Talk:Cornell University

Graduate Admissions

Does Cornell admit anyone with less than a first class honours degree into their graduate programmes? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 136.206.1.17 (talk) 22:31, 22 February 2007 (UTC).

Gap between the history section title and section content

Is there anyway we can fix this problem? I believe that the root of the problem is the footnote section in the university info-box.Cornell010 03:55, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Just dealt with it. Please comment on the List of People page, about images. —mercuryboard^talk 04:03, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

The history section has a rather glaring change in scope. The paragraph about the 1969 incident is fitting for a longer and much more detailed listing of historical incidents that have shaped Cornell policies. In its current location, it's been shoehorned in between "the first students were admitted" and "over the twentieth century, many changes", which seem to go together much more smoothly but at a much vaguer level.

Could this be rearranged to either minimize/outlink the incident or make it part of a longer and more detailed timeline? Right now it breaks the flow something awful. (Yes, I know, "fix it yourself", but I know nothing about Cornell and I'm thus poorly qualified for this task.) Mana Gement 14:46, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Gallery Section?

See Penn's gallery section at the bottom of the article. I think it adds a nice touch and with carefully selected images the section can showcase Cornell's beauty as well as prestige. Some photos of Cornell have a way of exuding prestige and accomplishment.

--angelrendon 15:50, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

^ Good idea. Princeton's section is also an example.

Endowment Numbers

There is a loose reference to "5 billion dollar endowment" in the article on the new investment chief. This would mean that the endowment grew from 3.77 to 5.0 billion (~33%) in one year, which smells of error. Nevertheless, rabid alumni post the number everywhere, inserting it in lists of numbers otherwise referring to 6/2005 values (and falsely inflating Cornell's rank). In contrast here is a specific reference to 4.4 billion in investments under Cornell's control as 0f 8/20/2006 (from Cornell itself). This seems like a more expected, reasonable growth of the endowment. It's clearly from Cornell and it's more precise. Why not use it? Or at least acknowledge it in a footnote? Or should we pick and choose what information to show to make Cornell look strongest? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.225.68.223 (talk • contribs)

My only question about this comes from an earlier discussion of endowment. I'm no economist or investment specialist, so when "long term investment fund" (or whatever the exact lingo was) is used, I don't know if that exactly translates to the same thing mentioned by other college endowments. What we need to know, it seems to my ear anyway, is exactly what is included in the $B 4.4 number... and whether this same number is reported for other colleges, or they use a different number in THEIR discussion of endowment. Anyway, I only submit that it is really hard to tell whether we are comparing apples with apples, or some other fruit. Isoxyl 11:48, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Ok. I'm ok with keeping the 5.0 on this page; but I have a strong feeling the 4.4 is correct, and we'll see this come out in a month or two as schools start leaking their year end values. Anybody else?

Dear Uncle Ezra

Would Dear Uncle Ezra be worth mentioning in the article? --Kjoonlee 05:52, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Not the main article, but it might be worth its own separate article. I believe Columbia's equivalent service has its own article.--Xtreambar 06:59, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Annual Endownment

Execuse me. What is the annual endownment. To be precise: What amount of money does the university spend in a year on their expenses. I think this a more interesting figure than the whole endownment. Please add it to the page.

• Cornell pays out 4% of the current value of its endowment each year. The payout rate is set by the Board of Trustees in a manner to assure that the endowment will grow at a rate to cover future inflation. However, endowment income is only a small portion of the annual budget. There are many funds besides the endowment. The current fund invests income (such as tuition) until it is spent. Also, a number of donors have retained an income interest in their gifts (Cornell gives them an annuity back in exchange for their gift.) New York Insurance law requires Cornell to separately invest these funds in very safe investments (bonds, not stocks.) Racepacket 05:31, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

A couple things before it goes on the main page

I'm not sure about the notable alumni section... its a lot of linkage and, when read all together (i.e. not just from a copyediting or writer's perspective), is pretty dry. Anyone else agree? Someone should find a friendlier picture than Wolfowitz, but that's just personal taste. ;)

The other thing is, has anyone ever heard of Cornell notes? Perhaps it's not significant enough for the already-extensive article, but this note-taking format is widely used and to my knowledge has been adapted to many academic programs, one of which is used throughout the state of California, so it should probably get a mention somewhere IMO. Paliku 16:29, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

