Talk:Syracuse University

Amartya Sen

Mr. Sen the Nobel laureate is NOT an SU alumnus. To the clown who keeps on adding his name to the list, DON'T.

I moved the all-century basketball thing to the Syracuse University Orange article. It's too long and technical for this article. newkai

Eddie Storm

No page for Eddie Storm? Or for Wally, his very large dog which loved bananna yoghurt? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dugong.is.good.tucker

Please help.

Will somebody please tell me what to do about this? The person OrangeMarlin keeps reversing my stuff:

One - [1]

Two - [2]

Three - [3]

Four - [4]

Five - [5]

Six - [6]

Seven - [7]

Eight - [8]

Nine - [9]

Isn't there some kind of rule about doing this kind of thing? SmoothFlow (talk) 19:27, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

This doesn't belong here, and it's not a discussion of your tendentious editing. Also, you should read the welcome message I left, so that you learn to properly format these things. Moreover, most of the edits you put up there are not reverts of a single edit, they are unique cases of reverting vandalism of this article by you. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 02:33, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Vandalims? What are you talking about? I know: you are an ex-'Cuse, right? So that's why you want this to shine. Me too!!! ...well, not the ex-'Cuse part (lol!) SmoothFlow (talk) 04:25, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Note this: http://sunews.syr.edu/story_details.cfm?id=4614 SmoothFlow (talk) 04:55, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Not notable. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 04:58, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Who does this sound like?

You repeatedly undo the “vandalism” of others.

Content disputes are not vandalism. Wikipedia defines vandalism very carefully to exclude good-faith contributions. Accusing other editors of vandalism is uncivil unless there is genuine vandalism, that is, a deliberate attempt to degrade the encyclopedia, not a simple difference of opinion. There are numerous dispute resolution processes and there is no deadline to meet; the wheels of Wikijustice may grind exceedingly slow, but they grind fine.

You find that nobody will assume good faith, no matter how often you remind them.

Warning others to assume good faith is something which should be done with great care, if at all—to accuse them of failing to do so may be regarded as uncivil, and if you are perceived as failing to assume good faith yourself, then it could be seen as being a dick. <-- ahem

You warn others not to edit war even while edit-warring against them.

It takes more than one person to carry on an edit war.

You challenge the reversion of your edits, demanding that others justify it.

Wikipedia policy is quite clear here: the responsibility for justifying inclusion of any content rests firmly with the editor seeking to include it. This applies most especially to biographies of living individuals, where uncited or poorly cited controversial material must be removed immediately from both the article and the Talk page, and by extension any related Project pages. Only once you have justified your edits beyond a reasonable doubt does the burden of proof shift to others.

Or maybe you're homophobic? SmoothFlow (talk) 05:08, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

That's uncalled for. There are 300 student organizations at Syracuse. [10] All of them have websites. Almost all of them have been written up in the newspaper at one time or another. Stating that this particular one is not notable enough to justify mention in the main Syracuse articles is not bias. Think of how big the article would be if all 300 of them were mentioned. NOTABLE organizations (meaning, organizations that someone outside of Syracuse thinks are important enough to write an article about) should be mentioned, but every school in the country has an LGBT center. Unless there's something special about this one, it really doesn't belong here. --B (talk) 05:11, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Smoothflow just called me homophobic? Oh, you have no clue how laughable that is. I helped fund the start up of that organization at SU (yup, this will probably give away my identity, but this pisses me off). OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 22:14, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Student groups

This change keeps showing up on the article. It would be nice to mention this group, especially since when I was at SU, the student group I was heading provided a lot of financial support. However, to keep this article at the highest possible level, it is not possible to mention every single student group, even if there is a special reason to add it. We've trimmed out a list of every fraternity and sorority. We've cleaned out a huge list of alumni. I think if a case should be made to add one or more student groups, we should determine if it is notable first by a discussion here that leads to a consensus. Since so few editors are involved, consensus might be difficult to achieve, but we'll try. At any rate, any group included, other than the student government, which is a critical part of SU's student life, must meet the needs of WP:NOTE. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 22:12, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

