Talk:Texas A&M University/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archived

All previous talk pages have been archived. — BQZip01 — ^talk 02:27, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Hold off on changes

Please refrain rom any major changes to this article unless they are minor (technical, grammar, etc) or are IAW the FA review. — BQZip01 — ^talk 02:51, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

New changes

All, our priorities at this time are

1. Get FA passed (minor grammar, syntax, and technical changes only unless specified by the FA candidate discussion).
2. Changes to improve the article even further.

Once we pass FA, we will implement further improvements. For such a change, please leave a note below.

Thanks — BQZip01 — ^talk 04:18, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

History (1900-1950)

It's a minor issue but I noticed that the history section (1900-1950) jumps to using "Aggies" to describe A&M graduates/students, and "Aggies" is only previously mentioned in the info box. Perhaps the first sentence in this section should say:

"Texas A&M students and graduates (Aggies) were asked to put their education and military training to the test during World War I."

This would introduce the nickname and also emphasize that both students and graduates made the sacrifice, a fact that is mentioned later in the article in the alumni section. In the current lead-in it seems to imply only graduates were involved. --Claygate 03:36, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Disagree: I'll admit this is a valid point, but I think the implication that current students and graduates are Aggies is pretty self-explanatory. The only difference is when you get to former students that did not graduate, but that issue is clarified later in the article. I think it is too much of a sidetrack and would detract from the issues in this section. In short, I think we should leave it the way it is. — BQZip01 — ^talk 04:18, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

The main point is that someone reading the article without any fore-knowledge of the term "Aggies" (especially someone from overseas), may be confused. Perhaps a short definition in the intro section is in order? --Claygate 12:38, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

My 2cents being from "overseas" reading the name didnt throw me I just accepted that as nickname but I agree that it should be mentioned, maybe even in the lead before its used. Even if the detail behind the name doesnt get covered until later in the article. Gnangarra 12:51, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Ok, sounds fine to me. — BQZip01 — ^talk 19:01, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Done. --Claygate 15:04, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

The term "Aggies"

The tradition section seem to have two phrases to describe people who attend A&M. Texas A&M students and "Aggies". the word "Aggies" is not previously defined in earlier parts of the article. However, it is much more concise then "Texas A&M students and former students". Also, the noun "Aggies" is used at 13 different schools around the US. Thus "Texas Aggies" would be a better way to write it. whatever we do, we have got to remove, or define the term "aggies" in the tradition section. maybe simply linking the term would be good enough. Oldag07 05:07, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

or maybe the best solution is to switch the athletics section, with defines the tierm, with the traditions section until we get FA status. i want your thoughts first. . . . Oldag07 05:14, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

i really should read the comments above before writing my own. still, my 13 other schools comment is true. Oldag07 05:22, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Respectfully, I think we should leave it as is. This article is about the University, not Aggies. As such, an informal definition seems fine. I'm an Aggie and so is someone from New Mexico State. It doesn't diminish anything when we have the same term for two different things. Since it is within an article of Texas A&M, I think the inference is obvious and would be redundant.

We already switched these two sections once (please check the archives), and I am hesitant to switch them back (even after FA review).

The FA review is already underway and they don't want any major changes. Discussion here is fine, but please don't do any major alterations until after we pass. I have to go to bed, so I'll bid you adieu. — BQZip01 — ^talk 05:27, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

FA Review Comments

History Section

• We may need to change the section headings. How about the following:
  • Establishment
  • World Wars
  • Expansion

Karanacs 13:41, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I think those that are there now (not 1870-1900, etc) are fine. We can tweak this later. — BQZip01 — ^talk 18:59, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I think we should change the third subheading to a word that is descriptive of the major facelift the university underwent - the university status, the enrollment hike, the grants, AAU recognition, etc. BlueAg09 (Talk) 07:56, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Notable People

• I think the O&M picture has to go, beautiful as it is. Instead, for this section can we include a picture of the Medal of Honor, as suggested in the review? Karanacs 13:41, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Sure! still think the pict is nice, I just wish we could find a place for it. — BQZip01 — ^talk 18:58, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Removing a Template

Maybe we could remove the Texas A&M system template, and just place a link to the system on the Texas A&M template. Maybe just mention the branch campuses. We can also add a disambiguation to the top for the Texas A&M System. could save a lot of space. we might be able to reduce the big 12 template to maybe a link, it being a athletics conference. Thoughts? Oldag07 01:28, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Texas A&M University/Archive 5

Comments?Oldag07 01:48, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

The template is really big, but I think it belongs in this article more than any others because it applies directly to TAMU in College Station and not so much the other branches of the system. Karanacs 14:24, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Totally misunderstood what you were asking for at first. I'm going to stay neutral here. I don't like templates like this in general, so I'm biased. Karanacs 14:25, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Texas A&M University/Archive 5 Category:Texas A&M University System

