Talk:University of Maryland, College Park

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

University of Maryland, College Park is a former good article candidate. There are suggestions below for which areas need improvement to satisfy the good article criteria. Once the objections are addressed, the article can be renominated as a good article. If you disagree with the objections, you can seek a review. Date of review: 26 September 2006

	To-do list for University of Maryland, College Park:	edit - history - watch - refresh
	Expand research section. More content (to offset lists) in academics section. Subsections for sports.

This article is a former featured article candidate. Please view its sub-page to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.

Contents 1 Custom Format 2 Choice of information 3 Academics 4 Recent Alumni Additions 5 Location 6 Proposal for Poll on Name 6.1 Nature of Dispute 6.2 Facts Not in Dispute 6.3 Proposal 6.4 Vote 6.5 Additional Comments 7 Requested move 7.1 Discussion 8 Secondary Proposal 8.1 Suggested Second Issue 8.2 Proposal 8.3 Votes 8.4 Additional Comments 9 Creating Page for Poll 10 Poll is open closed 11 Call me naive, but ... 12 A second go at the redirect question 13 Revert Explanation 14 College Benefactor Names 15 Dumb redirect 16 First Day of Classes at College Park 17 User:192.195.66.45 18 Icon vs Legend 19 Point of Failure 20 History of the anti-war movement at Maryland 21 Failed GA 22 Academics and Rankings Section

[edit] Custom Format

I have begun creating a custom format for University System of Maryland institutions. As a graduate of UMCP, I felt it best to start there. Anyone who is interested, should feel free to start attacking any of the constituent institutions pages.--Howardjp 17:45, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

So, I'd like to merge the Academic and Organizational sections into one Section structured like this:

(Removed because it was messy)--Howardjp 15:24, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

And include a paragraph or two about each program. This seems like the most sensible way to include information on everything, but not eat up namespace like University of California, Berkeley.

Comments? --Howardjp 20:53, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

It has to be linked to by "University of Maryland" and "..., College Park", of course. FWIW, all those aliases in bold type atop the current article detract from the its quality. They would never be included in a print encyc., although "UMCP" would likely be eased into in the text.Sfahey 00:04, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Sounds good, and maybe have a template "Departments of the University of Maryland: College Park" or something along those lines for each dept's page. --[[User:Tomf688|tomf688]] 01:02, Nov 18, 2004 (UTC)

I snagged the UCB article and started cleaning up what I saw as its problems. That can be pulled out. Can you clarify the first sentence though?--Howardjp 01:47, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I just built a sample version of where I think this page should go at User:Howardjp/Temp. Obviously, it would have more information, but the outline is there. --Howardjp 15:24, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Golly, that's purty. But it makes it look like UMCP is there for, like, lernin' or sumthin'. Go for it.Sfahey 23:34, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Maybe italicize the name of each college to distinguish them a bit more from their headers (academic programs, etc). --[[User:Tomf688|tomf688]] 00:20, Nov 19, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Choice of information

The article definitely needs some discussion of Maryland's academics, but I think there's a better direction. Remember, this in an encyclopedia, not a school handbook. Someone who's interested in each of the Colleges can find information on the UMD website. The focus of an encyclopedia article should be "what makes Maryland interesting or different from other schools" and "what are UMD's most important characteristics."

To put it another way; I was in both Gemstone and Honors. We should probably have a mention of Gemstone, because there's nothing quite like anywhere else. The Honors Program isn't worth more than a passing mention, because it's pretty much like honors programs elsewhere. Now, one thing that would be interesting: I remember hearing somewhere that about one third of Maryland students are in a special academic program of one sort or another (Honors, Civicus, Gemstone, Scholars, etc.) That's unusual, and it's something the administration has pushed for.

IMO the first thing that needs discussing is Maryland's up-and-coming (or UVA wanna-be, if you want) status. Twenty years ago, Maryland was a safety school. Today it has a lot of top departments, admission is rather tough, and it's getting harder to get in every year. Isomorphic 02:34, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Academics

Someone had the bright idea of linking to the real websites of various academic programs. This is a great idea. With that in mind, is there a prefered way to organize all that in a two-column format, or should I just put a table in there? --Howardjp 13:45, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Recent Alumni Additions

There are two recent alumni additions (Darren Mock and Robert DeLeon) which were promptly vandalized. Neither of them have current pages within Wikipedia and Google does not link either of them with the University of Maryland. Therefore, I am pulling them from the list. If anyone can produce reasonable justification for adding them, be my guest and present that justification in the list. --Howardjp 14:37, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Should Len Bias and Jayson Blair be added to the Famous Alumni list? --Arensb 21:01, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I vote a strong "yes" for Bias, who was famous before infamous, and "no" for Blair, who is only the latter. Sfahey 03:59, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I thought both were already on it. I could be wrong and too lazy to look. If you want out of Blair on a technicality, he never graduated. But he was editor-in-chief of the DBK when MacGruder started The Boondocks, which is also of some minor importance. -Howardjp 13:11, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Did Jim Henson ever graduate? I seem to recall hearing that he didn't. --Arensb 18:48, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Location

This page should be at University of Maryland, which redirects here. john k 00:20, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

No, the name of the school is "University of Maryland, College Park" and has not been styled "University of Maryland" since 1970. -Howardjp 20:32, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

That is stuff and nonsense. We use most common name. It may have the official name "University of Maryland, College Park." But it is best known as simply the "University of Maryland." Doing a Lexis-Nexis search, I find many, many articles which simply refer to the "University of Maryland," and in most cases it is clear that this is a reference to College Park (there are some that are referencing the medical school and the dental school, though). john k 20:50, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I remember hearing or reading somewhere that University System of Maryland has officially declared that the term "University of Maryland", if left further unadorned, refers only to the College Park school, not to other schools like University of Maryland, Baltimore Campus or University of Maryland, Eastern Shore. However, I don't mind the current title, which is in general use and is completely unambiguous. Isomorphic 23:53, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Unless the General Assembly changes the name of the school, I see no reason to change it. The State takes the standpoint that "University of Maryland" refers to the University System of Maryland as a whole. Further, it's only among those students who've entered the school since 2001 that they've dropped the ", College Park" part due to sloth. -Howardjp 00:50, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Do you have any source that "the state takes the standpoint that "University of Maryland" refers to the University System of Maryland as a whole"? Isomorphic says the exact opposite. I can certainly say that your second statement is simply absurd - I grew up in Maryland in the 80s and 90s, and everyone has always called it the "University of Maryland," unadorned. If someone says they went to "Maryland," it is assumed that they mean College Park (unless they went to medical school, or law school, or one of the other professional schools in Baltimore). In sport, it is referred to as "Maryland," while, say, the University of Maryland, Baltimore County is referred to as UMBC, or what not. The school's own website is at www.umd.edu, and simply refers to the school as the "University of Maryland." Your claim that "University of Maryland" is only used by lazy undergraduates has to rank as one of the most bizarre things anybody has ever said on wikipedia. john k 02:19, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The enabling statute (Educational Article, Title 12, Section 101, irrelevant material cut):

(b) Definitions.- In this title the following words have the meanings indicated.

