Talk:Kenyon College

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

Forget Independence[edit]

In a country so focused on individualism, the atmosphere at Kenyon could be a nice change for some students. 99% of the undergrads at Kenyon live on campus. Students there can plan on spending four years with familiar students in close quarters. Which for some is a positive thing...

“The lack of off-campus housing enhances the sense of community. I love living on campus.”

from the College Prowler guidebook, Kenyon College - Off the Record —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) 16:30, 25 January 2006 (UTC)


I would suggest adding more to the academics section. I'm quite impressed with Kenyon's courses and academics, but this section seems like it only highlights the English department. Thyroidpsychic 01:34, 4 October 2006 (UTC)


I removed most of the text from the Academics section, since it was taken from here. Please do not add copyrighted material to Wikipedia articles. Thank you. blameless 14:49, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Academic programs are listed here. User:Fred Bauder Talk 07:52, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
Captadam, why did you remove the link to Image:ken1.jpg? On the image page there is no mention of a copyright violation: the uploader says they took it themselves. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 13:21, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
It was photographed in 2004 by Howard Korn and is property of Kenyon College. It resides in the Office of Public Affairs photography collection, and the copyright information on the image page is incorrect. --Captadam 15:12, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
I stumbled on your report at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2006 November 10/Images. For some reason you did not complete the image nomination correctly, nor take the quick way of emailing the foundation. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 15:15, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Honestly, when I came upon the image, I was not sure of the way to report it--I just knew its origin and that the copyright statement was incorrect. I'm not a pro at this. My apologies for reporting it incorrectly. --Captadam 15:17, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Oh, and, thanks for your help doing this the right way! --Captadam 15:18, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Quite understandable. I had thought the page for representatives of the rights holders was easy to find, but I never use it. I have completed the nomination according to the instructions at the top of the page Wikipedia:Copyright problems. An admin will deal with it now. By the way, I hate copyright violations, and I am unhappy about the crest too. I just noticed that the interpretation of the arms, Shield.jpg, has no source information, so we can't be sure the artwork is old enough to be public domain, though that is certainly likely. What do you think? --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 15:24, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
I actually work in the office that manages all that stuff, although I am not putting myself out here as the guy who actually determines all these rules. The crest appears all over the place, so that was likely pulled off Kenyon's website. I'm not sure what to think about it, in all honesty. --Captadam 15:41, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

List of Student Organizations[edit]

I don't know what the Wikipedia standard is for including bunches of links, but the large numbers of red links (Wikipedia links that await an article) in the student organization section make me want to take them all out and only list the student orgs that have their own Wikipedia page. The rationale is that if it's important enough to be on the list, it should have its own page.

Thoughts? --Nufftin 19:02, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Notable alumni[edit]

Another editor has reverted my removal of Zack Space and Chris Eigemann from the notable alumni list here. We went through this with Barry Goode - and the point was, sure he's notable but he should go on the main article of Notable Kenyon Alumni. Surely that is also true of these other two: they don't belong in the brief list with Palme, Newman, Hayes, etc. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 07:13, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

[soapbox]It's a very good question, the answer to which (IMHO) comes down to "they are all notable (according to a strict interpretation of the rules) but some are more notable than others." The list on the Kenyon College article is intended to be a summary of the top layer of notability and the Notable Alumni of Kenyon College article is intended to supplement that. In other words, it is no shame to be left off the front page. For example, the three actors (Oscar-winning, racecar-driving/owning and salad-dressing-making) Paul Newman, (Emmy-winning) Allison Janney, and Chris Eigeman are all notable according to strict definition, but no one but a troll would think that they should all be at the first rank of notability, or else why have a separate page for Notable Kenyon Alumni? The same thing with (President) Rutherford B. Hayes and (one-term congressman) Zack Space, even if you think Space is a better representative than Hayes was a president. Notability is not the same as being good at your chosen field of endeavor.
There is a list of Kenyon Presidents on the Main Page, all of whom are notable under the rules, almost none of whom are notable enough to be on the front page of this article, as evidenced by the lack of separate articles about them. The whole section is a data dump, rather than something that really adds understanding to the article as a whole.[/soapbox]--Nufftin (talk) 13:58, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Printz Award winning author John Green is (what I would consider) a notable alumni; should he be added to the list, or should we perhaps wait to see his accomplishments later in his career? Theknittingnerd (talk) 00:24, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