????? could be in striking range of 75 kb. Oldag07 15:24, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

• Here's another question -- instead of removing these templates, is there a way to consolidate them, like we have for the WikiProjects above? And if there was a way to do this, would it help with our slow loading times at all? Karanacs 19:39, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I doubt there is one; I looked through all the university featured articles, and none of them consolidate the templates on the bottom of the article. I also looked through the "See also" section in Template:WikiProjectBanners and didn't get any luck there either. Perhaps we can create such a template? BlueAg09 (Talk) 20:01, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Check out my sandbox—we are able to use the same template coding in this case. We'll have to tweak some things, like the text on top. BlueAg09 (Talk) 20:07, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I think that looks pretty good (although we would have to tweak the text). Can you tell if that actually affects the size of the page and the potential loading speed? Karanacs 20:20, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

The template i made above isn't even necessary for this page. it mostly is internal links for this page. it would work with all the others. I do like the template blueag09 made though. we should decide by tonight. get FA status, then do fancy stuff. Oldag07 20:35, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually the template takes up another 39 bytes of space. When I took out the template it's 169 bytes, but with it, it's 208 bytes. So maybe we're better off without it. BlueAg09 (Talk) 23:31, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for trying, anyway. Karanacs 01:13, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Good edits

Oldag07, good edits on the gratuitous prepositional phrases (some written by yours truly!) — BQZip01 — ^talk 03:42, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, a one hour critical writing class was my only B last semester. I almost had a 4.0. a far better gpa then what i had for the rest of my college experience. Glad i learned something. Boy do I HATE CPR.. . .. . Oldag07 03:51, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Wait a minute. CPR was part of critical writing?!?! Boy did I get jipped! — BQZip01 — ^talk 04:08, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

CPR is aka Calibrated Peer Review. we write our papers, submit them online, then we have to grade, though the computer other students in the class. if our grade deviates from our other classmates, then you do not get points. you also have to grade 3 sample essays, and that that about right too. learned some good editing skills. it was very tedious though Oldag07 04:36, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

btw, what do you think about my changes to the A&M template? (above) Oldag07 04:37, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

This is what i used. might help for future pages. http://www.klariti.com/technical-writing/Deadwood%20Phrases.shtml Oldag07 14:40, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Let's not go crazy on the edits. I think the article is pretty sound right now. Overall, the minor edits today have been good, but I've found several instances where we've combined two sentences and left mismatched verb tenses or extra words that don't make sense. Also, in several cases the consolidated version left us with multiple sentences starting with the same word or phrase. Sometimes the extra verbiage is okay because it helps the paragraph or section flow better or because it provides a slightly more precise meaning. Let's be aware of those issues, and, since we are in the middle of an FA review, not get too edit-happy (something I know I need to work on too). Karanacs 01:42, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Guilty (See below)Oldag07 15:04, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Hidden comments

We might be able to trim off a little by taking out the hidden comments. There is one in the Athletics section and is (was?) one about popular culture, too. --Wordbuilder 19:31, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't have a problem with removing those. Now that we don't have a pop culture section, I think we can take out the few lines that are hidden in Notable people, and the athletics one can probably go too. BQ or BlueAg -- I'm not sure which of you added those; is it okay with you if we remove them? Karanacs 19:34, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I believe it was BQ. I'm thinking of moving those comments to one of his subpages (perhaps User:BQZip01/TAMU) so we can lose some space. That way, when he needs to refer to them, he can go there. Is that okay with you, BQ? BlueAg09 (Talk) 00:00, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

The comments I added shouldn't take up much space. They aren't for me, they are for future edits. If it is something like "This is temporary..." yeah, delete it. — BQZip01 — ^talk 02:49, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

The one comment I deleted in the Athletics section (and re-added) shows to be 404 bytes. --Wordbuilder 13:43, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry

Being a little over enthusatic about removing "be" verbs. Hopefully most of the changes are decent. I guess I am a little tired. Oldag07 03:06, 23 May 2007 (UTC) I need a break. no more wikipedia for a couple of days. 186 edits (some reverted but most good) in the last 3 days. Oldag07 04:11, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

186 edits is a lot for 3 days. You did a good job -- thanks for your hard work :) Karanacs 13:13, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Citation templates

We are at 84 KB now. If we were to write each of the references by hand instead of using the citation templates for guidance, I calculated that we can get down to the mid 70 KB's range. This will be a tedious job, however, and would be better if we split the 159 references up. BlueAg09 (Talk) 09:12, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