The article will go up on the main page in the next 24 hours. I encourage people to read over the page again. Though little has changed in the past couple months, a once-over wouldn't hurt. --Xtreambar 02:12, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Too late - it's on the main page already. Great job folks! I've watched this page for many months now and you've made excellent progress. --ElKevbo 04:24, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Cornell Sun mentions FA status

The Daily Sun wrote about the FA-of-the-day-status of the Cornell University article. Again, good work, everybody! JDoorjam Talk 07:04, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Impressive. Raul654 14:52, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

How does one get the coordinates to appear at the top of the page? I would like to add them for another university page I am working on. Thanks! --Daysleeper47 15:27, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

The {{Geolinks-US-streetscale|42.448510|-76.478620}} line at the bottom of the article adds the coordinates to the top of the page in addition to the geolinks at the bottom of the page. ~Kruck 22:08, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Industrial Revolution?

The article says that Cornell was conceived after the American Civil War in the midst of the Industrial Revolution. According to the Industrial Revolution article, that was over, by the most liberal interpretation, by 1840. Am I missing something here? Right now, this rather jarring statement is on the front page of Wikipedia!--Wehwalt 15:33, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

I would dispute the "fact" that the Industrial Revolution was over by 1840, at least here in America. The Industrial Revolution can't be measured in years alone -- it differs for each nation. It might have been over by 1830 or 1840 in England, where it all started, but it took longer to get started -- and thus finish -- in other places such as the U.S. From the U.S. perspective, the Industrial Revolution probably didn't get underway until at least the 1830s or so and probably didn't "end" until well after the Civil War (perhaps even to the turn of the century). Thus, Cornell University's founding "in the midst of the Industrial Revolution" is a reasonable statement. Now, why the Industrial Revolution is relevant is another question ... --CPAScott 16:18, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Public or Private

As it now stands, the article does not adequately explain how a university that was originated by the New York State Senate as a land-grant school came to be a private institution. Sylvain1972 16:51, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Public versus private isn't as black or white as you make it out to be. My school (the University of Delaware) is public, but privately chartered, although I don't know all the legal implications thereof. Raul654 17:44, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Components of the University are public (e.g. the New York State School of Industrial and Labor Relations) while parts are private (e.g. the College of Arts and Sciences). --128.84.217.166 19:37, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Actually, it's all private. Several of the units are contracted with the State of New York to provide services on their behalf, but the University is wholly private. See the archives for a very thorough discussion on this point. JDoorjam Talk 20:47, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Some private but state-funded colleges inside the private university, exactly. ⇒Bayerischermann ^- 21:20, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

You're right, there is a very helpful discussion in the archive, thanks. It would be nice if it could be incorporated in the article itself. However, I am still curious as to how a land grant school came to be private. Sylvain1972 14:07, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

The land grant status does not actually have anything to do with whether a university is public or private, and in Cornell's case is only tangentially related to its state-supported colleges (the statutory colleges are not the "land-grant" part of the university). The Morrill Land-Grant Colleges Act was intended to foster teaching of agriculture, engineering and military tactics; each state was given a grant (30,000 acres of land per representative) on the condition that these fields were taught at the land grant colleges. The grant could be split between different institutions or used in one place; it could also be used toward establishing a new university (or universities). Most of the state legislatures used the grant to establish or strengthen a public school, but I don't think there is any reason to infer that the institution receiving the federal grant was necessarily a state university — it just happened that the states decided to give the money to a public institution. btm _talk 22:45, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

I have tried to make some clarifications, but they were deleted by someone who does not understand the subtle relationship between the endowed and statutory colleges. If you don't know what you are talking about, please don't delete. Racepacket 21:25, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Since it's best to keep the discussion in one place, I will copy over here what you wrote on my talk page, and my response to it:

This has already been discussed extensively in the talk archives for the Cornell University article. The consensus has been that Cornell is in fact a private university, not a "mostly private" one. That phrasing would appear to be your original research. Your recently inserted material about "state employees" also appears to be your conclusion, contrary to recent legal proceedings. Your suggestion to use the primary source materials is fine up to a point, but one ought to be careful of original research by synthesis, which I expect you are falling prey to. You will need to provide a reliable source for your claims, particularly that of Cornell as "mostly private", and your conclusion that employees of the contract colleges as "state employees". If you cannot, your edits will be undone. Sorry, but that is the policy. --C S (Talk) 23:35, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