disclosure note: copied from my talkpage

Yes, this addition didn't likely cut the smell test in a broad sense. It's a bit undue and if we imagine what that article would look like at an featured article state - which is a good frame of reference for many editing issues - the LGBT content would likely not be caged in this way. This doesn't mean it is important or invalid just not contextualized in a way that works for the article as is. Even if we "get by" one or two editors who begrudingly "allow" inclusion now ... we need to write for the long term, for our readers and editors years from now. Will the information flow enough, does it make sense, etc. I can envision a few scenarios that may help. A section devoted to minority development inclusion; traditionally the chain follows something like those discriminated due to caste/social class; nationalism/foreign-born (communism/socialism overlaps here), women; people of color; special needs/disabilities; sexuality and gender minorities. You'll notice LGBT folks are usually last in these contexts which largely remains true today. Also some would argue that all discrimination is based on class/socio-economic status with new-money vs old-money as one litmus test. Another scenario would be showing notable event(s) that concern LGBT people and how it fits into the subject's history. Both these require a bit of research and thoughtful writing to weave into the present article. If LGBT presence on campus of the centre itself is quite notable, as evident, of course, by secondary reliable sources, another option is to do an article solely about that and after it's been developed a bit figure out how it fits into the "parent" article. -- Banjeboi 00:29, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Founding

The last sentence in the first paragraph in this section -- recounting in colorful, speculative detail why Ezra Cornell did not locate his school in Syracuse -- seems irrelevant to this article on Syracuse University. Earlier edit as such reverted by Anon. Other thoughts on this? DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 02:47, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Religious Affiliation

Syracuse University has no affiliation with the Methodist Church anymore. Please see below:

http://www.princetonreview.com/SyracuseUniversity.aspx (under "Religious Affiliation" in the "At a Glance Section" it says NONE)

http://graduate-school.phds.org/rankings/economics/university/profile/syracuse/721 (it says Religious Affiliation: Not Applicable)

http://www.cappex.com/colleges/Syracuse-University-196413 (it says Religious Affiliation: None)

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/syracuse-ny/syracuse-university-2882 (it says Religious Affiliation: N/A, not applicable)

http://www.campuscorner.com/new-york-colleges/syracuse-university.htm (it says Religious Affiliation: None)

http://www.venturescholar.org/portals/index.php?mid=191 (it says Religious Affiliation: No Preference or Affiliation)

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.236.160.233 (talk) 15:36, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Please check the official sources cited in the article along with the book source. Perhaps these tertiary organizations are not accurately informed. I hope this helps. With regards, Anupam^Talk 16:46, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

The above sources include US News & World Report and the Princeton Review. These are credible sources and national publications. Your sources do not explicitly state that the school is affiliated with the church. Your sources consider Syracuse to be part of the Methodist heritage because it was founded by the Methodist Church. This I agree with. However, it is no longer affiliated at the present time, as evidenced by multiple sources. Here are more sources that state Syracuse University has no religious affiliation:

http://collegeclicktv.com/videos?fr_chl=d4bb4c4032c00a2904b9909caa98002972314bd4

http://collegeprowler.com/syracuse-university/statistics/

http://www.enotes.com/syracuse-university-guide/

http://www.meritaid.com/meritScholarships/Syracuse-University-196413

Once again, your tertiary sources may not be informed. The International Association of Methodist-related Schools, Colleges, and Universities states that Syracuse is affiliated with the United Methodist Church. The official website for the United Methodist Church states that Syracuse is a "United Methodist school." Furthermore, a 2002 published book states that "Syracuse remains definitely Methodist." Please gain a consensus for removing the referenced information before altering the article. The sources I presented are official ones while yours are not. With regards, Anupam^Talk 19:24, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Your sources are not "official." They are from a religious organization. I am an alumni of Syracuse University and I can definitely attest that Syracuse is not affiliated with the Methodist Church. You cannot discount my TEN SOURCES as incorrect just because you want to advance your religious agenda. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.236.160.233 (talk) 19:37, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

