go after the punctuation to a sentence.
The fire destroying the college is history. It should be in there someplace.
The college offices being a national historic landmark should be there someplace.
Some of the college descriptions were mundane which is why they were altered some months back. They were PR which is why we stopped using them. We need to emphasis differences. A reader might guess that a college of mathematics offers calculus, for example. A degree in tensor analysis might be of interest. So, for example, (it was months ago that we did all this) I think I left in something about DNA for College of Ag and other stuff that caught my eye. The fact that Ag teaches animal husbandry should be left out IMO. Obvious and uninteresting.
The University was famous for its annual winter Kake Walk. Its history and disappearance need to be restored.
The payment to the city might need to be restored. It demonstrates a) that the city can't subsidize the college. It's the other way round. The city is too small and the college too large. b) the college is a good citizen and plays ball. c) that you don't get something for nothing.
Student organizations that were largest were mentioned. Eventually all active student orgs should be here but could be forked to another article later. Certainly want the organizations that are different. A snowboard team and volunteers seem interesting. I'm sure there are others.
I'll give you the marijuana issue.
The naked bike ride is famous. Sorry. It's gets nationwide headlines and tv coverage. It is assinine IMO but I didn't invent it! But since someone obviously thinks it is clever and keeps doing it, it needs to stay. Moreover, it stays as history even if it stops. Just gone on too long. And I'm not trying to shock anybody! The participants are and are rather successful at it I might add. The article is balanced. It still has plenty of serious stuff. At a large university (and even smaller ones) you have to take the bad with the good. BTW, bad gives credibility to the article. There's nothing worse to a practiced eye than a ream full of praise and suggesting that nothing has ever gone wrong.
You deleted that Arts and Sciences was the largest college. Was that a false statement.
So much disappeared without any advance discussion, I was about to revert all of it, but I will hold off.
Tuition normally goes in both places, as does all the infobox stuff. That is, in both article and box.
I didn't insert the student acivitism and wasn't there. Except for the Kake Walk reaction, I really don't care. However, under student activities, an organization might say that it strives for world peace, another for "student rights" or whatever. I don't know about history. But something that has ever shut down the campus for more than a couple of hours has got to go in as history. Student7 (talk) 20:06, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

4/4/08 response I have added tuition and other financial info to the financial section. Of note: I do not see this as "normal" practice - review of other New England land-grant university entries on Wikipedia (UMass, URI, UMaine, UConn, UNH) all did not include such information. You may wish to review those relevant sites.

The naked bike ride is an innocuous event, there is no embarrassment in including it. However, I still question it as a defining aspect of the university. I am not aware of notable national media attention it received. Will you please share your sources. Also, do you have a specific date of origin?

Re: Kakewalk, that information could be reinstated in history section. However, the point that UVM was "famous" for Kakewalk 50 years ago does not in itself seem to justify inclusion. In the eyes of many, UVM was also famous for its dairy bar. Fame has variable definition and changes with time. Happily, in this case it has. If reinstated, again, the context of the History section seems most appropriate.

Re: Concerts - this section appears long and overly detailed. I recommend cuts.

I am glad to be having a thoughtful exchange that will produce useful information guided by Wikipedia's five pillars. Jfrancoe (talk)jfrancoe —Preceding comment was added at 21:45, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

University and college founding dates[edit]

Gearbull, Castleton was NOT established as a college/university until 1867. It was a grammar school prior to that.It's charter in 1786 was NOT that of a COLLEGE. Analogy: Vermont was a republic until 1791 NOT a state. It had a geo-political entity, but not that of a state. In parallel, Castleton had an educational identity, but not that of a college/higher education sntitution, but not that of a COLLEGE. That charter/mission did not occur until 1867. See below:

Castleton was founded as a grammar school, teaching Greek and Latin and helping to fulfill the Vermont Constitution's requirement of universal free education for Vermont's citizens. In 1867 the State Normal School was founded in Castleton. Normal school a term based on the French école normale supérieure, a school to educate teachers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:23, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Dear unregistered user at IP Address Hi, many North American east coast and European colleges and universities were not founded as their current institutional status or name. To wit Harvard College and William and Mary began as something very similar to the grammar school that Castleton were founded as. John Adams attended Harvard College between ages 16 and 17. Middlebury College was founded as a grammar school, Colby College in Maine was at the time of its founding was also very much like a Vermont Grammar school. In the United Kingdom and much of the east coast of the United States, a grammar school described an institution as varying as Oxford, Harrow, Princeton or Dartmouth. About consistency of names, Princeton University was founded as the College of New Jersey, offering Greek, Latin, algerbra, and geometry, almost the definition of an eighteenth or nineteenth century grammar school. The curriculum of UVA and Yale University at their founding were also the same as a Vermont Grammar School in the eighteenth century. Until late in the nineteenth century better than half of Harvard College's students were under 20. This was also the case for the first several decades of UVM. From your edits I am curious if you might be an employee or alumni/ae of UVM? I am not a CSC student or alumni or an employee of the Vermont State Colleges. Best, CApitol3 (talk) 22:03, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Gearbull: The issue is not at what age students attended various colleges and other types of schools during the 18th and 19th Centuries. It is widely understood that many students in their early/mid teens matriculated at colleges during that time in history. The relevant issue is the date at which a school was founded specifically as a college or university. For Castleton, that date - if currently published Wikipedia information is correct - is 1867; that is the year Castelton became a Normal College and no longer a grammar school. As you note, many institutions of learning established in the 18th century were grammar schools. These were considered secondary schools by all definitions I researched, not colleges or universities. Please further note: If the definition of an 18th century grammar school were the criteria used to establish founding order, Castleton and UVM may not even appear on the list of 10 oldest schools in New England. I will further research the dates at which Harvard, Yale, Dartmouth and Brown were founded as colleges and universities (not grammar schools) to verify that they precede the Universiy of Vermont. I will also verify Castleton's date of founding as a college (the defnition in question). Based on findings, I will make necessary corrections. Clear definitions and solid facts are the goal. (talk)jfrancoe —Preceding comment was added at 03:04, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Dear unregistered user at IP Address and Wikipedia is of course about truth, including the many shades of meaning and interpretation of things like the dating of Castleton's founding (they claim 1787 and it appears in a ring of type around their shield), what sort of institution Harvard, Middlebury or Colby might have been at their founding, etc. What concerns me is that the University of Vermont article appears to be not edited so much towards increasing depth and a broader, more complete description of the university today, and its history, so much as preening and apple polishing. Peacock terms have appeared and been somewhat faithfully edited out. I suppose in that context your concern about Castleton appear to be mostly about prestige. You've not yet responded to inquiries by two editors as to your relationship to the subject, whether you are an employee, alumni/æ of UVM. The question would not arise had the edits not appeared to sound like advertising collateral. I very much agree a fine university like UVM deserved a far better, more complete article than what has been here for so long. But edits need to be encyclopedic and should not sound like advertising. Please try to write an edit summary explaining your edits, and where you anticipate conflict consider discussing the subject on an article's talk page. You can sign your comments by typing four tilde characters (~). Thanks. CApitol3 (talk) 20:36, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Dear CApital3: Regarding the chronology of the founding of New England colleges and universities and where UVM and other colleges fall in that line-up, you appear to be suggesting that this information is peacock strutting. While you and I may disgaree on definitions of institutional classifications and related founding dates, I can see that point. I suggest simply removing the chrono comparison, it is not defining of the institution. I will make this edit. If there is other "strutting" you see, please be direct and respectful in saying what that is. As you note, I have made extensive edits to the University of Vermont entry. It was poorly written and organized and contained incorrect information in many areas. There were also gaps in very basic factual information (inclusion of the College of Arts and Sciences and the School of Business Administration, in example). There were several entries that appeared to indulge personal interests rather than concern for information quality. There are indeed still elements of marketing positioning in the entry that I intend to help address. You will find extensive notes accompanying all but edits I made on April 1 - an honest oversight, for which I apologize. I was also unaware of the discussion function, therefore did not employ it. Also, the poor quality of the page led me to believe no one with any concern for information integrity was actively concerned with the University of Vermont entry at this time. Nonetheless, I see the importance of seeking discussion. With regard to my identity, I sense hostililty and/or insinuation in this request. Please respectfully state your reasons for asking. I have a 30-year affiliation with the University of Vermont and am a professional editor as well as graduate of library studies, much of which were focused on information integrity. I am committed to Wikipedia's five pillars. FYI: I plan to add a photograph to the University of Vermont entry. I believe a birds-eye shot giving a sense of the whole campus rather than a portrait of a single building is appropriate near the overview. I hope to obtain permission to use a photo I have seen. I will refer to the page discussion for any response. I am not clear on all aspects of the sign off you suggest and would like to review that function before employing it. Thank you for your patience in this regard. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:55, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Dear unregistered user at IP Address I meant no hostility, and I think my note above makes clear my own, and another editors', curiosity about your relationship to the subject. The style of writing sounds somewhat subjective leaning towards promotional. here is speak for myself not the user Student7. Which I can imagine if that has been your business for thirty years it might be a challenge to right with more of a purely objective tone. UVM is an excellent university and an important part of Vermont and new England history. I would love to see more about your campus' fine architecture including Henry Hobson Richardson's Billing Library (now student center) and I believe several buildings by McKim, Mead, and White including Ira Allen Chapel. I would also be interested to read more about John Dewey and his influences. Deletion of unflattering information like the now defunct tradition of Cakewalk does not make it go away. As in most things, fresh air and sunshine works best to contextualize the subject. A forthright account is more likely to be positively received than avoidance. A far darker subject, that is well presented to good result, is the subject of slave trading by the founding family of Brown University. That university's website and the wikipedia article are quite transparent about it, acknowledging that a university building was built with slave labor. While the mention of the Cakewalk tradition might not have been well written it is clearly a part of the lore and for some, the institutional memory. There are obviously far more good things than bad to say about the University of Vermont on human rights in the arenas of race, gender, and sexual orientation. I have not found anywhere a template or outline for describing a college/university in the wikipedia MoS, but many good articles are well outlined, and organized around degrees or sub-colleges. That seems a good way to cover academics. Discussion of the article is best placed here on the article's discussion page rather than a host of individual users' discussion pages. No worry about signing with the four tildes (~), there appears to be a robot that now applies credit notation and a date stamp to unsigned comments. CApitol3 (talk) 14:52, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