I think that the statutory college article is a balance presentation of the facts. The public/private dicotomy is vague and has no significance. I agree that the Cornell is a non-profit separate corporation. However, the court cases address whether Cornell employees are covered by the NLRB or the New York PERB for labor organizing purposes, which has practical significance, but does not address the emotional "status" issue which seems to be at the core of what the editors here are working through. The Holden v Cornell case which I added in the footnote (which you deleted) does discuss and address the fact that because the Cornell Board of Trustees performs a "governmental function" much like the SUNY Board, is subject to the NYS Open Meetings Law. I suggest you compare the tone of the discussion of the relationship on the SUNY website (www.suny.edu) with that on the Cornell website and read the Sections of the New York State Education law cited in the footnotes (which you deleted) and you will see that the current presentation after your edits lacks balance. I agree that "mostly private" is a judgment, but all of the facts recited are accurate and relevant to the Organization of Cornell. Racepacket 13:21, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Cornell statutory college employee benefits are described at: http://www.ohr.cornell.edu/benefits/programs/statHealth.html They are covered under the SUNY/State plans

In 2006-07, the average Endowed faculty salary was $118,422 compared with the average statutory salary of $104,112. So in the rankings, the endowed salary is just above Duke's while the statutory salary is just above the University of Maryland.

The statutory college buildings and facilities are owned by NYS. Any construction is managed by the State Construction Fund. Of the $2.5 Billion in capital spending budgeted for the next 10 years on the Ithaca campus, $721 Million will be funded by New York State.

A useful document is http://dpb.cornell.edu/documents/1000380.pdf, the 2007-08 Cornell Financial Plan which takes key metrics and compares them to other universities. Even Cornell's internal analysis uses "public" universities to compare the Statutory colleges and "private" universities to compare the Endowed colleges.

The striking statistic is that Cornell's endowment per student is only $222,204 compared with Harvard's $1.5M. However, if you add in the annual NYS support assuming a 4.4% payout rate, Cornell's effective endowment per student is $373,095. So, State support is a very important factor in Cornell's quality and scope.

A prospective student who is selecting between a private or public school will care about (1) is the management/funding subject to the whim of the state legislature, (2) is the faculty well-paid, (3) is the tuition affordable, (4) are the buildings nice. A categorical statement that Cornell is private is misleading regarding its dependence on annual NYS appropriations, the statutory faculty pay, the relationship between the NYS budget process and statutory college tuition, and the state ownership and funding of the statutory college buildings. So it is fair to state that Cornell is mostly private, both private and public, hybred, or avoid any conclusory categorization.Racepacket 09:54, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Please look at the formulation on: http://www.alumni.cornell.edu/cu_facts/read_more.cfm?id=32 regarding the differences between statutory and endowed colleges. Again the problem I have with the "contract" analogy is that a contract usually involves mutual agreement. Here, we have unilateral action. The legislature enacted laws to charter Cornell as a whole as the land grant university and later to create five statutory colleges. They unilaterally pulled the plug on the NYS College of Forestry, and could do the same on the other four. The annual appropriation process is by no means locked in as a contractual entitlement. I think that the current version of the Cornell main article is misleading the reader. Racepacket 16:39, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Jbacu1985 01:26, 15 October 2007 (UTC) The private/public distinction is not really relevant today - in my view it's meaningless. The more accurate description is that Cornell is substantively independent from the State of New York in setting its strategies and policies, and the use of land and endowment assets. The Cornell Board of Trustee's is 'vested with "supreme control" over the university. As NY State's Land Grant university, Cornell's mission - both in theory and in practice are as 'public' as most any university, however the state legislature cannot directly control how the mission and programs are delivered upon.

Lack of Continuity

The section below demonstrates a disturbing lack of continuity: There is a detailed account of the situation of the university in the middle of the 19th century immediately proceeding a description of racial strife one hundred years later.

Is there nothing noteworthy (at this level of detail) to report over the interveening hundred years?

I am reluctant to modify the text myself. (It is currently the article of the day). Better I let those who produced the article take charge of surgery.

The university was inaugurated on October 7, 1868, and 412 men were enrolled the next day.[9] Two years later, Cornell admitted its first women students, making it the first coeducational school among what came to be known as the Ivy League. Scientists Louis Agassiz and James Crafts were among the faculty members.[8]

In September 2006, David Skorton formally became Cornell's 12th and current presidentOn April 19, 1969, more than eighty members of Cornell's Afro-American Society took over the student union building, Willard Straight Hall.