(4) "Constituent institutions", "institutions", or "campuses" means the following public senior higher education institutions under the jurisdiction of the Board of Regents:

(i) University of Maryland, Baltimore;

(ii) University of Maryland Baltimore County;

(iii) University of Maryland, College Park;

(iv) University of Maryland Eastern Shore;

(v) University of Maryland University College;

(vi) Bowie State University;

(vii) Coppin State University;

(viii) Frostburg State University;

(ix) Salisbury University;

(x) Towson University; and

(xi) University of Baltimore.

(6) "University" or "University of Maryland" or "University of Maryland System" means the University System of Maryland.

Also, please see the Maryland Manual from the Maryland State Archives. The claim is not terribly bizzare. I was a student there from 1998-2002, and didn't start hearing the CP dropped until 2000/2001. I remember it starting with the silly "Zoom" campaign. -Howardjp 13:37, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Clearly you are right about the statute. However, if somebody who went to Towson said they went to the "University of Maryland," and it were discovered that, specifically, they had gone to Towson, the general reaction would be that the person was being deceptive. The same would go, to a lesser extent, for someone who went to UMBC or UMES. UMB is a different case, because it is the location for the only law school, medical school, &c. in the system. But normally in that case it will be qualified with "University of Maryland Medical School," or whatever. And I'm not sure about UMUC. But, in general, when somebody says "the University of Maryland" or "Maryland," when referring to what school they went to, the fact that it was College Park is to be assumed. I still find it utterly bizarre that you claim that nobody started dropping the CP until 2000/1. I graduated from high school in Maryland in 1998 as well, and had many classmates who went there. I have very frequently heard of it as just the University of Maryland, and this dates from way back before I was in high school to the present. I will further add that when media sources say "University of Maryland," they mean College Park. The Baltimore institutions are specified by what type of professional school they are (e.g. "University of Maryland Medical School"), while the other institutions are called by their full name. This is completely standard usage. Furthermore, the university itself has its website at http://www.umd.edu, and it simply says "University of Maryland" - College Park is not mentioned at all. The president of UMCP is referred to as the "President of the University of Maryland." So, both media sites and the school's own website use just "University of Maryland." Furthermore, "University System of Maryland" is used pretty consistently when referring to the system as a whole. john k 17:41, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I think the current "lead" paragraph states the issue as most people see it, and that for an encyclopedia article the most correct (UMCP), not the most familiar, title should be atop the article. Sfahey 00:03, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

That would be a reasonable position, but it is not wikipedia's current naming policy. See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names). It says "Use the most common name of a person or thing that does not conflict with the names of other people or things." Given that University of Maryland redirects here, and that most references to "University of Maryland" are to the school in College Park, and not to the system as a whole, I think we can say that the name does not conflict with other names. That page also says, "Titles should be as simple as possible without being too general." University of Maryland is certainly simpler than the present title, and I see no reason to believe it is too general - usage of "University of Maryland" refers usually to the college park campus, and not to the system as a whole. The page does represent exceptions to the common name rule - issues with monarchical or noble titles, which obviously do not apply in this case; offensive names, which also do not apply; and misleading names, which, again, does not apply - if the University itself calls itself the University of Maryland, which it does on its own webpage, I can see no argument for saying that it is misleading to use that as the title of the article. I agree that the current opening paragraph accurate states the issue - and given what it says there, which is that "University of Maryland" is the most common name, the page should clearly be moved. john k 00:33, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The "University of Maryland" page redirecting here is a recent change and probably not a good one. I just changed it back to the old form. While Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names) makes a lot of good points, it is clearly ambiguous on this matter. To top it off, universities tend to get an exception to this rule. For instance University of California (which, when unadorned, references University of California, Berkeley), University of Texas (unadorned, usually refers to University of Texas at Austin), University of Alaska, University of Illinois, and so forth. The downside to all my examples, is that they are all arguments in favor of redirecting to the University System of Maryland. I still think a disambiguation page is a better idea. -Howardjp 01:52, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

University of California seems a special case to me - except in sports, where they are "California" or "Cal," one rarely hears of it without the "Berkeley." The website is www.berkeley.edu. Compare to UMCP, whose web address is www.umd.edu (also www.maryland.edu). The others are clear instances where moves should be made, and I have proposed moves at some of these places (University of Illinois, for instance), and also on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions. You are right that, at the moment, pages on public universities tend to be at the full name. But there is absolutely not a convention which indicates that this should be the case, and there are other instances where it is not. University of Alabama, University of South Carolina, and University of Tennessee, for instance all refer to the main campus, rather than the whole system, or being disambiguation pages. Again, what wikipedia policy can you point to which supports your position? john k 03:30, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Regardless of all the discussion of official naming, I think the current title is fine, just because it's the least ambiguous. I hear people use "UMD", "UMCP", "College Park", "Maryland", and many others, but "University of Maryland, College Park" is the most clear and unambiguous.

I have no problem with University of Maryland redirecting here. Regardless of what might be official, I find it unlikely that anyone going there was actually looking for University System of Maryland or one of the other schools.

Just in case, one thing we could do is have a University System of Maryland template with all the schools, and put it on each college's page. That way, if you got here through a redirect at University of Maryland, you'd be able to find the correct school. Isomorphic 04:11, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I agree that a template would be a good idea. Nevertheless, I continue to believe that the article ought to be at University of Maryland. If University of Maryland is unambiguous enough to be a redirect rather than a disambiguation page (and I think it clearly is), and if it is the most common name for the school (which, again, it clearly is - the school's own website doesn't even mention the full name of the school on the front page. The Diamondback, the school's newspaper, also simply refers to it as the "University of Maryland"), then the article should be there. We simply do not have a "Use official names" policy on wikipedia. We have a "use most common name" Policy. There are exceptions to this, but I do not see where this falls under that. john k 04:57, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

A number of counterpoints. First of all, University of Alabama follows the pattern I've advocated. University of Tennessee backs up your claim (Texas A&M University, which you hadn't mentioned, also does). University of South Carolina, seems to as well, but I am not as familiar with USC, so I'll refrain from commenting on it further. Second, the umd.edu page does, in fact, say "University of Maryland, College Park." Third, it's poor reasoning to argue that because umd.edu and maryland.edu take you to College Park's website, it should be changed when umaryland.edu takes you to University of Maryland, Baltimore's site. Fourth, there is significant reason to argue that Wikipolicy is meaningless in face of the California, Texas, Alaska, and Illinois examples I've given, not to mention others I didn't (Minnesota, Missouri, Hawaii, Nevada [yes, I've seen your comments there, too], Massachusetts, North Carolina, and I am sure others, I am tired of looking). You're tired and misguided argument is based on a failed understanding of the reason for using common names. It's so you're not expected to search for "William Jefferson Blythe IV" when you really want Bill Clinton, but proper use of redirection allows both to work. Unfortunately here, University of Maryland refers to three different entities, so you have to use disambiguation, because if you don't, someone wanting the University of Maryland Law School or the University of Maryland Medical School is never going to find them. Therefore, moving this page to "University of Maryland" is a disservice to the users. -Howardjp 14:17, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

