Talk:Rochester Institute of Technology/Archives/2013

Add motto?

Is this accurate? The making of a living and the living of a life — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.89.147.79 (talk) 21:09, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Merge Park Point article into RIT article?

The Park Point article has been under a question of Notability, specifically WP:N#TEMP and WP:AFD. However, a merger seems to be a better move until Park Point becomes significant enough for it's own article. Mjf3719 (talk) 18:53, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

I disagree about merging, PP@RIT is not owned by the school, and is not on school land. If there was a separate article about Colony Manor or one of the other apartment complexes owned by the school, I could see that merge being logical, but since there is no school ownership of the complex, I do not believe they should be merged. 19:03, 16 September 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Terrillja (talk • contribs)

I think it probably should. While Park Point is a legally separate entity and we should note this, it is clearly intended as an extension of RIT's campus (especially considering that our bookstore is now located there); additionally, there's not much more to be said about Park Point, which is essentially just a bunch of apartments and shops, than what would fit in a few sentences in the "Campus" section here. krimpet✽ 20:09, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Strong Disagree. Park Point isn't even owned by RIT. If someone wants to propose this merge, then you can also propose merging the article to Wilmorite Properties. It's a similar concept to a mall; Places like Eastview Mall and The Mall at Greece Ridge have articles (also owned by Wilmorite). --Dan Leveille^TALK 01:16, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Although I was hoping for more than three people's responses, I think the consensus is that the two articles should remain seperate, but should each discuss how one is related to the other. I will remove the tag, and also make a short section on the PP@RIT talk page. Mjf3719 (talk) 12:46, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Removing trivia

It seems someone reverted my removal of the short, single-entry trivia section here about how RIT was once mentioned in the comic "Doonesbury," citing a short talk page discussion from months before with no definite conclusion.

A trivial reference in a single comic is not notable within the context of an article on RIT. (If the mention formed a significant part of that comic's storyline, it's probably mentioning in an article on the comic.) In the old discussion, someone compared it to "popular culture" sections in our articles on Harvard University#Harvard in fiction and popular culture and Yale in popular culture; but those are a much different beast, given that they detail how multiple successful novels and feature films have shaped cultural views of these institutions (turning them into textbook examples of "elite" for many people, etc.).

If significant reliable sources can be found describing how RIT and its student body are viewed in popular culture, it would be great to have a well-written section on that. (I tried looking for some sources myself as of yet, as one would think at least some news articles and such would exist describing RIT as "geeky," but have not been able to find any.) However, a bulleted list of name-drops like the one in "Doonesbury" is not the right way to approach this. krimpet✽ 20:01, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

I am for removing this unneeded section. This sort of single mention stuff is not needed in an encyclopedia and degrades the quality of the article. If significant sources included RIT perhaps it would be appropriate, but even then trivia like sections are usually not very good. Nick Garvey (talk) 05:20, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

OK, no objections in the three weeks since I suggested this, so I've removed the section. :) krimpet✽ 16:58, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject?

Shall we collaborate to start a formal WikiProject for RIT? We can nominate it for COTF as well. (Link) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.47.175.21 (talk) 16:29, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Neutral. As President Destler states, RIT is a unique school in that it embodies both Engineers and Artists, Deaf and Hearing, Zombies and Humans. Coverage of RIT-related Articles could be far broader than current articles - hardly anyone know about the RIT Athenium (I don't even know how to spell it) or the RIT schools overseas. However, RIT is much smaller than U of R, which IMHO has a broader range of subjects worthy of articles. We would also need to get Wikians involved who aren't RIT students, Alumni, or directly employed by the school. In the current state of things, I think a nomination for COTF would better suit RIT on Wikia. Mjf3719 (talk) 19:05, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

• Note that User:Danlev proposed WikiProject RIT in June and there was some strong opposition, mostly due to an anticipated lack of sustained interest. Feel free to review both the proposal and the archived discussion. --DanielPenfield (talk) 19:49, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Collaboration of the Month for December