My sources are indeed official and come from the organization in question. Please honor consensus and read WP:AGF. With regards, Anupam^Talk 19:46, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Your sources are not "official" because they do not come from Syracuse University themselves. Your sources are as much tertiary as mine. The organization in question here is Syracuse University, not the United Methodist Church. I actually called the Syracuse University Archives myself at (315) 443-3335 and they said the University is no longer affiliated with the United Methodist Church. Anyone is free to contact the University Archives to find out for themselves. Their website is http://archives.syr.edu/. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.236.160.233 (talk) 19:59, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Really? I just called the same number and the attendant stated that she was aware that the university was founded by Methodists and will inquire about the status of the current affiliation and would get back to me on the details. When I hear from them, I will let you know. In the meantime, the article will present the authoritative information as is. You should make yourself aware of Wikipedia policy and understand that removing information without establishing a consensus constitutes vandalism; it is for this reason that your edits were reverted and you received a warning from an administrator. In the future, take the time to establish a consensus before removing longstanding information from an article. With regards, Anupam^Talk 20:14, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough. I will not touch the article until a consensus has been reached. However, once you do hear back from them, please let us know. If they say the university is no longer affiliated with the church, then that should be taken as authoritative.

I have also contacted the United Methodist Church at InfoServ and have asked them to explain the relationship between Syracuse University and the United Methodist Church. With regards, Anupam^Talk 20:34, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Please see below topic. An official from Syracuse University has requested an edit. Syracuse University's religious affiliation is nonsectarian. Merriam-Websters Dictionary defines "nonsectarian" as "not affiliated with or restricted to a particular religious group." Please see: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/nonsectarian. Syracuse University's official webpage indicates the University as nonsectarian. Please see: http://coursecatalog.syr.edu/introduction.aspx —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.236.160.233 (talk) 17:40, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

I received confirmation of the affiliation by both Syracuse University and the United Methodist Church. Please see the evidence below. Thanks, Anupam^Talk 21:50, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 128.230.73.104, 16 June 2010

{{editprotected}} The information listed for Syracuse University's religious affiliation is incorrect. As a duly appointed representative of Syracuse University who is intimately familiar with its history and current status, I can tell you definitively that while it was founded as a Methodist institution, it has been nonsectarian since 1920. The correct wording for Religious Affiliation is "nonsectarian." An appropriate footnote for that would reference is W. Freeman Galpin, Syracuse University, Volume Two: The Growing Years, Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press 1960. Chapter 24, "The Sectarian Issue and Charter Revision," definitively describes the process by which the University charter was revised to declare definitively that "corporation [Board of Trustees] shall be non-sectarian" (page 419). The University by-laws were amended that same year, 1920, to reflect this change in the charter. It is essential that this affiliation be corrected in Wikipedia and the existing footnote 2 be deleted. Please contact me directly if there is any question or concern about this (Peter Englot, Associate Vice President for Public Affairs, Syracuse University, <redacted>).

128.230.73.104 (talk) 15:15, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Could you provide some kind of source for this correction? While I appreciate that it must be obvious to you, original research ins't allowed here and all information has to be verifiable. You might be better waiting it out until the protection is lifted. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:54, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

I think they did provide a source. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:56, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

In addition, here are 10 sources that state Syracuse University has no religious affiliation. Two of these sources include US News & World Report and the Princeton Review, which are highly reputable national publications and organizations. Please see the below links:

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/syracuse-ny/syracuse-university-2882 (it says Religious Affiliation: N/A, not applicable)

http://www.princetonreview.com/SyracuseUniversity.aspx (under "Religious Affiliation" in the "At a Glance Section" it says NONE)

http://graduate-school.phds.org/rankings/economics/university/profile/syracuse/721 (it says Religious Affiliation: Not Applicable)

http://www.cappex.com/colleges/Syracuse-University-196413 (it says Religious Affiliation: None)

http://www.campuscorner.com/new-york-colleges/syracuse-university.htm (it says Religious Affiliation: None)

http://www.venturescholar.org/portals/index.php?mid=191 (it says Religious Affiliation: No Preference or Affiliation)

http://collegeclicktv.com/videos?fr_chl=d4bb4c4032c00a2904b9909caa98002972314bd4 (it says Religious Affiliation: None)

http://collegeprowler.com/syracuse-university/statistics/ (it says Religious Affiliation: None)

http://www.enotes.com/syracuse-university-guide/ (it says Religious Affiliation: None)

http://www.meritaid.com/meritScholarships/Syracuse-University-196413

Furthermore, Syracuse University's own official website describes the University as nonsectarian: Please see here: http://coursecatalog.syr.edu/introduction.aspx. Merriam-Websters dictionary, one of the definitive dictionaries of the English language, defines "nonsectarian" as "not affiliated with or restricted to a particular religious group." See: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/nonsectarian. Therefore, Syracuse University is not affiliated with any religious group.