University of Alabama is about the school in Tuscaloosa, not the whole system (which includes University of Alabama at Birmingham and University of Alabama in Huntsville). How does it follow your version? The front page of the Maryland website does not call the school "University of Maryland, College Park" at any point - at the bottom of the page it lists its address in College Park, however. I agree that the url is not a good argument. At any rate, the fact is that the current locations of articles is all wrong, based on wikipedia policy, and there is no consistency at all. The fact that nobody has ever gone through and made sure that these article titles conform to policy is no reason to insist that they continue not to conform to policy. Furthermore, your argument that someone will not find what they are looking for if they are looking for the medical school is absurd. We have various means of disambiguating - disambiguation pages, if the usage is about equal, but disambiguation notices if it is not. In this case, I have repeatedly demonstrated that usage is not equal (as it is not for most flagship state universities, with the admitted exception of the University of California system). So all that is needed is a notice at the top saying something like This article is about the University of Maryland in College Park. For the University of Maryland system and its other schools, see University of Maryland System. This does no disservice to users, and allows the vast majority of users who, when looking up University of Maryland are going to be looking up the school in college park, to get to where they were looking for. john k 16:35, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The name of the school in Tuscaloosa is University of Alabama, not "University of Alabama at Tuscaloosa" or anything similar, so it should be left alone. (I misread the address at the bottom of the page, since I grepped the output of a text browser, oops.) However, you argument about equal utilization holds no water. There's a law student in my house, so guess what "University of Maryland" means there. My best friend is a medical student and you can guess what "University of Maryland" means to him. It's about context and your ESPN-centric view of the matter fails to take into account that policy exists for a reason and sticking to the letter of policy abrogates that reason. You've failed to produce a valid argument to the contrary, but I'd more than willing to entertain a discussion that does. -Howardjp 17:19, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Law students at "Maryland" and medical students at "Maryland" are different, but they would say they go to "Maryland Law" or "Maryland Medical School." Any media references would say a "University of Maryland law professor" or a "University of Maryland Medical School professor," not just a "University of Maryland professor." The latter term would refer just to the College Park faculty. And that you say that my argument is "ESPN-centric" is insulting - I have provided reference to the school newspaper, to the school's own official website, and to media references in numerous non-sports contexts, and you have refused to address this at all. john k 18:07, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

From the University of Maryland "Identity Guide", http://www.newsdesk.umd.edu/media/identityguide.pdf:

In 1997, the Maryland General Assembly passed legislation allowing the state’s flagship university in College Park to be known simply as the University of Maryland. This action recognizes the historical roots of the institution and formalizes what most people have called us for years. As the only university in Maryland with a mission to serve the needs of the entire state, the University of Maryland is well known by residents from the western panhandle to the Eastern Shore.

• Formal Name: University of Maryland, College Park
• Appropriate 1st Reference: University of Maryland
• Preferred 2nd Reference: Maryland, the university or the flagship;Terrapins or Terps in athletic references
• Abbreviation: If an abbreviation is needed in headlines or TV chyrons, UM would be appropriate, but not UMCP. The university’s name should not be abbreviated in article text.
• Location: College Park is our location. Its use as a name for the institution should be avoided.This colloquial reference is not readily recognized by audiences beyond the Baltimore–Washington metro area.

I would vote for calling the page simply University of Maryland and having University of Maryland, College Park as a redirect. Obviously an explanation regarding these issues will have to stay prominently placed at the start of this article. Dragons flight 18:38, Mar 22, 2005 (UTC)

Very nice, Dragon's Flight - I think that's pretty much case closed. john k 19:31, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Not really. That claim is based on the change from University of Maryland College Park to University of Maryland, College Park. At the same time, University of Maryland at Baltimore became the University of Maryland, Baltimore and by that logic, has an equal claim to the name. That said, neither of you have been given a reason why written policy is better than the reason behind it, as I requested. -Howardjp 20:02, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

While I am on the topic, again, I would like to point out a few technical reasons not to make this change. The infobox, common to all USM schools (and derived from the Template:UC taxobox) determines the name of the school based on the article title. The category structure is already in place. Renaming this page, along with all the associated changes, introduces complexity that is unnecessary. Here's a bit more. From Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(common_names), We want to maximize the likelihood of being listed in other search engines, thereby attracting more people to Wikipedia. Also, the Jimmy Carter page has the string "Jimmy Carter" in the page title. The primary reasons to do this is for SEO, and this is not relevant as "University of Maryland" is a substring of "University of Maryland, College Park" and it reduces the seach engine rankings of "University of Maryland, College Park" unnecessarily. I simply do not see what problem you are trying to solve here. I do however see you creating a situation where someone cannot easily find the information they are looking for. -Howardjp 20:34, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Point #1 - we can certainly make a disambiguation notice at the top that refers specifically to the University of Maryland, Baltimore as well as to the University System of Maryland. University of Maryland Medical School, University of Maryland Law School, &c., can redirect to University of Maryland, Baltimore. Point #2 - I have no idea what you're talking about with categories. But if a page is in the wrong location, such things are not relevant. Point #3 - your quotation of naming conventions is silly - by that standard, we should always have longer names, so long as they include the shorter, more common name. This is not what the common names policy is meant to address, and I think that the argument-from-search-engine-whoring is the weakest argument for the common names policy, anyway. At any rate, you continue to fail to engage with the basic fact that "University of Maryland" is the most common name for the school, and that it is unambiguous enough that a disambiguation notice is sufficient. john k 22:26, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Proposal for Poll on Name

From reading the comments here, I don't see it as likely that further discussion will be able to reach mutual agreement. However, I think there is an important and general issue regarding the usage of the term "University of Maryland" that needs to be resolved. Hence, I am proposing that a community survey be rendered on how to refer to the University of Maryland campus at College Park. The following is proposed text for such a poll. Please comment on this, and edit it as necessary, but please do not vote on this issue until the text of any potential poll can be agree upon by all parties. Obviously, if you disagree on any of the "facts not in dispute" then that should be commented on and potentially changed. Assumming that parties involved can agree on how to cast the issue, then this material can be moved to a side page (e.g. /Vote) and people be encouraged to visit it by posting on related talk pages and at Announcements in order to get a selection of opinions.

Dragons flight 00:51, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)

Hey Dragons flight - I don't necessarily disagree. At the same time, I think this is a much broader issue, in that numerous articles like this one are arguably misnames - University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, for instance, or Indiana University Bloomington. I'd prefer that we come up with some general rule, although, obviously, different schools deal with these questions in different ways, making it more difficult, perhaps. But whatever. I have a few comments on the poll, respecting the way the issue of the University of Maryland, Baltimore is dealt. I also wonder if some mention of the continuing ed school, UMUC, should be made. john k 01:04, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I'd support having "University of Maryland" redirect to here, with a note at the top along the lines of "For other universities that are a part of the U. Sys. of MD., see University System of Maryland."

