Talk:Dartmouth College

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Featured articleDartmouth College is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on August 31, 2008.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 6, 2005Peer reviewReviewed
February 9, 2006Good article nomineeListed
March 6, 2007Peer reviewReviewed
August 31, 2007Featured article candidateNot promoted
September 30, 2007Featured article candidatePromoted
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on December 13, 2007, December 13, 2008, December 13, 2009, December 13, 2010, and December 13, 2015.
Current status: Featured article

If you attend or have attended Dartmouth College,
you can add this userbox on your userpage:
{{user Dartmouth}}, to display this on your userpage:
DThis user attends or attended Dartmouth College.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dartmouth 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.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • 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) 11:19, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Pathetic, dogmatic, and bullying - serial reversion of "comprised of"[edit]

This is a pathetic display of both dogmatism and bullying. The grammatical construct "comprised of" is commonly used in American english. This is an article on an American subject. Some linguists object to it, others don't. The phrase has passed editors for publication in the New York Times, New Yorker, and The Atlantic, and appears in over 100,000 US Patents. Some Wikipedia editors clearly personally object, and dogmatically strike it out whenever it appears. When challenged to provide even one citation in a reputable publication to support their cases, not one did. Nor could one even be bothered to cite the Wikipedia page Comprised of, which examines the construct pro and con. Instead, they serially pile on, creating singly and together an edit war, shouting down an experienced and good faith editor with a bullying pattern of knee-jerk reverts, none even willing to take their case here to Talk.

How to drive a good editor away? This is a textbook example. Of pettiness, stubbornness, and dogmatism masquerading as what? "Consensus"? Good grief.

You out there, Jimbo?

Yours, Wikiuser100 (talk) 14:52, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

What an utterly trivial and silly thing to edit war over. ElKevbo (talk) 15:11, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Your opinion. I did not start any war. A pack of magpies descended serially and created it. I merely sought to defend a valid edit. Which is is, per the above, and below. Yours, 15:54, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

"Comprising" or "comprises" would be most accurate. "Comprised of" is not appropriate here. See [1]. Steve Lux, Jr. (talk) 18:02, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

"Not appropriate"? Au contraire. From the very web page you sent me to:

Verb.
3. (sometimes proscribed, usually in the passive) To compose, to constitute. See usage note below. quotations ▼
Example: A team is comprised of its members.

My bold and italics.

It is a grammatical construct in common and accepted use. The dogmatism is that of those who single-mindedly descend to wipe it out.

Yours, Wikiuser100 (talk) 15:54, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

That it is in "common and accepted use" isn't a particularly compelling point, I don't think. So is irregardless. I guess I don't understand why you'd advocate for using the nonstandard usage in the first place. As the note you quoted above indicates, it's "sometimes proscribed," so why not just the never-proscribed construct of the grammatically standard "The whole comprises the parts"? Esrever (klaT) 00:20, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Dartmouth in Science Fiction[edit]

I don't know if …

No, blow that.

Is it possible we could could mention Julian May's Galactic Milieu novels in the 'In Popular Culture' section?

Dartmouth crops up as a setting … 

Cuddy2977 (talk) 22:33, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Robert Frost[edit]

Robert Frost attended Dartmouth for a mere two months. Is it really necessary to include him in the article, let alone have his image at the top of the alumni list? 67.246.227.130 (talk) 17:45, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Fair question. Answer is "yes." He was also a professor at Dartmouth and identified himself as a "Dartmouth person". He is also the only person to receive two honorary degrees from Dartmouth.Sedimentary (talk) 20:47, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

"He was also a professor at Dartmouth" he was a teaching fellow, not a professor. regardless, that is irrelevant.
"identified himself as a "Dartmouth person" again, irrelevant.
"received two honorary degrees from Dartmouth." since when are honorary degree recipients included in alumni sections?
We are talking about the alumni section, I'm not sure how any of that is relevant. 67.246.227.130 (talk) 23:54, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
He still attended the college, regardless of how long that may have been. It is relevant. Steve Lux, Jr. (talk) 13:14, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
...for two months, before dropping out. again, that is hardly enough to include him in the alumni section (at least without mention of his short attendance or failure to graduate), let alone have his image at the top of the alumni gallery. galleries are already unencyclopedic, this only adds to that. 67.246.227.130 (talk) 05:04, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
It should stay. Steve Lux, Jr. (talk) 13:34, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
Check Robert Frost's own article. He is listed as an alumnus of Dartmouth (no degree) and Harvard (no degree). Dartmouth claims him (and anyone else who matriculated) as an alumnus. Frost should stay in, but perhaps there is a way to word his entry to reflect Dartmouth's stance. --Ken Gallager (talk) 13:38, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
Yes, his name isn't even listed in the text above. His image is just randomly at the top of that gallery. 67.246.227.130 (talk) 16:42, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
Feel free to expand the article and include information regarding his attendance with the college. Steve Lux, Jr. (talk) 19:22, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
That sounds good, thank you for the suggestion. 67.246.227.130 (talk) 20:26, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

I change my opinion. As Ken Gallager said, Dartmouth claims him (and anyone else who matriculated) as an alumnus so that's enough; he should stay. 67.246.227.130 (talk) 20:35, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:List of Dartmouth College faculty § Touch-ups needed[edit]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List of Dartmouth College faculty § Touch-ups needed. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 22:13, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Dartmouth_College&oldid=976446947"