We can always cut out the corps and the band. who needs them anyways  :-)Oldag07 14:08, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Thems fightin wurds...  :-) — BQZip01 — ^talk 16:03, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I vote against. This is an internal problem in Wikipedia, not a problem with the article. I certainly have no problem continuing to improve the article after we get FA status, but I say we wait until after that. — BQZip01 — ^talk 04:14, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Superscript removal

I'm going to go ahead and remove the superscripts on the ordinals (60th, 22nd, etc.) The use of the superscript in ordinals is unconventional and many style guides have a rule against it. See Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(dates_and_numbers)#Superscript_.22th.22 for more detail. BlueAg09 (Talk) 09:46, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

coolOldag07 10:54, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Ditto. Good catch! — BQZip01 — ^talk 16:03, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Using the phrases "Texas A&M" and "corps of cadets"

I remember reading in the FA guidelines: "Don't repeat the title of the article unless necessary." We seem to use the phrase "Texas A&M" a lot. we could save space just using the term "A&M". As for "corps of cadets" 2/3's of the times the phrase is used, "corps" could suffice. I think I can change "corps of cadets", changing the phrase Texas A&M requires in my view a second opinion. Oldag07 10:54, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't mind changing Corps of Cadets to Corps, but I don't really like changing all of the "Texas A&M" to "A&M." Both are really the name of the school, A&M is just our lazy way of saying it. I'd rather be more formal here and use "Texas A&M," but I'm also not advocating replacing any instances where we didn't already do that.Karanacs 13:15, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

How about "Texas A&M" in the more "formal" sections, and "A&M" in sections like traditions and student life. Regardless, the phrase "Texas A&M University" should be limited as shown in the FA guidelines.Oldag07 13:39, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Agree with last post, but be careful about using just "Corps." It should be capitalized and "the Corps" should be referenced somewhere (it's already in the Corps section, but if you use it before, make sure you show where it comes from): e.g. The Corps of Cadets, also known as the "Corps," is one of the oldest... — BQZip01 — ^talk 16:03, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Kept the Corps of cadets in formal sections, and the words corps or cadets in the "informal sections"Oldag07 17:39, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

OldAg, I agree completely with your proposal. "Texas A&M" for formal sections, "A&M" for ones dealing more with students. Karanacs 16:25, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

done. although i considered sports unformal. or should i revert those too. Oldag07 18:15, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I would say sports is more formal, especially considering there are other "Aggies" out there and other "A&M"'s. — BQZip01 — ^talk 04:15, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Suggestions

my last contribution for a while. ill be back in to busy mode in a few days and i have spent way too much time here. clever editing can only go so far. We are eventually going to have to cut stuff out. my suggestions are on my talk page: User_talk:Oldag07#TAMU_Revisions Oldag07 19:21, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't think we should remove content; the problems the reviewers are citing are with citation templates. I just don't know how we should address those issues. Karanacs 20:17, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

templates don't affect the size much as shown on the history section. (see revisions 03:44, 23 May 2007 and 03:43, 23 May 2007) They do increase loading times significantly like pictures do. Maybe i should organize my talk page to separate the remove suggestions with the other ones. the alterations need approval from our "group" Oldag07 20:51, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

made some of the easier changes. what do you think about the rest of my ideas?Oldag07 22:24, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Everything seems fine. Just be careful about those little changes that change the meanings of sentences. That is all.

As for the references, I think Johntex (a longhorn no less) made the best argument for us to keep any/all references. The ones we have now are fine, but, as he said, we'll have to maintain it. If it is a loading problem, I say screw it. That is wikipedia's problem, not ours and certainly not the article's. — BQZip01 — ^talk 04:12, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Submitted our article to the 2 wikiprojects that we have for assessment. hopefully with more assessments, we can get comments quicker, and hopefully FA faster. Oldag07 05:29, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

NICE!!! — BQZip01 — ^talk 05:42, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Feedback about the Class of 2010

I posted this on Gnangarra's user page and got a pretty positive response. Thought I'd share it with you and see if we could incorporate his suggestion at a later time.

I am hoping to shed some light on your interest in the class system at Texas A&M University. At Texas A&M, your class year is defined by the date you enter the school. Even if you graduate late, early, or not at all, you are still a member of that class. Privileges associated with those classes are given to the entire class and, as such, a bond forms between members of each class.

A few examples:

• Only seniors can walk on the grass.
• Only seniors wear boots in the Corps
• Tickets to the football games are issued by class: grad students/seniors first, juniors second, etc

This is ingrained in freshmen from the day they step on school grounds at their new student conferences when they start to be encouraged to show pride in their class as a group.