--Philopedia 22:13, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

I concur. I have wondered why no one else is bothered by the sloppy history section. I wrote the first two paragraphs and took the last one from an old version of the lead paragraph. What's up with the WSH takeover taking up half of the history section!?--Xtreambar 18:26, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

I support the comments above. The WSH takeover "takes over" the history section. We need to trim it down to a more succinct and appropriate length.--Parenthetical Guy 22:02, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree with those above who believe detail in the section overall is lacking. Much has happened between the Ezra vision and founding and today. That stuff's gotta be here!

Recent Edits

I have been comparing the current edition with that of the September 14th (last before the September 20 editions), and found some differences... The reference to the "Sylvester Lloyd" incident is newly added. Almost the only source I could find for this was the one cited (http://www.deltasigmatheta.com/hazenews/haze01.htm), with less than a dozen other webpages citing the source mentioned. Nor could I find any mention of one Sylvester Lloyd on the Cornell website (page search and people search), so I'm slightly skeptical about whether or not this actually took place. Would someone please confirm it with an independent reliable source? The founding date has been changed from "April 27, 1865" to "April 27 1865"; is the deletion of the comma appropriate? The caption of "Big Red Planet" has been changed to Mars. I think I prefer the title of "Big Red Planet" because it ties in better with the context. What's every else's opinion on this? Mimson 00:57, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Endowment (again)

Cornell has made public its endowment stats for fiscal year ending 6/30/2006, and the value is 4.3B as noted in http://www.alumni.cornell.edu/endowment.htm.

• Is that an official figure? The alumni association doesn't seem to give a source and in particular does not say it is the NACUBO figure. This source says $3,777,092,000 Do you have access to the 2006 NACUBO study? Dpbsmith (talk) 14:41, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

• • You win. It's not nacubo and I was not being strictly rigorous (not intentionally: I was just sloppy). The source is only an official Cornell release, and there is no stated connection between this release and the data from Cornell's business officers. If the Cornell alums think in good faith that the 5.0B value is still a more reliable source, then place the number back on the page.

• • • Actually, I don't think the $5B figure is that trustworthy. I feel like that figure almost seems made-up. It's the least reliable figure I've seen quoted, as it has one significant figure, and the way it's quoted, its accuracy is not even that relevant to the article. I fear it's quoted simply because it's the biggest, and I'm not entirely comfortable with its use. On the other hand, the $4.3B figure is the point of the source in question, and I feel more comfortable using it, though I do wish that they'd listed their sources for that figure. JDoorjam Talk 18:30, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

mars rover picture

Cornell helped make it, why can't its picture be on this page?

Alumni

I've removed Huey Lewis from this article for the second time. Please note that he definitely does not belong in the Alumni section since he dropped out before graduation.

Overall, the alumni section has some paragraphs that seem very sloppy and disorganized (especially the paragraphs on authors and entertainers). This needs to be cleaned up.

Bill Maher is mentioned in two seperate paragraphs. He is probably best categorized as an entertainer/comedian than a journalist (by his own account), so I have removed him from the list of journalists. User:keammo1 11:36, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

You don't have to graduate to be an alum. Please see the previous discussion: Talk:Cornell_University/Archive_3#Graduates_vs._Alumni. --C S (Talk) 09:29, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

I think that Ratan Tata is worth mentioning in Cornell Alumni list. He is one of the most influential business figures in India. I saw his name here a couple of days ago, but it's not there any more.

Ratan Tata is on the List of Cornell University People under Business. He certainly seems worthy of being listed on the main Cornell University page. If you want him there, put him there. --Cjs56 03:44, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

-Well I tried, but it keeps getting deleted for some reason.