Lastly, do a Google Search for religious affiliation for different Methodist-affiliated universities like Duke University or American University. If you type in "duke university religious affiliation" or "american university religious affiliation" in Google, Google tells you at the very top that these universities are affiliated with the Methodist Church. Please see:

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=duke+university+religious+affiliation and

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=american+university+religious+affiliation&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=

However, if you do the same search for "Syracuse University religious affiliation" in Google, it says "Syracuse University religious affiliation — None." Please see:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=syracuse+university+religious+affiliation&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai= —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.236.160.233 (talk) 17:55, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Can someone please reconcile the apparent differences between the institution's official stance and the other sources that have been cited that appear to contradict this stance? Are these sources out-of-date, confused, outright wrong, or being misinterpreted?

The majority of the evidence presented thus far seems to support the institution's official stance. However, although I am sympathetic to the institution I am not willing to immediately cede the issue merely because a university official has presented the institution's official stance. This is not a university publication and we are not beholden to their interpretations, standards, or demands. ElKevbo (talk) 17:58, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Please see this University publication: http://coursecatalog.syr.edu/introduction.aspx

This is the Syracuse University official website. The website states that the University is "nonsectarian." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.236.160.233 (talk) 18:01, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

You haven't answered the question. Why are there reliable sources that contradict this? From where are they getting their information? ElKevbo (talk) 18:07, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

To be honest, I am not sure why the United Methodist Church would claim this. Perhaps for religious propaganda so as to show they are affiliated with several prominent private universities. Perhaps it was a mistake. The mistake is a reasonable one since Syracuse University was indeed founded by Methodists and USED TO BE affiliated with the Methodist Church. However, today it is no longer affiliated with the church. The sources that the sources in question got their information from might be out of date. Also, the issue is confusing; Syracuse University is not affiliated with the Methodist Church at the present time but it has "historic ties" with the church. This could have led to the contradictory information.

Ok. In any case, I think that you've made your argument and the vast majority of sources support the claim that the institution is non-sectarian. Whoever makes the edit once the protection expires will have my support in doing so. ElKevbo (talk) 19:26, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you ElKevbo. Is there a way to contact an administrator to unlock the article so we can make the changes sooner rather than later? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.236.160.233 (talk) 19:44, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

There is but the protection will expire by itself shortly so it's easier to just wait a little while longer. ElKevbo (talk) 23:58, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Deny Request: I received an email from the Syracuse University Archives stating "Thank you for your inquiry about Syracuse University’s connection to the United Methodist Church. The University is nonsectarian; however, we remain historically connected to the United Methodist Church. Please find attached a summary of our relationship." The document stated this:

A Brief Report of Church Relatedness

Syracuse University

INCORPORATION AND THE METHODIST CHURCH

Syracuse University came into existence as a corporation formed for the purpose of providing education and related services. It was formally established and incorporated by charter on March 25, 1870, under existing New York State laws for the incorporation of benevolent, charitable, scientific, and missionary societies. The charter stated that the University shall be under the control and general patronage of the Methodist Episcopal Church of the state of New York. The charter was amended and the University was reorganized and incorporated by an act of the state legislature on May 19, 1887. The amended charter omitted the reference to the Methodist Church and placed responsibility for the affairs of the University in the hands of the Board of Trustees.
From its founding to the present time, Syracuse University's relationship to the Methodist Church has undergone several changes. Although by 1887 the church no longer had legal control over the University, the amended charter specified that the majority of the Trustees must be nominated by one of the annual conferences identified in the charter. A further amendment to the charter, enacted by the legislature on January 23, 1890, provided that the majority of the Board of Trustees were to be elected by the church's annual conferences.
In 1920 the charter was amended by the legislature to state that the University shall be nonsectarian. The 1920 amendments no longer required the majority of the Board to be nominated or elected by the annual conferences of the Methodist Church. Instead the amended charter authorized the Trustees to designate in the University's bylaws the number of members to be elected by the conferences of the church and to prescribe the manner in which they were elected. Since that time, the University's bylaws have continued to provide for representation of Methodist conferences on the University's Board of Trustees.
In 1952 the bylaws significantly revised the procedures for electing representatives of the conferences by authorizing the Board rather than the conferences to elect 14 Organization Trustees. The amended bylaws stated that the conferences may recommend persons for election to the Board as Organization Trustees. The current bylaws authorize the Board to elect three Organization Trustees: one Trustee each to represent the North Central New York, Western New York, and Wyoming conferences of the United Methodist Church. Both the conferences and the Board may recommend persons for election as Organization Trustees.
Today Syracuse University is considered a Methodist-related institution. Syracuse University's affiliation is expressed in the tradition, though not regulation, of having a United Methodist minister serve as dean of Hendricks Chapel and in the University's participation in the annual University Teacher/Scholar Award sponsored by the Methodist Church. In addition, the University administers a number of Methodist-funded scholarships and houses the Bishop Ledden Endowed Professorship in the Department of Religion.
The University hosts a Protestant Campus Ministry (PCM) that is a collaboration between the United Methodist, Presbyterian USA, American Baptist, and United Church of Christ. By agreement, the United Methodist is the lead sponsor financially and makes the appointment of its chaplain in consultation with the PCM Board. The PCM is unique among the other chaplaincies at Hendricks Chapel, in that it is entrusted with maintaining the tradition of a Protestant service on Sunday morning and the chapel choir and organist provide the music for worship.
Each year the former North Central New York Conference held its ordination service in Hendricks Chapel. As of June 2010, North Central NY, Western NY, portions of Wyoming, and portions of Troy Conferences merged to become the Upper New York Annual Conference of the United Methodist Church. In 2004, Syracuse University hosted the North East Jurisdictional Conference and the five newly elected bishops were consecrated in Hendricks Chapel.
In September 2009, a United Methodist University Senate site team visit took place on the Syracuse University campus. In January, 2010 the University Senate voted to reaffirm its historic connection to Syracuse University.

Updated 6/15/10

I also received an email from the United Methodist Church which stated:

Thank you for writing. Syracuse University is a United Methodist-related school. Any school can apply to become a United Methodist-related school. The UM-related schools were not necessarily started by the UMC. Each school must be approved by the University Senate and is subject to the guidelines and criteria established by the University Senate. Each institution is reviewed every 10 years (or more often under special circumstances) by the University Senate to ensure that each school continues to meet the criteria. Annual conferences can provide funding to the schools in the conference as long as they remain approved.
Each school is governed by its Board of Directors as required by accrediting agencies and some schools require a certain number of United Methodists on the board. Each institution is independent and it is the responsibility of the school's board to govern the school.
Visit http://www.gbhem.org/gbhem/senate2.html for “Marks Of A United Methodist Church-Related Academic Institution.”
Visit http://www.gbhem.org/site/c.lsKSL3POLvF/b.3463093/ for a complete list of United Methodist-related schools.
The Section of Schools, Colleges, and Universities at the General Board of Higher Education and Ministry may be able to answer more specific questions about Syracuse University.
Section of Schools, Colleges and Universities
General Number: 615-340-7406
General Email: scu@gbhem.org

In light of this evidence, I suggest we edit the sentence in question to state: "Since 1920, the university has identified itself as nonsectarian, although it still maintains an affiliation with the United Methodist Church." Both Syracuse University and the United Methodist Church openly state that the university is affiliated with the Church and Wikipedia should honor this relationship. With regards, Anupam^Talk 21:40, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Sounds fine to me. The infobox should simply state "nonsectarian," though. ElKevbo (talk) 23:57, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Since the relationship is more complicated than that, do you think that only using the term "nonsectarian" in the infobox suffices? I suggest inserting "nonsectarian but related to the United Methodist Church." What do you think? I look forward to hearing from you soon. With regards, Anupam^Talk 03:52, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