@john: I feel the Wikipedia articles should be named according to how those schools choose to name themselves. I Googled UMCP, Bloomington, and Chapel Hill and their articles are all named here on Wikipedia as they are officially referred to. --tomf688 (talk) 01:32, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)

Once again, this is not wikipedia naming policy, which says that we use the most common name. john k 01:59, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

So you'll also be proposing to move Law School Admissions Test to LSAT, Graduate Management Admission Test to GMAT, and Medical College Admission Test to MCAT, right? That's still within educational themes, and there are thousands more like it on Wikipedia. The point is, don't use the rules to put yourself into a bad place, when that is exactly what you're doing. -Howardjp 14:14, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

John, I agree there are broad policy issues involved, but given UMD's recent identity crisis, I don't think that it is a good candidate to use a poster child for broad policy decisions. I have made several edits to hopefully address your concerns. Dragons flight 04:22, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)

I want to add that if we can come to some strong conclusion about what to do with Maryland, that would probably point the way towards what the general policy should be. Dragons flight 04:40, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Nature of Dispute

This poll is to help establish the appropriate way for refering to the University System of Maryland campus located in College Park, MD, and what meaning, if any, should be assumed for the phrase "University of Maryland". The page currently describing this campus exists at University of Maryland, College Park.

This vote will remain open for two weeks from XXX to XXX.

[edit] Facts Not in Dispute

• The legal name for the flagship campus of the University System of Maryland is "University of Maryland, College Park".
• In Maryland statutes, the phrase "University of Maryland" is reserved as refering to the University System of Maryland as a whole.
• In common usage, the phrase "University of Maryland" predominantly means the "University of Maryland, College Park".
• The "University of Maryland, College Park", though acknowledging their official, legal name, explicitly asks [1] that they be refered to as the "University of Maryland":
  • Formal Name: University of Maryland, College Park
  • Appropriate 1st Reference: University of Maryland
  • Preferred 2nd Reference: Maryland, the university or the flagship; Terrapins or Terps in athletic references
  • Abbreviation: If an abbreviation is needed in headlines or TV chyrons, UM would be appropriate, but not UMCP. The university’s name should not be abbreviated in article text.
  • Location: College Park is our location. Its use as a name for the institution should be avoided. This colloquial reference is not readily recognized by audiences beyond the Baltimore–Washington metro area.
• The University's official graphics do not include the name "College Park" (same reference as above).
• The University's recommendation to avoid including "College Park" is a recent decision. Most official references to the University prior to 1997 included "College Park".
• The websites http://www.umd.edu/ and http://www.maryland.edu/ link to the official site of the University. The site http://www.umcp.edu/ is blank.
• The frontpage of the offical website refers to the school as the "University of Maryland".
• In NCAA athletics and sports related reporting, the University is refered to simply as "Maryland".
• At least in a few cases, the name "University of Maryland" might be intended to refer to one of the similarly named campuses: "University of Maryland, Baltimore County", "University of Maryland, Baltimore", "University of Maryland Eastern Shore", "University of Maryland University College" or to the seperatedly located "University of Maryland Medical School" and "University of Maryland Law School"

No, the University of Maryland Medical School and Law School are part of the University of Maryland, Baltimore, which is just the location of all the professional schools. The University says that only UMCP and UMB are to be referred to as the "University of Maryland." But since in the case of UMB one is rarely referring to the school as a whole, but to schools within it, each of which is the only medical school or law school or dental school for the University of Maryland, there is no real risk of confusion. john k 01:04, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Is there really some rule that says only UMCP and UMB can be called "University of Maryland"? That strikes me as a little weird. I suspect there are at least some people at UMES or UMBC that will colloquially say "University of Maryland" to describe their school. Regardless, I have changed the text (see below) to hopefully avoid these concerns.

The new stuff looks fine. The page you linked to, in fact, says that only UMCP and UMB can be called "the University of Maryland." I would add that I can never recall the people that I know who went to UMBC (I don't know any who went to UMES, which, as a historically black school on the Eastern Shore, doesn't attract too many suburban kids from Montgomery County), ever referred to it as "the University of Maryland." For undergrad institutions, at least, this term referred to the College Park campus, and to use it for UMBC would only have been confusing. john k 05:42, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• <new>Several other schools in the University System of Maryland have names which could, in principle, be reduced to "University of Maryland". These include "University of Maryland, Baltimore County", "University of Maryland, Baltimore", "University of Maryland Eastern Shore", and "University of Maryland University College". For these schools the usage "University of Maryland" is uncommon outside Maryland.</new>
• All of the other campuses are regional institutions, and not major national players.

Again, this is not true of UMB, which is the site of the main professional schools for Maryland's public university system. john k 01:04, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

It also isn't true of either University of Maryland Baltimore County, which is rapidly rising in stature as a national player in hard sciences, or University of Maryland University College which is very well known, especially in military circles, for its distance education programs going back to the 1940s. -Howardjp 03:40, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• <new>The "University of Maryland Medical School", "University of Maryland Law School", and similar professional programs located at the University of Maryland, Baltimore can also be refered to as "University of Maryland". This usage may be common but is less ambiguous since these are the only major professional programs in the University System of Maryland.</new>

No, this still isn't right. There's a law school at the University of Baltimore. There is no business school at UMB (but there is at UB, UMCP, UMUC, and other schools in the system). There is no policy school, but there is at UMCP and UB. There is, however, no duplication of medical programs. -Howardjp 14:10, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Howard, could you perhaps suggest text that would be acceptable to you related to this issue. Dragons flight 17:05, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)

• The website http://www.umaryland.edu/ refers the "University of Maryland, Baltimore".

[edit] Proposal

The University should be refered to by its common name, "University of Maryland", and unless explicitly disclaimed all references in Wikipedia to the "University of Maryland" shall be assummed to indicate the University campus at College Park.

A vote of agree could be expected to have the following consequences:

1. The current page at University of Maryland, College Park will be moved to University of Maryland, with "University of Maryland, College Park" redirecting to the shorter name.
2. In all articles, except where contrasted against other University System of Maryland campuses, the name "University of Maryland, College Park" should be truncated to "University of Maryland".
3. Any references in Wikipedia to the "University of Maryland" shall be assumed to indicate the College Park campus unless explicit context indicates otherwise.

A vote of disagree supports the use of the legal names and could be expected to have the following consquences:

1. The University's page would remain at University of Maryland, College Park.
2. University of Maryland should redirect to the University System of Maryland <new>a disambiguation page</new>.
3. Usage of the terms "University of Maryland" and "University of Maryland, College Park" should be left to the discretion of editors at any other pages on which they occur.

In either event, appropriate disambiguation and discussion of the naming issues will appear on the page for the University and for the University System of Maryland.

[edit] Vote

Please DO NOT VOTE. Right now this is a proposed poll, and the text of this vote are still being discussed.