This is true many times over for classes in the Corps. Of my 21 buddies, I have been to all but 2 weddings (and I was deployed to the Middle East at the time) and stay in touch with all of them. I graduated in 2002. Medrano graduated in 2001, but joined us after spending 2 years as a non-reg (a nonregulation non-Corps student); originally the class of 1999, by joining the Corps as a fish, he renounced his class and became part of ours. Another one of my buddies, Jeff, never graduated. All of us though are members of the Fightin' Texas Aggie class of 2001.

I will admit it is nonstandard (in regards to what other schools do), but it keeps students together even if they fall behind, change majors, etc. At class reunions, these students still meet up with the same people and not with strangers they knew for only 1-2 years.

This is not a hostile note, merely a bit of education about this unique school. In short, to call a group of freshmen at A&M who entered in 2006 "the class of 2010," is entirely accurate. — BQZip01 — ^talk 23:50, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the information, not being from the "states" there are somethings especially with the school system that I know very little beyond the media interpretations. The advantages in that is when reviewing unexplained and local terminology stand out. Maybe a supporting article to explain the use of it, how its socially developed etc then you could revert back knowing that its clearly explain. BTW I found the article informative, its a credit yourself and the other editors who put the effort in. Gnangarra 05:06, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

The Traditions page needs major updating. The "class" caste system, and what i am suggesting, painted overalls. Get FA status, secondary articles after that Oldag07 12:24, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Ideas Section for After our Nomination if we get it

More Templates!

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Infobox_World_university_rankings
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Infobox_US_university_ranking Oldag07 13:29, 24 May 2007 (UTC) Oldag07 17:38, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

The World template is probably small enough we could include, but I think the US one might be way too long and page-consuming. I'd have to see it first. Karanacs 17:54, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Bonfire

I am trying to finish a bonfire accident elaboration as suggested in the FA review. I just don't know if i should expand the history section or the tradition, BF section. I put in something about the memorial on the history section but I think it should be moved to the tradition section. Honestly, i am a first gen first aggie of my family. I would prefer someone who actually was at school during the accident (BQZ) to write this section. Thanks Oldag07 03:27, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I'll be happy to do so, but it may take a little bit of time (i.e. until next week) before it is finished, but if the weather around here keeps up I may tackle it tonight. My ideas for the paragraphs are:

1. Pull from the bonfire site to show the history of Bonfire
2. (maybe expand to the 3rd para as well): Show the impact on the student body & school spirit. Address the impact on the environment & how replant/common sense addressed it.
3. The collapse; include references to the first collapse and the manner in which bonfire was run.
4. The aftermath of the collapse and the memorial.

As for my experiences, I wasn't there when it happened, but I was there about very shortly after it happened.

Story time (pull up a chair)

At approximately 2:25 A.M., the band commander was awakened by someone on Corps staff. In turn, my commander and first sergeant were awakened by a phone call from the band commander and told they needed to get a head count to make sure no one was missing. Both they and the other unit command staff in our dorm came quickly came to the conclusion that the quickest way to get a head count was to pull the fire alarm. They called the command post and told them their intentions and to inform the fire department accordingly.

Side note: The previous year, a dorm room was set on fire by an arsonist (his identity was never proven, but we knew who it was; damage: $500,000+). When the fire was discovered, every fire alarm was pulled, but did not activate the alarm. The University had decided that the number of false alarms warranted a 3-minute delay before alarms would still give the students time to get out; they were wrong. By the time the alarms would have activated, the circuit was burned through. 13 people were trapped in the upper floors until the fire department arrived. The policy was changed and those who pulled the alarms have been visciously prosecuted ever since. Needless to say, an alarm in the dorm quickly got our attention

We quickly got up and did a head count. Everyone was present (my brother was among the freshmen) from our unit and our sister unit in the dorm with us was missing two who were later found to be out with friends. We were told the situation. We were shocked. One of my buddies said his sister was out there. I ran back inside and called my parents. I still vividly remember what I said to my mom when she answered, "Mom, stack just collapsed. Matt (my brother) and I are okay, but Luke's sister is out there and I'm going out to help. I love you, but I gotta go." She said she loved me and I quickly got dressed in my jeans, combat boots, and my pot and ran out to my buddy's jeep. We all piled in and drove over to the site.

We were stopped by some juniors on Corps staff who told us that we couldn't go there. My buddy explained his sister was out there and we were going. They said we couldn't take our vehicle since it would interfere with rescue vehicles getting in. He said, fine, and we pulled over into the grass and ran over to the site.

I must admit I was in awe. The stack that had been so carefully built was on its side. Emergency workers kept us back (understandably) and we found his sister shortly thereafter. We stayed behind and helped lift a few logs out of the way until we were stopped by investigators who told us to stop since they wanted to figure out what happened. I stayed until sunrise. They then asked for a someone to do a head count for the Corps. All of the commanders were in a meeting with Corps staff and no seniors were around. All the first sergeants were at the meeting too. Lo and behold, I was the ranking member of the Corps present, so I took up the job starting with the units I knew.