RIT was nominated for WikiProject Universities's Collaboration of the Month. Take a wander over to the this page and vote for RIT! (Don't forget to update the Vote Counter manually) There have been several cries in the past for an RIT Wikiproject - now's your chance to prove that RIT is big enough! Mjf3719 (talk) 19:48, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

• NOTE: It appears to be a prank nomination, along with 9 other institutions of higher learning, as a parting shot by by User:Jamesontai, an editor who wants his account deleted. See User:GlassCobra/Editor_for_deletion#Jamesontai for details. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 20:36, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Regardless, we can still collaborate amongst ourselves to create better pages. There are numerous pages here that could use updating and/or general improvement. Perhaps there are other items worthy of articles, such as The Sentinel or the Gordon Field House. Mjf3719 (talk) 21:26, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

I think it's "Editors for deletion" that's the joke, not the nominations themselves. Jamesontai is on wikibreak but doesn't look like he's leaving the project. Powers ^T 19:17, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Senior Seminar Class Project

Why not contact the teacher that is in charge of teaching senior seminar and make fixing up these articles part of a class project? You can accomplish two birds with one stone.  :) Zzmonty (talk) 23:14, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

History Section: Request for comments

I'm working on a history of RIT section here: User:Karimarie/Workshop/Rochester Institute of Technology. Let me know if you have any thoughts on it. Kari Hazzard (T | C) 02:46, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

• My 2¢:

• Why organize the Institute's history according to president?

• Obvious benchmarks, like History of Georgia Tech, History of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute#History, and Purdue#History don't take this approach.
• Because the Institute's compensation has been historically paltry, its early presidents tended to leave at the next available opportunity, so while Ellingson and Simone might warrant their own sections, it would be hard to justify sections for their colleagues, IMHO.

• Many presidents don't have sufficiently length tenures to warrant their own section. I prefer to chop my history sections into either approximately 25-year chunks or bound them with major historical events (World War II, protests of 1968-1972, etc.). I still provide the list of presidents during that span of time. Madcoverboy (talk) 08:07, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

• Your draft is lacking WP:Reliable sources. You should look to either replace your two primary sources ("Mechanics Institute, Minutes") with secondary sources where possible to avoid accusations of WP:No original research.

• You should also include enough information so that others can verify that your sources 1) are real and 2) actually state what you claim they state. If you're really looking at old minutes at the RIT archives, then ask one of the staff how to properly cite the resource. If you're in fact using one of Gordon's histories of RIT, you should cite that instead of the primary source at the very least because it's intellectually dishonest to cite a source you haven't actually directly consulted.

• It might be a good time to visit the ASC writing center.

• Check your spelling. "Due" is not a verb ("those who were even willing to pay to use its library would not due so")
• Check your facts. "the recession of 1877" sounds WP:MADEUP. I'd believe Panic of 1873, but only if accompanied by a WP:Inline citation
• Avoid the passive voice: "cultural lectures were organized", "requests that were often not possible to fill", "classes were added", "Classes [...] were established"
• Cut down on the repetition:

• "the Athenaeum [...] was beginning to lose public support. The public was losing interest in the organization"
• "high-prestige organization", "while the organization was prestigious", "the Athenaeum, though prestigious" (see also WP:Avoid academic boosterism)

• Re-word clumsy phrases:

• "the Institute made its first expression of desire"
• "in the city's high school on the third floor"

• Delete intensifiers ("overly laborious")
• Explicitly demonstrate the intended scope by providing a "starter" WP:Lead section

-- DanielPenfield (talk) 17:23, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

I hope you didn't scare her off... Powers ^T 02:00, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

RIT Dubai

No mention? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.212.199.56 (talk) 08:11, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

RIT Dubai is mentioned and linked. If you think it needs more discussion, feel free to add it. Powers ^T 12:54, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Merge of E. Philip Saunders College of Business

