Jump to content

Talk:Haverford College

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Nellis (talk | contribs) at 00:13, 1 November 2017 (→External links modified: checked=true). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

soccer

http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:9H389SIYnokJ:www.soccerhall.org/Monthly%2520Column/MC.November1.2004.htm+haverford+college&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=295

Motto

ok, so there's some controversey over the correct motto. I'm no latin expert, but i did contact the school librarian about this, and this is what i recieved in response (verbatim): "Haverford's original motto was "Non doctior, sed meliore doctrina imbutus" which translates roughly as " Not more educated, but with a better spirit imbued." This what I have always seen on all "official" college materials (seals, bookcovers, pennants, yearbooks, etc).Calcio 06:20, 16 January 2007 (UTC)calcio '69 I also ran what "Latinlovinglatino" claims to be the correct motto, "Nostrum discipulus es valde bardus" through a translator, and I got "Our disciple are intensely stupid." Clearly not the best translation, but upon consultation with any latin/english dictionary, it's quite obvious that "Nostrum discipulus es valde bardus" is not what a college would have chosen as its motto. Nostrum = our, discipulus = disciple, student, learner, pupil, valde = very much, bardus = stupid —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chinesejewboy (talk • contribs) 20 April 2006[reply]

Honor Code

The Honor Code is so central to this institution that it seems strange not to have a section called "honor code." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.82.136.225 (talk • contribs) 9 June 2006

I added RS material about the Honor Code. Many of the points made in this paragraph are covered in that citation. Drmikeh49 (talk) 07:03, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There needs to be more sourcing for the honor code as nearly the entire section is unsourced. Any unsourced material WILL be removed.Lacmaboingo (talk) 17:10, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Notable faculty, current and past

This section should be reserved for NOTABLE faculty (i.e. those with their own wiki pages or accomplishments to speak of) Also meaning not notable to a select few on campus like Hohenstein, but notable to whoever would be reading this page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.183.199.22 (talk • contribs) 10:22, 1 August 2006

Deleted stuff

Comment moved from User_talk:000.000.000.000:

--I deleted a lot of the alumni because I didn't think they were particularly notable and it's embarrassing for Haverford to have these more-or-less unknown graduates listed under famous alumni. Also, it's more aesthetically pleasing to have a shorter list. --I deleted the whole faculty section because it seemed pompous and a misleading to call all those profs notable. Maybe we should create a faculty section and just list them all. That way specs and other people could look at the list and google the names and get a sense of the faculty. --The soccer tidbit wasn't interesting. I forget what else deleted.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by SwammerBAM (talk • contribs) 00:41, 27 October 2006 I notice the section on the alumni magazine controversy was deleted. In 2006, the Haverford Alumni Magazine published an article comparing the Polish community in New York as stupid and likened them to vermin. The story was picked up by various New York newspapers, Poliosh language papers and web blogs across the country. It caused embarrassment for the college. An unfortunate smirch on the college's reputation. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.248.28.112 (talk) 17:14, August 23, 2007 (UTC)

It wasn't deleted at all; it was simply moved out of the article introduction and into its own section, which is certainly more in accord with its relative importance than its previous position was. - Nellis 18:03, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Photo

Just occurred to me: a student (or anyone else hanging around Haverford) should take a nice campus picture to add to the article. I might do it myself, eventually... ;) --Galaxiaad 02:02, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Metro Colleges

Rowan U in Glassboro NJ should be added to the list since it is closer to Philly (Center City/City Hall) than several of the institutions already listed (Villanova, Rosemont, Red Belly, etc)Calcio 06:20, 16 January 2007 (UTC)calcio '69[reply]

Advertisement?

The article seems accurate, could whomever marked it as an advertisement justify that tag? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 165.82.80.197 (talk) 16:10, 20 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

It seems immodest. Check the article for Swarthmore College, and you'll see what I mean.

e.g.

"The campus is a national arboretum and has a natural beauty and simple elegance."

"Haverford is a small college that quietly carries its eminence."

Don't forget:

"perennial powerhouses in their division" and the ensuing 4 paragraphs of athletic bragging with only one line mentioning that they're in the lowest division in a weak conference.

"Local attractions within walking distance include Wawa and IHOP. Merion Golf Club and Suburban Square are also located within walking distance" Its one thing to say where it is, but listing how close it is to the IHOP? This article was obviously written to promote the school. Not to mention calling IHOP a "local attraction" when the store is a nationwide chain that almost any school could claim to be in "walking distance of". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.167.67.191 (talk) 06:02, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, this article needs to be edited to be more unbiased. Even if the facts are right, the way they are written makes it seem untrustworthy and full of pomp. -- from a current student — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.183.133.159 (talk) 22:39, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lawrence J. David

Several users have added this alumnus to the list of notable alumni with the justification that he is a "noted historian," but I have been unable to turn up anything about him other than the fact that he (or someone with that name) graduated from Haverford in the nineties. I think that unless someone provides a link to support the claim he should be removed from the list. Arsene 06:46, 25 April 2007