[edit] Additional Comments

I think diagree option 2 should be changed from redirect to a disambiguation page with UMCP, UMB, and USM listed, which I think is the current form. -Howardjp 03:42, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

For more entertainment, University of Maryland Baltimore County is incorrectly given as University of Maryland, Baltimore County in its article name. That should probably be fixed. -Howardjp 03:45, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Their own website calls it the "University of Maryland, Baltimore County." See [2]. Both usages seem to be used. Certainly one should be a redirect, and one should have the article, but I don't think it's entirely clear which should be where. john k 05:45, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

For now I'll create a redirect at the no comma version. john k 05:45, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

This may have been Bad Idea, but I swapped them this morning since it is generally uncontroversial. I then went through and fixed a dozen or so references, until real work demanded attention. -Howardjp 18:07, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

According to the UMBC Style guide, the official UMBC name does include a comma. see [3]

According to the state legislature, which did the naming, it does not. -Howardjp 18:18, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Please provide reference to the information about the current state legislature decision. Legazy 18:40, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

See if this link works (funny CGI script) [4]. If not, I posted the same text above on March 21, 2005. -Howardjp 18:53, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

According to the University System of Maryland, the comma is included, which is more of a recent authority on this issue, rather than the law that was first passed in 1988. It's important to note that it is not how the school was named, but how the school is named. As you well know, the page that you reference is not for the purpose of establishing names, if so, there would be reference to UMCP being regarded as University of Maryland. That page is for listing, not defining. Also if you click the next article on that page you will read that "The government of the University System of Maryland is vested in the Board of Regents of the University System of Maryland" [5] meaning that the governance of the schools are done by the UUniversity System of Maryland see [6] and they say it’s with a comma. Legazy 23:47, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Almost, but the reasoning fails in a couple places. The USM governance is still under the pervue of the legislature and the legislature grants limited authority (read the charter, it is so restrictive, the state had to separately create a police force, despite the general ability of any corporation to create a police force). Additionally, you have provided no evidence that USM has changed the name. Finally, the Maryland Manual, published by the State Archives, is quite clear on the matter. Commas for UMCP and UMB, but for no one else. The reason for this is both UMCP and UMB were both, at one point, two campuses of a University of Maryland whereas UMBC has always been a separate university. -Howardjp 13:07, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

Also, it is worth pointing out that no link to the UMBC wiki page uses University of Maryland, Baltimore County except for talk, project, and user pages, which are not subject to style and correctness standards. As if this were not enough, you should also note that when Coppin became Coppin State University in 2004, the State effected this change by modifying the list I referenced previously which is, in fact, for establishing names. The issue of is vs. was is irrelevant in this case as both are the same. Further, the UMCP issue you site proves the point, but in a subtly backwards way. The name of the school is University of Maryland, College Park. That is, in fact, what the entire discussion here is about. You'll also further note that (a) UMCP's page is in the wrong place; (b) Wikipedia put reality up for a vote; and (c) it came out a tie leaving it wrong. -Howardjp 13:08, 7 May 2005 (UTC) modified on ~----

This issue will resume deliberation on Monday, Have a good weekend.Legazy 17:35, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Requested move

copied from WP:RM

• University of Maryland, College Park --> University of Maryland;
  • University of Massachusetts Amherst --> University of Massachusetts;
  • University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign --> University of Illinois;
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill --> University of North Carolina; &c.
  • Current naming conventions support having these articles at their most common name. I hate to do a group proposed move, but I tried bringing this up on the talk page here, and the Naming conventions talk page, and on various individual pages, and I've only gotten any actual discussion going at [this page] john k 03:47, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one sentence explanation and sign your vote with ~~~~

• Strongly Oppose this multi-move. These are not a set of similar moves, each one should be posted to WP:RM seperatly and due notice given on their talk pages. Philip Baird Shearer 10:36, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Strongly Oppose this move and all related. To summerize what I've said elsewhere, this move is not merely unneccesary, but actually bad. There are multiple institutions with similar names and moving University of Maryland, College Park to University of Maryland, and likewise for related institutions, introduces ambiguous references, and may lead a user to the wrong page. Additionally, using the "use most common name" rule to introduce false information into the encyclopedia makes for a worthless encyclopedia. -Howardjp 14:23, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

Add any additional comments

It is not clear to me what is going on here. There has been a request to move this page and others in a multi-page move on WP:RM so:

• why was not move template added to the top of this page or any of the others?
• why was no posting made to this page announcing this?
• why is the poll not open and how are people meant to register their support or opposition to the moves?

-- Philip Baird Shearer 10:18, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

John you have not posted any suggestion to any of the talk pages of the other Universities suggesting the preposed moves. I think that you should at the very least have done that before linking them into a multi-page move. However I think you should post each move seperatly to WP:RM as there is no obvious link between them. Philip Baird Shearer 10:36, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Notice: I have removed the move notice from WP:RM, as such a broad request was not discussed here and other elements of protocol (e.g. noticing and discussing for related pages) was not followed. John, as you evidently want to pursue this, we should discuss this broader action and then I would be willing to see the request reinstated. Dragons flight 17:03, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)

Sigh, I will admit that my actions were not proper. I was just trying to get somebody actually interested in commenting on this stuff. I posted a bunch of notices to a bunch of different university pages making the same argument - this was the only one that resulted in any serious response. I also posted to Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions and Wikipedia talk:Requested moves. Nobody, so far as I can tell, took any interest. So I posted up to Wikipedia:Requested moves to try to drum up interest. I will, as I said, admit that I misused WP:RM in this manner, and largely out of frustration. However, I will suggest that no other actions have been inappropriate - so far as I am aware, there are no particular rules for how page moves are to be conducted, and there shouldn't be, I don't think. Personally, I think that the highly bureaucratized nature of WP:RM at present is a terrible idea. As I've said before, it should be a place either to a) notify administrators of non-controversial moves that a non-administrator can't make; or b) tell people about pages where a suggestion has been made. In terms of this, I will agree that my largest sin in my WP:RM post was to list pages where I had not actually suggested a move on the talk page. I will assure, though, that this was due to negligence and not to malice - I posted proposed moves to a bunch of similar pages, and was uncertain which ones I had done so for, and which I had not. john k 17:26, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Secondary Proposal

Given that John K apparently feels very strongly about the naming issue, I believe the appropriate thing would be to amend the above proposed poll to include a general policy proposal. (I am assumming what John K really wants is a policy for using short names regarding universities, and not just to change the names of the 4 universities he listed.) Dragons flight 17:50, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Suggested Second Issue

In addition to the "University of Maryland", many other colleges and universities can be known by either short or long names. This portion of the poll is to propose an amendment to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names) to state a general preference for either short or long University names, if a consensus can be reached.

[edit] Proposal

A consensus vote of short indicates that policy should be amended to include

In many cases, a well-known university may adopt a short form of its name, even though this may create some ambiguity with similarly named schools (e.g. University of Texas <new>(at Austin)</new> vs. University of Texas at Dallas). If the short name is clearly the dominant way of refering to the school, then its usage is preferred on Wikipedia even though this may create ambiguities in some cases. Editors are encouraged to add disambiguation directions at the top of such pages in order to connect users with similarly named insititutions.