Working with the RHA President (with whom, through a completely unrelated situation, I became good friends with), we quickly compiled a list and found about 50 missing from the Corps. The nonregs were not so organized and it took nearly 7 hours before they had a reliable list. My girlfriend at the time was an RA and I was with her when she found out one of her residents died. I also later found out that I knew all six of those who were killed from the Corps. I lost a lot of respect for the Captain in my Air Studies (Air Force ROTC) class when she questioned where everyone was for class and told them that they might lose their scholarships ("they may be dead," I thought internally)...one of them had.

The second night, I went with my girlfriend to the scene and we wandered around. A sorority sister of hers had a miniature dachshund and she lent it to some Corps guys for comfort, but the dog went missing a few minutes later. I helped her friend find her dog, who was safe and sound in the pocket of someone's overalls. I later got dumped by that girlfriend and married the other one with the dog (who still gets into trouble on a regular basis).

Something else that stands out in my memory: the bars voluntarily closed and no alcohol was served for the next 48 hours within about a 70-mile radius. It was one of the classiest things I have ever seen from businesses: helping us think clearly in a crisis and not allowing feelings of anguish to be amplified through depressants (fights WOULD have broken out too).

To this day, I am still VERY touchy about the whole incident. When I was a freshman, one of the guys wore a nametag with "Charles Whitman" on it to the t.u. game. I thought it was funny at the time. In retrospect, I can't imagine how painful that would be to the parents of a gunned-down student and see that as a joke. I saw several shirts at the t.u. game in 2006 and was appalled to see, "What's the matter Aggies? Can't keep it up?" and a picture of the collapsed stack on hundreds of orange T-shirts. Current students thought it was a funny joke and I lost a lot of respect for that institution that day when those students were not asked to change shirts or leave the stadium, but were asked to stand up front in the stands and be shown on TV (they never made it on TV, but they were trying). A mob mentality can excuse some of that, but not all and I will not respect an institution that harbors and supports that kinds of behavior. I realize that's not all of the students, only a small portion, but they are vocal and inappropriate and should be asked to sit down & shut up (end rant).

Well, those were some of my recollections. I'll try to keep the new section bias-free.

Thoughts? — BQZip01 — ^talk 04:53, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I found out Bonfire fell at 4am when I got to G Rollie to wait with a friend to pull tickets for the tu game. I called my mom immediately because I was terrified that one of my high school friends was out there. She started calling the others in her Aggie Moms group. By 4:30 they had gotten in touch with every student from our county and learned that we were all safe. (I now have a lot more respect for Aggie Moms organizations -- that was fast considering the craziness.) It took until 3 pm that day to find out whether one of my friends from FHK was out there. She had decided at the last minute the night before to visit friends in Dallas instead of taking her shift at stack, and no one knew where she was. When I picked up the phone and heard her voice I just collapsed from relief.

I have never been more proud to be an Aggie as I was at the memorial service the night Bonfire fell. Reed Arena was packed as full as it could get, and when the service officially ended it was absolutely silent. Everyone stood up and spontaneously linked arms as Dr. Bowen began handing flowers to the families of those injured and killed. Someone started singing Amazing Grace, and we all stood there until every single family member, and every rescue worker, had been escorted out. I still cry every time I think about it.

Becoming an Aggie is really becoming part of a family, and for me, that was never more evident than throughout the aftermath of the collapse. Karanacs 13:49, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

it seems like he only wants "a sentence or two" on the accident. "would like to see another sentence or two on the bonfire, mainly the loss of life and cause. It was a very important event for the campus. Joe I 17:49, 24 May 2007 (UTC)" Oldag07 12:42, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't think we need to include anything about Bonfire in the traditions section for now. In the existing paragraph, I recommend adding how old the tradition was and then adding a full sentence on the causes of the collapse would probably be enough to satisfy the reviewer. Possibly also a bit on the lawsuits. And, since it moved both BQ and I to write about how it affected us (and still does so many years later), is there a way to include anything about the effect on the students without being too POV? Karanacs 13:49, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Here's my proposed new paragraph for the history section: Karanacs 14:11, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Texas A&M received national media attention on November 18, 1999, when Aggie Bonfire, a ninety-year-old student tradition, collapsed during construction. Fifty-eight current and former students were working on the stack, which stood 40 feet high and consisted of 5000 logs, when it fell; twelve of them died and twenty-seven others were injured. The accident was later attributed to improper design and poor construction practices, leading to "excessive internal stresses" on the logs and "inadequate containment strength," where the wiring used to tie the logs together was not strong enough. The wiring then snapped after logs from upper tiers were "wedged" into lower tiers. Many family members blamed the university for the collapse, and six lawsuits were filed against Texas A&M officials, the student Bonfire leaders, and the university. In 2005, 36 of the 64 original defendants, including the student leaders, settled their portion of the case. As of 2006, the remainder of the lawsuits were unresolved. Texas A&M dedicated the Bonfire Memorial on November 18, 2004 to honor the victims of the accident.