He's already at List of Kenyon alumni. rʨanaɢ (talk) 00:54, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Selective in lead[edit]

(copied from User talk:Madcoverboy) Regarding your recent edit to Kenyon College -- I agree that "highly selective" is somewhat subjective and I have tried to restore the article to NPOV. The term "selective," however, when applied to college admissions, actually means something relatively tangible--it is generally used to refer to colleges that have an admissions process involving several steps (interviews, etc.) and don't accept all or even close to all applicants (as opposed to schools that, for example, have rolling admissions, no interviews, and accept over 90% of applicants). This article, for example, uses the term in that sense. There is a standard rating system for ranking colleges' selectivity, the Barron Selectivity measure, that is not perfect but is enough that calling a college "selective" here is not making a subjective description, but rather objectively placing the school among a group of other schools that share the same status. This article and this article are some more random examples of the term used in this sense, to define a generally accepted group of schools. --Politizer (talk) 16:58, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

As you point out there are several different indices, standards, and organizations promulgating rankings and other college information, each employing different definitions and metrics to classify institutions. Thus, to assert that Kenyon is "selective" necessarily implies either an overborad, generic definition common to the vast majority of higher education institutions (as you suggest) or a classification with the thinnest veneer or reliability and based upon sources with divergent or even incompatible definitions (US News, Barrons, Carnegie, NSF, etc) but nevertheless intended to connote eliteness. I believe that if the word is intended as the definition you propose, it is redundant as indeed the vast majority of institutions are "selective" and indeed the vast majority of even the most "selective" institutions make no mention of this in the lead of their articles. The term is entirely appropriate within a section based upon admissions information and academics, but to state it in the first sentence of the lead gives it undue weight. That Kenyon is a liberal arts institution, located in Gambier, founded in 1824, and not publicly owned or controlled are important, specific, and uncontroversial assertions. Uncritically describing it as "selective" in the lead is unspecific at best and boosterism at worst. Thus, it shouldn't be included at all in the lead. Madcoverboy (talk) 20:37, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Ok, I think you have a point there; I checked out the Wikipedia articles for a bunch of schools that are similar to Kenyon in terms of size, demographic, background, selectivity, etc., and none of them seem to use the term either. I am deleting "selective" from the article now, to put it back the way it was after your edit. --Politizer (talk) 20:47, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Notable faculty members, past and present[edit]

Former Swedish prime minister olof palme studied here (murdered 1986) —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:52, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Dude, he's in the list. See Notable alumni. —Politizer talk/contribs 00:06, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Notable alumni section[edit]

Is it necessary to list all notable alumni in the small introduction at Kenyon College#Notable alumni, when there is already a separate article (List of notable Kenyon College alumni) for this? Per the WP:Summary style guideline, it makes sense to limit the list here to a few prominent examples that are easily readable in paragraph form, and keep the rest at the separate list; otherwise people are just going to keep adding any individual they personally feel is important, making the paragraph larger and more indiscriminate, and less useful to readers.

So, we should reach a consensus on just which individuals to include in the brief summary here, and after that if anyone wants to add further examples here (rather than in List of notable Kenyon College alumni) it should be discussed here first. rʨanaɢ (talk) 00:04, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Lead section issue[edit]

What other points should be included?--MattyMetalFan (talk) 20:54, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Kenyon 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.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:03, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Religion in the infobox[edit]

This RfC, which covered religion in infoboxes, states that irreligion shouldn't be placed in infoboxes, under the holding that non-religion is not religion. I will, following this logic, be removing the affiliation (or the lack thereof) from the infobox. --Peapod21 (talk) 07:00, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Not so fast. There's a good argument to made that it's very helpful for readers if we make it clear that institutions that were associated with a specific religion but have changed that association are no longer associated with that religion. In this instance, the college was explicitly founded to train Episcopal clergy but it is no longer associated with the Episcopal (or any other) Church.
Perhaps "unaffiliated" or "secular" would be the most appropriate entry. ElKevbo (talk) 13:58, 3 July 2017 (UTC)