Examples of pages that may be affected by the creation of such a policy include:

• University of Massachusetts Amherst --> University of Massachusetts;
• University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign --> University of Illinois;
• University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill --> University of North Carolina;
• University of Texas at Austin --> University of Texas

A consensus vote of long indicates that policy should be amended to include

In many cases, a well-known university may adopt a short form of its name, even though this may create some ambiguity with similarly named schools (e.g. University of Texas <new>(at Austin)</new> vs. University of Texas at Dallas). In such cases, Wikipedia prefers that the insititution's full name (e.g. "University of Texas at Austin") be used in most cases where the possibility of ambiguity exists, even though many users may be unfamiliar with the long form of the name. The short name (e.g. "University of Texas") should be reserved for a disambiguation page to clarify this ambiguity for the user.

Examples of pages that may be affected by the creation of such a policy include:

• University of Alabama --> University of Alabama at Tuscaloosa

The school is Tuscaloosa is, in fact, known as University of Alabama, and the other institutions in the UA System are University of Alabama at Birmingham and University of Alabama in Huntsville. -Howardjp 19:38, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Okay. You seem to be especially familiar with these issues, can you think of other examples that would fit in this category? Dragons flight 20:40, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)

• University of South Carolina --> University of South Carolina Columbia

Added comma above. -Howardjp 19:38, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Actually the USC System seems to refer to it without a comma. An observation supported by the fact nearly 50 wiki pages link to the version without a comma and no page exists at the version with a comma. Dragons flight 20:40, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)

• University of Tennessee --> University of Tennessee at Knoxville
• <new>University of Arkansas --> University of Arkansas, Fayetteville</new>
• <new>University of Wisconsin --> University of Wisconsin-Madison</new>

A consensus vote of no change or faliure to reach consensus will result in no change to Wikipedia policy.

[edit] Votes

This vote is not yet open, as the terms of the policy proposal are still being discussed.

[edit] Additional Comments

This is generally and agreeable poll. -Howardjp 18:05, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I concur, although it should be on a different page. Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (common names), perhaps? If it is approved, I think it should become its own naming conventions subpage. john k 19:21, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

There seem to be a couple issues here. First, where should any resulting changes to policy be made. On consideration, I agree that (common names) might not be the right place. In my opinion, adding a subsection "University Names" under Wikipedia:Naming Conventions#Other specific conventions is probably the best place for it. I wouldn't suggest creating a seperate subpage unless you intend to propose significantly longer text than appears in the current draft. Dragons flight

Secondly, I really do think that to resolve the issues involved it is going to take two votes. One on Maryland's specific identity crisis and one on university naming. In part, I believe this because I am guessing that the second vote will end with no change (too many disparate interests and conventions). In my opinion it makes sense to keep these closely related issues together. However, I am willing to hear alternative opinions if people want to make a case for seperating them, or even waiting on the conclusion of the second poll before considering the first. On which page, the poll actually takes place is not horribly important, because I intend to make sure that any vote on general university naming will be widely advertised. Dragons flight 21:06, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)

I will be on vacation and otherwise busy, and might not be around when a poll is actually voted on. For the record, I favor keeping the page at its current title, keeping University of Maryland as a redirect to University of Maryland, College Park, and possibly introducing a template with all the University System of Maryland schools. I don't know much about the case of any other schools, but would probably feel the same way there. Isomorphic 19:28, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I also favor having references elsewhere in Wikipedia use the short form of the name as long as the context does not make the reference particularly ambiguous for some reason. However, such decisions could simply made on a case-by-case basis by the person making the reference. Isomorphic 19:32, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I would like to point out that the most common name proposal would require moving University of Miami to Miami University and Cornell University to Cornell. -Howardjp 13:40, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Oh please. There are more google hits for "University of Miami" than for "Miami University," and most of the hits for the latter are for the school in Oxford. As to the Cornell issue, that's absurd. The equivalent to Cornell would be "Maryland," not "University of Maryland." john k 03:28, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I used Miami as an example because my family has a very close relationship to Miami University (five students in three generations), and everyone we encounter, outside of Ohio, seems to think it's in Flordia. This goes so far, that students at Miami University wear shirts that say "No, in Ohio, damnit." This is not a contrived example, this is the absurdity of what you've suggested. -Howardjp 13:10, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, this is a non sequitur. The fact when you say something about Miami University, people think it's the Florida school is completely unrelated to the question of what people call the University of Miami. Which is "the University of Miami." That there are ignorant people who, when they hear about Miami University, think it's the University of Miami is neither here nor there. Can you point to a single published source that refers to the University of Miami as "Miami University?" Because I can find numerous published sources that refer to the University of Maryland as the University of Maryland. A better claim would be that we should have Miami University at Miami of Ohio. At any rate, this is not relevant. The University of Maryland itself asks people to call it the University of Maryland, and not the University of Maryland, College Park. This is how it is referred to in the mainstream media, not just by ignorant people. Your examples seem to suggest a hostility to the common names policy as a whole. For instance, your "the common name policy would mean that Cornell University is at Cornell" is exactly the same as the equally fatuous claim that "the common name policy means that Tony Blair should be at Blair." This is not how the common name policy works - it is a reasonable system, and takes steps to avoid names that are explicitly wrong or overly ambiguous. Neither of these is the case in the University of Maryland, nor in that of many other public universities. john k 16:20, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I am hostile to bad applications of good ideas, and this reeks of it. Nothing is gained, in this case, from adherence to policy except for adherence to policy. And that is a terrible reason to do anything. -Howardjp 17:01, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC) (updated -Howardjp 20:17, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC))

Amen. "Because it's policy" is not a sufficient argument on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not meant to be inflexible. In many cases what is now called "policy" was just whatever emerged as the most common practice. Isomorphic 20:05, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Huh? What is gained by having it at the longer title besides a very slight decrease in ambiguity. Given the UMB situation, Maryland might not be the best example, although I continue to believe it's good enough. But why is it confusing to have University of North Carolina or University of Illinois or Indiana University? This is how these places are mostly known. When one says "I went to the University of North Carolina," there is no confusion that the person might have gone to UNC-Charlotte. This is how these schools are referred to in the media. Referring to them by the shorter name allows for easier linking - without piping or redirects. It will mean that people do not accidentally link to disambiguation pages or pages on university systems when they intend to link to the flagship school. It will mean, that, well, the article is under the best known name for the school, and the name by which the school itself is normally referred to in almost all contexts. Furthermore, as it stands, the situation is wildly inconsistent. We already have University of Wisconsin and University of Tennessee, for instance. It seems to me that I shouldn't have to offer any compelling reason beyond that this move is consistent with policy. It should be up to those wanting to make an exception to explain why this exception is a good idea. All that has been offered are spurious claims about ambiguity, and claims that we need to use the "official name" which are directly contrary to wikipedia policy. There is a case to be made for always using the official name. But I see absolutely no case for using the official name just for state universities - please explain why University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill is any more necessary than Anthony Charles Lynton Blair. Why is this a difference in kind? What is gained from using the long name of the university that would not also be named from always using the full names of individuals? Why should this be an exception to the general policy? john k 23:31, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

John Smith -Howardjp 23:42, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Fun, another non sequitur. There are 38 John Smiths listed on that page, and we have 17 articles on them. Most of them are not particularly famous. Of the two that are famous - the one in Virginia, and the one who was Labour Party leader - it would be difficult to gauge which is more frequently used. There is a clear need for a disambiguation page here. In the case of the University of North Carolina, to take one at random, there are six schools with "University of North Carolina" in their names. However, the school in Chapel Hill is acknowledged to be the flagship school of the system, and I dare you to find any reference to any of the other schools which just refers to them as "the University of North Carolina" without elaboration. That term, used on its own, means the school in Chapel Hill. Period. I'm done arguing with you. Let me just refer you to Wikipedia:Disambiguation, and to the subject: "Primary topic disambiguation":

"Primary topic" disambiguation: if one meaning is clearly predominant, it remains at "Mercury", the general title. The top of the article provides a link to the other meanings, or if there are a large number, to a page named "Mercury (disambiguation)". For example: the page Rome has a link at the top to a page named "Rome (disambiguation)" which lists other cities named Rome. The page Cream has a link to the page Cream (band) at the top.