I like it. Suggested changes:

• Family members, expanded to Family members of the victims
• I think most of the lawsuits were settled. either that, in 2007, a lot of them died down. http://chronicle.com/news/article/2169/appeals-court-upholds-dismissal-of-lawsuits-over-texas-am-bonfire-accident
• Create more Active sentences:

• Fifty-eight current and former students worked on the stack, which stood 40 feet high and consisted of 5000 logs, when it fell; The accident claimed twelve lives and injured twenty-seven others.
• Major Fires Investigation Project attributed the accident to improper design and poor construction practices, leading to "excessive internal stresses" on the logs and "inadequate containment strength," insufficient wiring used to tie the logs together.
• The wiring then snapped after logs from upper tiers "wedged" into the lower tiers.
• Several of the victims' family members filed and six lawsuits against Texas A&M officials, the student Bonfire leaders, and the university. (if they are already filing a lawsuit, one would already think that they blame a&m)
• As of 2006, the rest of the lawsuits remain unresolved.

-) Oldag07 15:17, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I didn't know that the rest of the lawsuits were dismissed. I incorporated that and some of your other suggestions into the paragraph and put it in the body of the article. Karanacs 18:26, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

The lawsuits were dismissed by a federal appeals court, not the state court for a federal issue (due process...don't ask me, it sounded like a longshot to begin with). Now they are moving on to state courts, but the outcome seems assured given the results at the national level. On top of that, they can also still sue within Brazos county or any other county in which a part of the collapse, planning, legislation, or other component took place. I think suing in Travis county in Austin probably gives then the best chance of a favorable verdict. In short, it ain't over yet, but the fat lady is warming up... — BQZip01 — ^talk 20:38, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Aren't they past the statute of limitations yet? Karanacs 21:18, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

BTW, the adds look good. We'll brush up the Bonfire page to FA standards when we get to it. — BQZip01 — ^talk 20:50, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Some, yes. Others, no. — BQZip01 — ^talk 21:40, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Uncaptioned Image

I noticed that the recent addition to Lowry Mays included an image without a caption. Someone should add a caption or delete the image (is there need for yet another image in this article?). --Claygate 12:45, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Is it really necessary to add the mays business school now. we are under FA review. besides, why only highlight that school. I am going to copy paste the article here, and we should discuss it before putting it up Oldag07 13:27, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Lowry Mays College of Business

Mays Business School is the business school at Texas A&M University. The School educates over 4,800 students in undergraduate, master's and doctoral programs and consistently ranks among the top public business schools.

The Mays Business School was one of the first five schools in the United States to offer a trading center, the Reliant Energy Securities & Commodities Trading Center, which provides students with hands-on training to the tools used by commodities and currency traders. Students also use the center to manage the Tanner Fund, a $250,000 portfolio created using donated funds. The School also houses the nation's largest publicly funded real estate research organization, the Real Estate Center, and the Center for Retailing Studies, which was the first retailing center partnered with a business school.

Thanks for deleting this paragraph. You are right, it doesn't belong in this article at all. Karanacs 13:34, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Whoever posted this paragraph up, i can tell that you put a lot of time into it, and we welcome as much input as we can get. you paragraph simply does not follow the style of the article. we do have individual college pages. maybe you can help contribute to those. I think i am going to link those colleges up on our site. is that a good compromise? Oldag07 13:58, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

This was actually just taken from the lead of the Mays Business School article (I wrote it a few weeks ago). The individual colleges are already listed and wikilinked in the article and in the Texas A&M template. I don't think we need to do anything further. Karanacs 14:49, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Wording

Can we change the references to "in America" back to "in the nation?" I think it's already clear that the school is located in the US, and I like "in the nation better" for a formal tone. If this is too nit-picky for anyone else to care, ignore me. Karanacs 14:49, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

well, most people already know my opinion on this issue because i changed it. admittedly, "in America" will probably offend people on western hemisphere too. take a vote? ill abstain. . .Oldag07 15:15, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

btw, is general studies a major. wouldn't it be better to say, 8% of students have not declared a major? Oldag07 15:20, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it is a major. I think the latter would be better though. BlueAg09 (Talk) 16:44, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Done Oldag07 18:41, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Vote for keeping "in America". I reread those areas and it sounds fine and isn't too informal. Doesn't offend others in the Americas as they are used to the short form for USA. --Claygate 17:29, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

I also vote for keeping "in America." It adds stylistic variation. It's accurate. It's simple. If someone from is offended by that, I recommend reading breast. — BQZip01 — ^talk 15:44, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

FA status

No one has reviewed us since the 25th. any suggestions to get more reviews? Oldag07 20:42, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

As a minor contributor to the article, I voiced support. Is there any rule saying that major contributors, such as you, cannot vote to support as well? --Wordbuilder 21:24, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

maybe this silence is a good thing. no one has objections? I am not going to risk it. thanks for your help Oldag07 00:23, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

?????