GearedBull/Capital3 FYI: I have added factual information about Kakewalk in a historical context. Accuracy, logical context, and balance relative to overall content is intended. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jfrancoe (talkcontribs) 17:08, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi Jfrancoe, I think you've got the reference to Kakewalk exactly right. Thanks. CApitol3 (talk) 13:50, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

UVM Latin Day merge[edit]

Has any discussion been found for the fate of this? Personally, I think it should be brought to AfD (fails WP:N), but the article has a merge tag. Leonard(Bloom) 17:14, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Given its lack of fanfare whilst i was a UVM undergrad, i doubt it deserves its own article. Its merits as a mention within the overall UVM article are also debatable, especially as pruning of Activist history is suggested, despite its far more significant impact upon life at UVM. Dirk Chivers (talk) 20:28, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Greek Life[edit]

Expectations of a fraternity coming back to campus does not necessarily mean that it will. Also, next time you post something please cite your source. (talk) 01:34, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

  • Cannot cite a solid source for this, but I know from talking with members of the fraternity that the UVM Alpha Epsilon Pi chapter has had its charter recently revoked in the wake of an investigation into the possible date-rape drugging of a number of female students over the Halloween Weekend —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:45, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Charter free of religious bias, but not first[edit]

The article currently states: "It was the first American college or university with a charter plainly declaring that the 'rules, regulations, and by-laws shall not tend to give preference to any religious sect or denomination whatsoever.'"

I would not be surprised if it is still the only American school with that quotation in its charter.

But decades earlier, charters of Princeton and Dartmouth and perhaps other schools empowered their trustees to make rules "not excluding any Person of any religious Denomination whatsoever from . . . any of the Liberties, Privileges, or immunities of the . . . College, on account of his . . . being of a Religious profession Different from the . . . Trustees of the College." [[1]] I think these provisions are simply another way of saying what the UVM charter says, only earlier. Perhaps the claim that UVM "was the first American college or university" to declare this should be removed; the charter provision alone will still support the claim of the Wikipedia paragraph that UVM is progressive.

--Truthier06 (talk) 17:13, 9 January 2009 (UTC)