Following your logic to its insane conclusion is not a non sequiter. It is evidence of the fact your logic is faulty and no amount of repeating yourself change that. -Howardjp 12:39, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

What are you talking about? Following anything to the furthest possible way would, of course, be a bad idea. The issue here is that we have two competing principles, and how to reconcile them. All you have on your side are slippery slope arguments. What you are saying is not that my logic is insane, but that the logic of the entire common name policy is insane, because it leads to having the article on Tony Blair at Blair, or some other such nonsense. The basic policy is this: if one usage is predominant, used that as the article title. If there are several usages that are used about the same amount, make a disambiguation page and disambiguate. How on earth is this insane? This is a perfectly sensible policy which is used throughout wikipedia. john k 17:52, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

It's insane because you argue, based on your limited experience, that since one context is the only one you've every known, it must be right. Within the limitations of NCAA basketball, I've only ever heard "University of Maryland" refer to UMCP. But when talking to a judge about law schools, I can assure you s/he will never mean UMCP. Many servicemen, especially older, will think of UMUC. UMES was known as "University of Maryland" until 1970. This is why I brought up John Smith. My Americentric view of life precluded me from ever knowning about the Labour leader until I mentioned it. But you don't see me trying to get John Smith redirected to daft Virginian John Smith of Jamestown. Your failure acknowledge that multiple contexts exist in this matter would be funny if it were not sad. -Howardjp 18:22, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I have clearly shown that in this case, and in others like it, "one meaning is clearly predominant." That's that. We have a common name policy which should be applied in this case. The disambiguation policy should be applied by using primary topic disambiguation. We do not have an official name policy. You have nothing to back up your argument. john k 00:25, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

You've yet to show any such thing. That's that part you're not understanding. See my comments above with the same timestamp. -Howardjp 18:22, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Creating Page for Poll

I have created a potential page for the poll at University of Maryland, College Park/Vote.

In moving the proposed poll text to this page, I modified a few things to address issues that had been raised on this page, and added some header information. Please review the proposed text to see if there are additional concerns. Since the poll now has a seperate page, it would be appropriate to place additional comments regarding the poll language on that page's talk page.

Since I didn't recieve any feedback on the question I asked here regarding whether these issues should be polled together or seperated, I have assembled the current page under my preference for running both questions concurrently. I will still welcome additional feedback on this issue. Dragons flight 08:47, Mar 25, 2005 (UTC)

Did you list this on the page where one lists polls? Also, it should be in talk or wikipedia space, not main article space, I think... john k

I've added a notice at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Universities to ask for additional feedback on the language. I haven't posted to Wikipedia:Announcements or Wikipedia:Current surveys yet, because I wanted to give a little more time discussion before opening the poll for general participation. Usually polls on content are placed with the associated article, and polls on policy go in the Wikipedia namespace. Since this is mixed, I not sure exactly where to put it, but if you find some guidelines on that feel free to mention it. However, I don't think there would really be a problem in leaving the page were it is provided it is noticed and linked in all the appropriate places. Dragons flight 09:16, Mar 25, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Poll is open closed

Since we have gone several days without further comment on language, I have opened the poll at Wikipedia:University of Maryland, College Park/Vote. Dragons flight 17:11, Mar 27, 2005 (UTC)

Please note that the poll will only be open about 1 more day, and the issue of what to call the University of Maryland is still pretty close. So if you have an opinion, now would be a good time to visit the page and say so. Dragons flight 18:21, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC)

Well, that was an interesting exercise that established very little. With a 9-9 split on the name, there is clearly a lack of consensus on this issue. As a result this page should probably stay the way it is for the foreseeable future. I must admit, I am surprised with the outcome, but then if everyone thought like me there would be no point in asking the question. If people want to revote this issue in some months time, be my guest, but I don't plan on introducing and orchestrating any future votes on this matter. Dragons flight 19:23, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm also rather surprised. Ah well, you win some, you lose some. john k 19:26, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

This now leaves us with the current foolishness. University of Maryland should not redirect to University of Maryland, College Park any more than University of Maryland, College Park should have been moved. Would anybody be willing to agree that University of Maryland should be a disamig page now? -Howardjp 16:01, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The disambig note at the top of the page is fine as it is. Since there is no consensus, things should just be left alone. --tomf688^(talk) 16:10, Apr 11, 2005 (UTC)

Agree. Sfahey 03:27, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Call me naive, but ...

... what makes an editor label a photo (such as the Testudo shot which just got yanked) a "likely copyvio" and remove it. How's this one differ from the bazillion others on the wiki.? Sfahey 06:01, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Finding where it had been published by the Baltimore Sun [7] was probably a good clue. See Wikipedia:Copyright problems Dragons flight 06:11, Apr 3, 2005 (UTC)

I removed it because I knew it was from a copyrighted source. I uploaded it in my early days with Wikipedia, before I understood the whole "fair use" concept. I guess if I wasn't so lazy, I could just snap a picture of the turtle while walking between classes... :) --tomf688^(talk) 04:38, Apr 11, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] A second go at the redirect question

Over the past few weeks, I've cleaned up most of the ambiguous references to University of Maryland. For those of you interested, roughly fifteen percent of the references should not have gone to UMCP, but rather to the University of Maryland, Baltimore page. A handful should have gone to University of Maryland University College. One should have gone to UMBC. None were actually references to UMES. Some were easy. Obviously, references to the medicial or law school clearly mean University of Maryland, Baltimore. Otherwise, Google is your friend. Further, when a reference is date-sensitve (for instance, "XXX graduated from the University of Maryland Medical School in 1934..."), I used the form: [[University of Maryland, Baltimore|University of Maryland]] since the school would have been known as University of Maryland at the time, but is clearly UMB today. There were many of these. Atheletics links usually refer using [[University of Maryland|Maryland Terrapins]], so these were cleared up using [[University of Maryland, College Park|Maryland Terrapins]], as appropriate. As it stands now, there are 319 links to University of Maryland, College Park. Of those, 35 link through University of Maryland. And of those, 16 are user, project, talk, or other pages for which style guidelines do not apply. That leaves 19 still ambiguous pages for which I was unable to determine which campus they are refering. Here is the current list:

Old list deleted, 10/6/2005

• Arguments for the existance of bigfoot -> pulled reference, no UM school has heard of Stephen Irosen
• Bigfoot -> pulled reference, no UM school has heard of Stephen Irosen
• Elaine Marshall -> UMCP, only campus with textiles major
• G. Spencer-Brown -> UMCP
• James L. Walls, Jr. -> pulled reference entirely, see Talk:James L. Walls, Jr. for details
• Joe Moore -> UMCP, comm major only there
• John H. Collins -> UMUC per [8]
• Nguyen Khang -> UMCP per http://www.engr.umd.edu/news/e@m/02_e@m_Winter_sm.pdf
• William D. Houser -> UMUC, per email from UMCP and UMUC archvists
• William Lacy Clay, Jr. -> UMCP, per Congressional website

Any assistance in clarifying these references would be appreciated. -Howardjp 13:05, 10 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Revert Explanation

I agree with Howardjp that a category such as "notable" alumni or "famous" faculty is very ambiguous and allows for an unwieldy list of entries. Though this encyclopedia is a good indicator of who should be included into this list, wikipedia should certainly not be the sole - determining factor. The alumni list should either be kept to a minimum or become a separate article. For now I will revert to maintain the current list. If you were to assume Wikipedia should be the only determining factor in success, Michigan has a few notable business graduates, UVA wouldn't be able to recognize the president of NASDAQ nor the chairman of AT&T, while Berkeley would show off a mediocre athletics program. We need to find some other way to handle lists of alumni and faculty. Jussenadv 13:05, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

The alumni list is completely out of control. How does anyone feel about splitting it into a separate page? -Howardjp 13:56, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

No strong feelings on this, but I agree with your just-completed deletions of that goofy ranking stuff. UMCP is regretfully hung up on that stuff. It is embarrassing to see posters and banners bragging of #19 this and #3 that, with no context (ie, just how many Criminology depts. are we "competing" with?) Sfahey 23:18, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Every school is, regretfully, hung up on that stuff. I've given up on trying to keep it out of the UMBC page. But whatever. -Howardjp 12:22, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] College Benefactor Names

How about a section that links to each of the benefactors, assuming their biographies are appropriate? I've started (godawful attempts) at Glenn L. Martin, Robert H. Smith, A. James Clark, Philip Merrill. I have not seen any other pages with such a setup, but it could go either at the Alum / Distinguished, or perhaps after the college list. Rbeas 19:00, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

OK, take a look at the List of University of Maryland, College Park Notable Others. If someone has a better title than "notable others" to capture those who have building names, big donations, college names, non-graduates, past faculty, former coaches who are in wikipedia ...--Rbeas 20:22, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

Non-graduate former students are considered alumni by most schools. -Howardjp 12:54, 21 August 2005 (UTC) (updated: -Howardjp 12:54, 21 August 2005 (UTC))

[edit] Dumb redirect

Since the vote was taken on the University of Maryland redirect back in March, I have systematically gone through every article that links to University of Maryland and fixed each reference. I did not keep records of how many or who they linked to, but that can be gotten from my contributions page. Regardless, as of a few minutes ago, I finalized the last reference (there are still about two dozen, however they are user, talk, or project pages for which style guidelines do not apply). With this in mind, I'd like to move University of Maryland to redirect to University of Maryland (disambiguation). Please discuss. -Howardjp 14:54, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

Nobody said anything for almost two weeks. I made the change. -Howardjp 12:56, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] First Day of Classes at College Park

There has been some confusion concerning the date of the first day of classes at College Park. The opening-day ceremonies actually took place on October 5, not 6. The Baltimore Sun of Oct. 6 and the Washington Evening Star of Oct. 6, all say the ceremony took place "yesterday." The American Farmer, for November 1859, also gives Oct. 5 as the opening date. In the first edition of George Calcott's history of the University, he says the opening day was "Monday," October 6. But this is not possible, since Monday was October 3. This error has been perpetuated ever since. At any rate, Calcott has corrected the error in the just published new edition of his book. Corrections are beginning to appear on some University websites: www.150years.umd.edu/Media/ PatO 02:36, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] User:192.195.66.45

I suggest that fan behavior be created as a subsection of athletics. You may want to use this source as a starting point: http://www.umd.edu/umnews/studenttaskforce.html I have deleted your (User:192.195.66.45) statement on fan behavior once again. First you provided no references. Now you have made the same claim, citing news articles about a single basketball game that occurred almost four years ago. If you wish to make the claim that these fans have been a "black mark" since the late 1990s, you must provide the evidence. Please keep in mind: Wiki:NPOV. Jussenadv 02:07, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Icon vs Legend

Recently the section "Campus legends" was changed to "Campus icons." I don't think "icon" makes much sense here. The relevant definition:

Icon n.

*A person or thing regarded as a representative symbol of something.

While that fits, somewhat, as a description for Testudo, it doesn't work well for The Point of Failure or Morrill Hall. Whereas the relevant definition for "legend" is:

Legend n.

*A traditional story sometimes popularly regarded as historical but unauthenticated.

*An extremely famous or notorious person, esp. in a particular field : the man was a living legend | a Wall Street legend.

It seems to me that Testudo could use his own section as mascot, and he could have the stories from his history placed there. The stories about The Point of Failure or Morrill Hall do seem to be legends, although I'm not sure if two legends need their own section? I feel that's a decision better left up to those who have and are working more on this article than I am. — Vijay 20:55, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Point of Failure

I'm a student at U of M, and neither I, nor any of my friends, have never seen this plaque mentioned in the wiki warning students about the legend. I really don't think there actually is one. Can someone confirm? Perhaps I'm just blind. User:70.108.29.250 21:19, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Then remove the information unless it can be verified. Leave the fact tag, however, since the entire paragraph is uncited. --tomf688 (talk - email) 21:55, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

I, too, am a student at UMD. The 'point of failure' is there, but the plaque nearby does not warn freshman of the dangers. It explains what happened and why the point is there, but it doesn't tell people about the legend at all.

[edit] History of the anti-war movement at Maryland

I think some mention needs to be made of the history of the radical movement on and around campus during the late 60s and early 70s particularly as it relates to the anti-Vietnam War movement. Beginning in May 1970 the campus was shut down for part of three consecutive spring semesters. I personally recall the events of April 1972 when the campus was shut down by protests, occupied by the National Guard and placed under martial law for approximately a week. In the early 80s I had the privilege of meeting rock star Commander Cody who gave a concert during this time at Ritchie Colliseum which ended in pandemonium as the crowd tried to take over the Armory with National Guard and State Police barricaded inside. Cody recalled the episode during my brief encounter with him on the West Coast in 1983. Then of course there was the food co-op in the Student Union building which I understand still exists almost 30 years after we founded it. Tom Cod 20:30, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Failed GA

This article failed the GA noms due to lack of inline citations. If you feel the this article is still GA quality please feel free to seek a review. --Tarret 21:58, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Academics and Rankings Section

I added both an academics section and a rankings section to the article. I realize that a lot of these rankings are criticized, but people use them as references and that makes them relevant.

The Academics Section, I believe, should be where we add the content regarding academics at the university. I realize I didn't start off with much, but I think that together, we can all do research and make that section better.