Comment on our FA status page

"Again, unless there is a compelling reason to do so, it usually isn't neccessary to footnote the lead. Since every fact in the lead should be expanded and referenced in the body of the article, there isn't really any reason to footnote each fact twice (once in the lead and once in the body). But again, this is minor and not worth holding up support." (not trying to take credit for someone else's comment, came from our fa comments site.) Oldag07 17:13, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

• Fixed. Good catch. — BQZip01 — ^talk 18:22, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Junction Boys

I guess we need to discuss the sentence: "The toughness of the football program was showcased in the 2002 television movie The Junction Boys, an account of Coach Paul "Bear" Bryant's first summer as football coach at A&M." My opinion:

• That episode in our history (i have watched it) only describes that team, not all a&m teams as a whole.
• Some could say "toughness", some could say obsession that fans have for football or the ruthlessness of Bear Bryant. Today, if a coach did what the Bear did, the guy would be thrown in jail.

Maybe a better sentence to replace the one on top would be, "The movie, The Junction Boys, dramaticized then A&M Coach Bear Bryant's grulling ten day summer football practice sessions, in Junction, Texas." probably could do that a little better. Thoughts? Oldag07 22:18, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

You're right, and it also sounds out of context in the people section. I like your version, after slight correction: "The movie, The Junction Boys, dramatized then A&M Coach Bear Bryant's grueling ten-day summer football practice sessions in Junction, Texas." --Claygate 22:52, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps "... former A&M Coach Bear Bryant's..." since he wasn't coach then (i.e. at the time the movie was made). --Wordbuilder 02:30, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Rewrite - fine, but simplify for the sake of clarity: The ESPN movie, The Junction Boys, dramatized Coach Bear Bryant's grueling ten-day summer football practice sessions in Junction, Texas." — BQZip01 — ^talk 05:37, 31 May 2007 (UTC)Oldag07 13:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Good job on the rewrite. The new sentence sounds much better :) Karanacs 13:18, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Muster

I rewrote the muster paragraph trying to emphasize the essence of the tradition rather than its history.

Aggie Muster officially begun on April 21, 1922 as a day for remembrance of fellow Aggies. The March 1923 Texas Aggie urged, "If there is an A&M man in one-hundred miles of you, you are expected to get together, eat a little, and live over the days you spent at the A&M College of Texas." Modern muster ceremonies today occur in approximately 320 locations globally including Kabul, Afghanistan, and Baghdad, Iraq. The largest muster ceremony occurs in Reed Arena on the Texas A&M campus. The "Roll Call for the Absent" commemorates all Aggies that died since the last Muster Roll Call. As names are called, a family member or friend answer "Here" and a candle is lit. Some non-campus muster ceremonies do not have the pageantry of the campus ceremony, and may consist simply of a barbecue.

not too sure about the references. you can pretty much find it all on the association site. Should we change it? Oldag07 16:39, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

You have some good points, but let's not rock the boat until after the FA review. (BTW, noncampus is either one word or is hyphenated; non isn't a word by itself...except in France...). — BQZip01 — ^talk 17:04, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

OldAg, would you mind putting your new paragraph as the lead in the Aggie Muster article? I think what you've written would be perfect there -- it's much better than the old lead. Karanacs 18:37, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Done with slight changes. We need to mention at least in a sentence on the main page that muster is carried out worldwide. but, either change it now, or wait until we get FA status. i am kind of anxious because we haven't been reviewed for a while. do make sure i did the references correctly.Oldag07 22:54, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Missed this round of FA promotions :-( Oldag07 16:07, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Removing Templates 2

The only other complaint that I have seen by the FA reviewers that we have not addressed is the fact that we have too many templates. most we have to have. but we can reduce to eliminate some of ours.

Template:Mapit-US-hoodscale- Do we really need to know where Texas A&M is on the map. we have a paragraph about the location of the school

Template:Geolinks-US-hoodscale- same I guess if other schools are doing this, we should do the same :-(

Template:Texas A&M University- The only template we have complete control of. if keeping it is holding up our FA status, then we should remove it. however, reducing it is probably more practical. we can make separate templates for the traditions, sports, colleges etc, within pages of these individual categories.