I still don't see why Huey Lewis needs to get mentioned. The article is long. Make room for other alumni who actually graduated. Is anyone with me on this? Against? In any case, it's extremely confusing to start the section with "Graduates of Cornell are known as 'Cornellians'." and then go on to mention people that did not graduate! Huey Lewis should either be out, or something needs to be done to make it clear that he is not a Cornell graduate. My feeling is to just take him out. Yes, I know it's a fun fact that he attended Cornell for a while, but does he really need mention in the Alumni section? Let's please settle this - User:keammo1 4:02, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

The alumni section is waay bloated and lacks coherence. It's jammed packed with moderately-notable grads. I think cutting Huey "not a grad" Lewis is a great start towards cleaning this section --Cjs56 21:35, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

The first sentence defining "Cornellian" in that way was probably a mistake. Usage of "Cornellian" can include alumni, faculty, etc.; this is the definition used on List_of_Cornell_University_people. It's a bad idea to weed out the section, keeping only graduates. Then we would have to take out Kurt Vonnegut. If your issue is notability, there are very notable former students more famous than some of the graduates listed. So keeping only graduates is not workable. If you have some other scheme in mind, please describe it on this talk page. At this point, removing one name (Huey Lewis) is rather pointless. --C S (Talk) 06:18, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Wolfowitz Pic

Is there a reason that the Wolfowitz pic keeps getting deleted?

Methinks perhaps vandalism? I've had to put it back the magical three times --Cjs56 03:46, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

It's an insult to all Cornellians to have his picture on this website...much as the same as any Cornellian is ashamed to admit that Anne Coulter is a graduate.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.84.85.57 (talk • contribs)

So the picture keeps getting removed because you feel he's embarrassing? Metros232 22:00, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

You kiddin'? I talk about Ann Coulter having gone to Cornell all the time. It's a great conversation-starter. Except that the alumni section is rather crowded as it is, I see no reason for the Wolfowitz photo to be kept out of the article. JDoorjam Talk 18:19, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Not all Cornell alumni would agree with your view of embarrassing.

NRC Ranking

National Research Council is the only official agency which ranks universities based on their long-term research achievments. It basically averages the perfomance of schools over a period of ten years and because of that, it is more robust (despite USNEWS rankings which could change every year).

Ten years is chosen because the time constant of change in universities is more than 10 years and hence the data is valid even if it is 10 years old (look at sampling rate and bandwidth according to Nyquist!). for more information, please look at their homepage.

The last ranking goes back to 1995 and the next one will be out in September 2007 (one year delay). Again, because of NRC method, the 1995 data is not considered old and is still the most relavant ranking among schools. Although some college students or their parents might pay attention to USNEWS because of its publicity.

It seems to be fair to have both rankings in wikipedia. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.84.225.153 (talk) 00:48, 15 December 2006 (UTC).

Please define "official agency" and "official rankings." Those appear to be meaningless terms invented to support your argument.

I agree that the USN&WR rankings are deficient in many ways but the current paragraph gives 10 year old NRC rankings undue weight. It should be drastically shortened or deleted altogether. --ElKevbo 01:20, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

By official I meant that it is related to National Academy of Science and also National academy of Engineering as opposed to a magazin like USNEWS, and I guess the difference between these two is obvious.

Let's simply provide the date of issuance and then wait for the new ranking to come out and update it. There is no newer NRC information; let's let the readers decide the relevance of the statistic. JDoorjam Talk 02:26, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree. In fact, if you look at the history of the page (about two months ago), initially I had the date, but someone insisted that we should not put 1995 there. let's have all information and give all readers to decide for themselves.

The NRC methodology is flawed, and this has been remarked upon and supposedly fixed in the new ones coming out. In my experience these rankings have drawn fire in the academic community particularly because of the appearance of being "better" or more "respectable" than US News rankings. I don't see any evidence that they really are so though. But this is all beside the point. They are well-known rankings and deserve mention just as much as any of these other rankings. --C S (Talk) 21:05, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

All the rankings are deeply flawed. And all of them are using different measurement criteria. And most of them are fairly irrelevant, because even undergraduate students usually have some idea of what they're going to major in, that the quality of their major department is more important than the quality of the school. And what's more important than that is the highly chance event that they happen to encounter just one or two professors that happen to strike a spark in them. How the heck do you measure whether the probability of the spark being struck is higher at Reed College or at Colorado State?

If we must have them, then the NRC rankings are certainly as relevant as any. (The one I object to is the Washington Monthly rankings, because they're explicitly trying to prove a point, and the measure what people should care about, but not what people do care about).

I haven't glanced at the article yet, but let me take a guess: by any chance does someone want to throw out the NRC ranking because it happens to give a lower number than U. S. News? Dpbsmith (talk) 22:49, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Nope, I was wrong. I'm too cynical, I guess. Dpbsmith (talk) 22:50, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

I heard there are all sorts of delays on this NRC -- someting about being overbudget. I think they are coming aout > 2007, although I cannot give an exact date. I like the assumption that only ugrads would use this page to select a school. Makes sense. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.225.82.32 (talk) 02:26, 4 January 2007 (UTC).