No, I don't think the relationship is that complicated. The infobox should be succinct and accurate ("nonsectarian") but the historical relationship can be explained and expanded on in the body of the article, perhaps in the "History" section. ElKevbo (talk) 10:31, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Could you provide a source to your claims? As noted by the administrator above, "original research isn't allowed here and all information has to be verifiable." Without cited sources, there's no way to verify the authenticity of your claims. You need to provide an internet link to this information from a credible source. Also, since the general consensus has not confirmed any affiliation, I do not think it appropriate to title this sub-thread as such. 71.249.7.168 (talk) 12:38, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Sorry but he or she most certainly does not have to "provide an internet link to this information from a credible source." He has a document above transcribed from the university archives and several links to other sources. I think those sources - along with the ones already present in the article - are more than sufficient to substantiate the innocuous and uncontroversial idea that there are historic ties between this institution and the Methodist Church.

Frankly, I'm mystified as to why this is such a contentious issue. ElKevbo (talk) 15:25, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

I do not deny that the university has historical ties to the church. It does. However, what Anupam wants to do is say that Syracuse University's religious affiliation is with the United Methodist Church. This suggests too much and is a contentious issue for me as an alumnus of the university because it gives the mistaken impression to prospective students that Syracuse is a religious school. Prospective students, upon reading Anupam's edits, might not want to apply to SU because they might be turned off by the thought of attending a religious school. I agree with ElKevbo's suggestion that we should state "nonsectarian" in the info box and leave it at that. Or we should just remove any mention from the info box at all about religious affiliation. The info boxes of other nonsectarian university articles don't even make a mention of religious affiliation. I think the body of the article should explain the historical ties with the church in the HISTORY section, not in the introductory section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.236.160.233 (talk) 16:06, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

There's no way to determine the veracity of the statements Anupam provided unless there's a source showing proof. I could just make up a statement, post it up here and claim it was a letter from the Chancellor of the school. Also, Wikipedia's policy says that original research is not allow. What Anupam did was his own original research.

I would also like to bring up that Anupam's sources may not be as accurate as he thinks. His sources suggest that Boston University is also affiliated with the United Methodist Church (I also noticed that he changed this on the Boston University Wikipedia article to reflect this and cited the same sources as he did here). However, several other sources state the Boston University has no religious affiliation, including BU's own website. Please see:

http://www.princetonreview.com/BostonUniversity.aspx (Religious Affiliation: No Affiliation)

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/boston-ma/boston-university-2130 (Religious Affiliation: N/A, not applicable)

http://www.4icu.org/reviews/5703.htm (Religious Affiliation: None)

http://www.massmentor.edu/campustour/undergraduate/1583/Boston_University/Boston_University1.html (Religious Affiliation: No)

http://www.enotes.com/boston-university-guide/ (Religious Affiliation: None)

http://graduate-school.phds.org/university/bu/university/profile/political-science/2155 (Religious Affiliation: Not Applicable)

http://www.cappex.com/colleges/Boston-University-164988 (Religious Affiliation: None)

http://www.fastweb.com/school/boston-university/ (Religious Affiliation: Non-denominational)

Boston University's official website even says it's nonsectarian. Please see:

http://www.bu.edu/bulletins/sed/item15.html (BU is coeducational and nonsectarian)

http://www.bumc.bu.edu/phys-biophys/gradprog/university/ (Boston University, incorporated in 1869, is a private, coeducational, nonsectarian, urban university)

http://www.bu.edu/bulletins/sar/item03.html/ (BU is coeducational and nonsectarian)

Both Syracuse University and Boston University claim to be nonsectarian on their own websites and this contradicts what Anupam's Methodist sources state (he only cites Methodist sources to begin with). The fact that his sources contradict what TWO universities describes themselves to be shows that his sources may be incorrect or misinformed. This mistake, however, is reasonable considering both SU and BU were founded as Methodist schools, even though they aren't affiliated with the church at this time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.236.160.233 (talk) 16:00, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Proposal for a Resolution Regarding Religious Affiliation

I propose that we remove mention of religious affiliation in the info box. The body of the text should say "Since 1920, the university has identified itself as nonsectarian, although it still maintains historic ties with the United Methodist Church." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.236.160.233 (talk) 16:17, 17 June 2010 (UTC)