Template:See also- is this necessary?

Oldag07 22:41, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

For example:

Texas A&M University/Archive 5 Category:Texas A&M University System

Want me to make more?Oldag07 23:14, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

This looks good. However, I don't think student life should be on there since it's already on the main article.BlueAg09 (Talk) 00:42, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Does changing the template actually make a measurable difference in the size or loading speed of the article? If not, I don't think we need to make a change. I thought the templates the reviewers were complaining about were the citation templates, and I don't particularly want to remove those. Karanacs 01:50, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

I interpreted her comment that we had 5 different templates at the bottom making the page look ugly. maybe we can have them in default closed? i am going to look into that.

btw, on the main template, we have student life linked that way. maybe we can have a list for A&M organizations. then we can link it there? as for academics, I know we can do the college thingy, not too sure about the second part. Oldag07 02:56, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

I changed three templates to a collapsed state. not sure if if someone will revert it. i do feel that college pages in general have too many templates in the bottom and the collapsed state would be better. been trying to make the templates collapsed only for our page. but after banging my head on this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Navbox_generic for a while, i quit. could any of your more computer programmer types help me out with it? and if we could convert our texas A&M template to a collapsed state that might be better. thanks Oldag07 04:23, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, that does look much better on the page with those other 3 collapsed :) Karanacs 02:32, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Changed the a&m template into a collapsible type. made it easy to set it either initially in a collapsed state, or in an open state. opinions on with one you want? Oldag07 19:48, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Just keep it open. It looks fine that way. (no sexual innuendo there...) — BQZip01 — ^talk 20:30, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

GA comment

For the article to maintain its GA status, the copyrighted images need detailed fair use rationales. Look to other passed GA/FAs for examples. Let me know on my talk page if you have any questions. --Nehrams2020 07:02, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Considering this page passed GA status only a few weeks ago, I believe all of our images are up to date, much more so than other GA/FA articles. If we are missing one, please tell us which one. — BQZip01 — ^talk 07:34, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

From BQZip01's talk page:Image:Texas AMU logo.png doesn't have a fair use rationale. I was actually impressed with the FUR for the first image. I left similar GA comments at almost all of the passed educational institutions for lack of FURs. The article looks really good, I don't know how this FUR was missed. --Nehrams2020 07:42, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Is this sufficient? I think at one time the comments were in the text. With all of the edits, I think it got erased somewhere; not sure when. — BQZip01 — ^talk 07:59, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Looks good, make sure any other copyrighted images added to the article also have detailed fair use rationales. --Nehrams2020 08:03, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

 Done — BQZip01 — ^talk 09:04, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Campus

"Main Campus .. includes many of the academic buildings, the Memorial Student Center, Kyle Field, and the student dormitories.[62] West Campus, . . . includes most of the sports facilities, the business school, agricultural programs, the veterinary college, the George Bush Presidential Library and the medical school. Research Park, the area of West Campus along Kimbrough Boulevard, includes many research facilities.[63]"

The west campus description is much larger then the main campus section. could elaborate in the future. Oldag07 15:35, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

FA Status

figured id be the first to say it, but we did get FA status. the bot hasn't been though yet as of now, but yes, we earned it. good work to everybody. Oldag07 22:12, 4 June 2007 (UTC) almost forgot WHOOOOPPPP!!!!! Oldag07 22:21, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

btw, i made a whole lot of changes today. i know how most of mine are pretty good but some times i make bad edits, so do check the history for my mistakes. Oldag07 22:33, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

WHOOP!BlueAg09 (Talk) 22:34, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

I have rewritten the muster paragraph. That is the last thing I want to do before taking a long break. I am not exactly sure if the references that i did are 100 correct. take a look. Oldag07 00:02, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

By the way, where's the featured article star () that's supposed to show up on the top right hand corner of the page? Will that show up eventually? BlueAg09 (Talk) 02:37, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Some of the other new winners don't have it yet either. no worries.

It is time for me to retire from "active duty". (After i get the medal of honor pictures. been putting it off for quite sometime)I feel helping bring the A&M page, to FA is my contribution to wikipedia and to my alma mater. I am definitely one of those types that can put a lot into something. But, I have got some real world duties, and I have enough problems with internet addiction. But, I will always be around to make a minor contributions. Thanks expecially to BQZip01, Karanacs, and BlueAg09. All of us have brought unique perspectives and skills in representing our university on wikipedia. It is ashame that we can not celebrate face to face. I am looking forward to spending the summer by the place I love so much, Texas A&M. Then I am off to the real world. I am joining the Americorps, and beginning a new adventure in my life. As always, Thanks and gig em. Oldag07 02:46, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Gig 'em and take care! BlueAg09 (Talk) 02:51, 5 June 2007 (UTC)