Glee Club

Might not be the proper forum to post this, but the article on the Cornell Glee Club is somewhat problematic and I'm wondering if there are any Cornell-affiliated people who might want to take a look at it - particularly (but not only) to see if the huge list of "Cornell Songs" might be whittled down to just the ones people today are actually aware of.--Dmz5 21:51, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Alumi Picture

I just want to see some consensus on this. I believe that the alumni pictures should be diverse (ex: 1 government and 1 something else). I was just wondering if anyone had ideas of what types of people should have their picture in the alumni section.

I like the current two pictures, however, if there was a Toni Morrison picture I would put it up there.

thanks.--Cornell010 05:37, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I think other alumni need to be represented in picture form here too. Bill Nye (the Science Guy) is a good candidate for starters.

Somebody better take some pictures of Cornell

The pictures will look awesome, since Cornell has all this snow. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cornell010 (talk • contribs) 18:01, 14 February 2007 (UTC).

Individual College Articles!

[edit: i admit it; i'm a wiki/html/etc noob...how do I get this to be a normal looking topic like all the other ones?]

Some of the articles for individual colleges, especially College of Agricultural and Life Sciences, Arts and Sciences, Human Ecology, and even Weill Med. College seem to be lacking. Chose to insert this topic in overall university discussion rather than in those colleges' pages because their discussions are virtually dead :P But seriously, i think these pages need some work. Anyone willing to pitch in? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.184.89.167 (talk • contribs)

Club Sports

I was wondering if anyone would be willing to make pages concerning the club sports in Cornell such as Ultimate Frisby, Squash, Table Tennis, Karate, Taekwondo, and the like. I would be willing to make contributions but can anyone else follow me up on this?

Request for some help at Georgetown

I am hoping that some of the fine editors who have worked on this article could lend their eyes to my Georgetown University article. In working on Georgetown's article, I look at Cornell's often for inspiration, so I was wondering if I could get advice. I put it up for peer review, but more important would be the thoughts of the editors of a similar university. I am here because Cornell, like Georgetown, is a historic, private, well respected, research university, and should have basically similar article styles. Besides any advice on article content, such as what's missing or what's unnecessary, I'm looking for ideas on how to better move up the wikipedia foodchain to FA status like Cornell. How, at a smaller school, can I get more people involved? Who/where is good to ask for assistance? What should I avoid doing when posting it as a featured article candidate? Thanks for any time you can share.--Patrick 19:58, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Cornell Crest

• double take* All instances of the Cornell crest were speedily deleted?! --Xtreambar 16:08, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
  • I've asked for an explanation from the deleter. Apparently they failed the 'fair use' criteria. cOrneLlrOckEy 16:51, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

This is what he explained on my talk page:

Sorry, I was just in the process of replying (I had to dig the exact page name up first...). The only FU rationale on the page was the following:

Fair use rational:
Illustrates the logo in question.
{{no rationale}}
{{Non-free logo}}

This doesn't describe how the logo itself contributes to the reader's understanding of the article(s) in question, et cetera. Also, could you give me a list of what articles/templates this was used on? Thanks, ^demon^{[omg plz]} 18:42, 26 October 2007 (UTC) SO where did the logo come from? cOrneLlrOckEy 21:19, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

See here: Talk:Cornell University/Archive 1#Things That the Page Needs --Xtreambar 01:51, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't understand, every other school page has their crest, why haven't those been taken down. The lack of the crest makes this page look strange, and almost un-related to Cornell. Removing the crest is like removing every picture in reference to the clocktower, or removing a link to the atheltic page. It just makes no sense??? And yes, it contributes to the user's understanding, the university's crest is one of its most important images??? This decision makes no sense. Cornell010

Here's what ^demon deleted:

1. 10:47, 25 October 2007 (hist) (diff) Cornell University‎ (Removing instance of image Cornell emblem.png that has been speedily deleted per (CSD I6);)
2. 10:47, 25 October 2007 (hist) (diff) User:Pinecar/sandbox/Universities‎ (Removing instance of image Cornell emblem.png that has been speedily deleted per (CSD I6);) (top)
3. 10:47, 25 October 2007 (hist) (diff) Cornell University Department of Applied Economics and Management‎ (Removing instance of image Cornell emblem.png that has been speedily deleted per (CSD I6);) (top)
4. 10:47, 25 October 2007 (hist) (diff) Weill Graduate School of Medical Sciences of Cornell University‎ (Removing instance of image Cornell emblem.png that has been speedily deleted per (CSD I6);) (top)
5. 10:47, 25 October 2007 (hist) (diff) Cornell University Department of History‎ (Removing instance of image Cornell emblem.png that has been speedily deleted per (CSD I6);) (top)
6. 10:47, 25 October 2007 (hist) (diff) Cornell University School of Hotel Administration‎ (Removing instance of image Cornell emblem.png that has been speedily deleted per (CSD I6);) (top)
7. 10:47, 25 October 2007 (hist) (diff) List of Cornell University people‎ (Removing instance of image Cornell emblem.png that has been speedily deleted per (CSD I6);)
8. 10:47, 25 October 2007 (hist) (diff) Cornell University Graduate School‎ (Removing instance of image Cornell emblem.png that has been speedily deleted per (CSD I6);) (top)
9. 10:47, 25 October 2007 (hist) (diff) S.C. Johnson Graduate School of Management‎ (Removing instance of image Cornell emblem.png that has been speedily deleted per (CSD I6);) (top)
10. 10:46, 25 October 2007 (hist) (diff) Weill Cornell Medical College of Cornell University‎ (Removing instance of image Cornell emblem.png that has been speedily deleted per (CSD I6);) (top)
11. 10:46, 25 October 2007 (hist) (diff) Cornell University College of Engineering‎ (Removing instance of image Cornell emblem.png that has been speedily deleted per (CSD I6);) (top)
12. 10:46, 25 October 2007 (hist) (diff) Cornell University College of Architecture, Art, and Planning‎ (Removing instance of image Cornell emblem.png that has been speedily deleted per (CSD I6);) (top)
13. 10:46, 25 October 2007 (hist) (diff) Cornell University College of Arts and Sciences‎ (Removing instance of image Cornell emblem.png that has been speedily deleted per (CSD I6);) (top)
14. 10:46, 25 October 2007 (hist) (diff) Cornell University College of Veterinary Medicine‎ (Removing instance of image Cornell emblem.png that has been speedily deleted per (CSD I6);) (top)
15. 10:46, 25 October 2007 (hist) (diff) Cornell University School of Industrial and Labor Relations‎ (Removing instance of image Cornell emblem.png that has been speedily deleted per (CSD I6);) (top)
16. 10:46, 25 October 2007 (hist) (diff) Cornell University College of Agriculture and Life Sciences‎ (Removing instance of image Cornell emblem.png that has been speedily deleted per (CSD I6);) (top)
17. 10:46, 25 October 2007 (hist) (diff) Cornell Law School‎ (Removing instance of image Cornell emblem.png that has been speedily deleted per (CSD I6);)
18. 10:46, 25 October 2007 (hist) (diff) Cornell University College of Human Ecology‎ (Removing instance of image Cornell emblem.png that has been speedily deleted per (CSD I6);) (top)

--Xtreambar 19:36, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Plantations & Waterfall Pictures

There is no need to have a picture of the water-fall and the picture of the plantations, I think that we should choose one or the other ;having both pictures results in over-crowding in that part of the page.Cornell010

NY State College of Forestry at Cornell ???

I just stumbled across some information about a briefly lived college at Cornell called the State College of Forestry at Cornell. Apparently it existed from 1901 until June 17, 1903 when the Board of Trustees voted to dissolve the college due to lack of state support. See NYT June 18, 1903 "Cornell School of Forestry Suspended" perhaps someone wants to take a crack at an article about this since defunct college at Cornell.--Xtreambar 01:36, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Cornell in the Media=

I thought an interesting section to have would be to mention characters in movies, tv shows, or other media that feature a Cornell connection. I know off the top of my head the short lived TV show "Over There" had a US soldier that was a Cornell graduate. Life Time Movie network also had some movie called ""When Innocence Is Lost" that featured a character that gets accepted to Cornell. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.65.230.193 (talk) 01:53, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

food

The food at cornell is good.Darth Anzeruthi 00:16, 4 December 2007 (UTC)