I don't think it's "several users," I think it's the same person posting multiple times. I posted a request on his talk page that he provide some justification for it, but he hasn't responded except to put it back every time it's been deleted. I wonder if it's Lawrence J. David himself? John, HC '85 JTRH 16:40, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

cleanup

I went through the article and cleaned it up as best I could -- fixed grammar, continuity errors, some overly flowery language, some uncited "people think that"s. I acknowledge that I'm a Haverford student, so I'm not going to remove the template myself, but I'd like someone who has a moment to look over it and see if it's alright to do so -- and if not, to either lay down some points as to what should be cleaned up, or do so. 165.82.109.44 04:48, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Any thoughts, anyone? 165.82.109.44 13:24, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alumni list out of hand

Someone please take the initiative to create new article (List of Haveford College alumni) and move the way-too-long list in this article. I would do so myself but part of that process should include including a sampling of the most notable, prominent, or interesting alumni in this article and someone familiar with Haverford needs to do that. --ElKevbo 02:29, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone? If I make the article and move this list I'll be forced to pick a few random alumni to be listed in this article... --ElKevbo 03:20, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not an experienced enough Wikipedian to know how to create a new article while retaining the edit history of the original section of the original page, which is WP policy as I understand it. Otherwise, I'd volunteer. But if you have no connection to Haverford or knowledge of its history, may I respectfully suggest that you not put yourself in charge of deciding which (or how many) of our alumni are notable enough to be included? Thanks. JTRH 03:51, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The list is way out of hand and if you (or someone else) is not going to do something about it then I will, particularly since our anonymous friend is ignoring this conversation and blithely continuing to add to the list. --ElKevbo 04:01, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved the lists of alumni and faculty to List of Haverford College people. Please edit that list as appropriate. As noted above, it might also be a good idea to choose a few of the most interested and notable persons from that list to mention in this article to give readers a taste of the nature and diversity of Haverford's alumni. --ElKevbo 04:22, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll take a look at it. I think most of the contributions to that list have come from one or two people. JTRH 13:40, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Endowment

The $520 million figure which appears on the page as I write this is undoubtedly closer to the actual size of the endowment than the $800M+ figure it replaced. However, it is not verified by the cited article, which says only "over half a billion". Different sources give different figures, and it seems to vary widely from year to year. The information on the College Website is over a year old. Anybody want to take a crack at coming up with an accurate, verifiable figure? John, HC '85 JTRH 20:20, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest that we use the number from the College's site (unless you have access to a college publication that is more up-to-date). A number that's a year out of date will express the right order or magnitude which is all you can really expect to keep right. --Ahc 13:04, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The amount reported by the College as of June 30, 2005 (the most recent data I could find on haverford.edu) is just under $395 million, while a March 2007 article in the Bi-Co News - which is cited as the source for the $520 million figure currently posted on the wiki page - actually offers only a vague "topped the half-billion mark" (I misquoted above). I have no idea why the size of the endowment is so volatile, but two-year-old information seems to be particularly out-of-date here. JTRH 14:27, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

deleted the "controversy section". the article is long enough and the "controversy isn't about haverford but rather one recent grad who acted by himself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.142.243.20 (talk) 15:39, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently, it's been reinserted. I'm not going to re-delete this section on my own, but we should discuss notability. I agree that this isn't pertinent to the College as an institution, nor do I think it's notable. I vote for (re-)removal. JTRH 12:42, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Haverford1.gif

Image:Haverford1.gif 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 22:25, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:UNI Assessment

The article has numerous neutrality and style issues and fails to even approximate WP:UNIGUIDE.

  • The content of the lead is wholly distinct from and doesn't summarize anything the rest of the article. Also undue weight on some topics.
  • Rampant neutrality issues and repeated violations of WP:MORALIZE and WP:PEACOCK:
    • "highly selective" in lead, "elite liberal arts college", "quietly prestigious", "rigorous academics", "an especially close and storied relationship", "a reputation as one of best places to experience an undergraduate education", "While nearly all of the departments are strong, and are complemented and enhanced by the offerings...", "disproportionate number of prominent scientists", "a vibrant musical community", etc.
  • Pervasive lack of referencing or citations
  • Undue emphasis on honor code
  • Lack of a history, organization/administration, and several other necessary sections.

Madcoverboy (talk) 03:02, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

all americans

It states that Haverford has had 13 All-Americans. I can think of at least that many that I overlapped with, and anyone who has ever been into Tom Donnelly's office knows that 13 is an order of magnitude off the correct number. Can someone correct this?

148.63.6.147 (talk) 07:45, 6 August 2009 (UTC)Nathaniel[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Haverford College. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:08, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 10 external links on Haverford College. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:23, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sciences at Haverford College

The notion that Haverford College is a leader in the Sciences (especially so relative to our peers, and given its small size) is not an unfounded or a new one. The college has been associated with numerous achievements in science and science education (eg. strong alumni activity, the only stem cell research lab at a LAC, ...), but the current state of the "Science program" section of this wiki article is pretty sad. Could someone in good faith please, please come up with something pleasant?

Just some things to take note:

Thank you for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.156.53.105 (talk) 18:06, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Haverford College. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:43, 2 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Haverford College. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:02, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Haverford_College&oldid=808119055"