I definitely disagree with merging SCB into this article. Though the article is lacking a bit, SCB is definitely notable enough to have its own article, just needs some work on it. --Dan Leveille^TALK 04:05, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

The proposer never created a discussion section, and that was two months ago, so I've removed the merge tag. Powers ^T 12:37, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Notable alumni

About half the "notable alumni" listed are red-linkes. Perhaps some thought should be given as to whether they are all notable, and if they are whether someone wants to spend time creating wiki stubs (at the least) for them.--Epeefleche (talk) 05:20, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Considering all of the blue links available at List of Rochester Institute of Technology alumni, I would think we could pick some better examples for the main article. Powers ^T 18:49, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Universities COTM

Hello RIT contributors. This university has been selected by popular vote as this month's WikiProject Universities Collaboration of the Month. You should see some increased activity on this page with the goal of achieving Good Article status by December 25. When you have the opportunity, please vote for next month's COTM or help improve the other Collaboration of the Month, the Start-class Lethbridge College.

Happy editing! -Mabeenot (talk) 20:15, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

I gave the article a first pass to include some standard statistical and descriptive information and corresponding cites.

• The notable academic programs is absolutely overgrown booster-cruft that is likely best served by deleting in its entirety and starting from scratch or simply using Template:Infobox US university ranking.
• I also introduced an "Organization and administration" section; look to Northwestern and MIT to see what I've done with analogous sections.
• The academics section should include some discussion of the library, museum, and other artistic installations on campus
• The research section likewise needs some basic descriptive and statistical information that is available from NSF. See Northwestern University#Research
• Presidents and provosts should be spun-out into a standalone list. The current list is not even exhaustive (starts in 1910?)
• Some sources that should continue to be integrated into the article (if I have not already done it). Madcoverboy (talk) 07:50, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

• Carnegie classifications
• College Navigator
• Registration guide
• Institutional Research reports
• Policies & Procedures Manual
• Fast facts

I don't know who led RIT before 1910, but Carleton Gibson is counted as its first President. The list is complete AFAIK. Powers ^T 01:28, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

I love the fact that neither of you could be bothered to actually click on the link for Carleton B. Gibson and scroll down to the succession box before making your pronouncements. Truly outstanding. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 01:57, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Take your gratuitous sarcasm elsewhere, would you? "Board of Directors", which is all that's listed in the succession box of which you speak, isn't all that illuminating on who led the institute. Not to mention the fact that it's not sourced. Powers ^T 02:40, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Let's keep it civil in here. According to the timeline on RIT's website, Carleton Gibson is indeed the first president. The institute was primarily run by a Board of Trustees from as early as 1885 up until Gibson became the first president in 1910. However, there were apparently a series of presidents of the Board of Trustees, starting with Captain Henry Lomb. If someone could find out who those Trustee presidents were, that would be great. Until then, I'll add a little note to the top of the list. -Mabeenot (talk) 07:42, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

List of fraternities and sororities

Does there actually need to be a list of each and every chapter? RIT has some 200 student organizations; while the greeks do contribute a lot to campus, so do many non-greek organizations... And it seemed un-encyclopedic to list every student organization RIT recognizes. Kari Hazzard (T | C) 13:52, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

RITpedia

As in the Elmo article, Muppet Wiki is an external link. I believe RITpedia, which is a wiki dedicated to information about RIT, should be an external link. --RickNightCrawler (talk) 04:33, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Per WP:ELNO #12, open wikis should not be linked to. It is marginally better since it requires an account, but it is still a generally open wiki.--Terrillja _talk 04:39, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Understood, what are the guidelines of stability? --RickNightCrawler (talk) 06:17, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Generally, something that has some editorial oversight. So things like official RIT pages are good, content generated by unknown people is generally not.--Terrillja _talk 06:31, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

This wiki does require a RIT computer account to edit, so entries are monitored and anonymity is not an issue. --RickNightCrawler (talk) 18:40, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

"Second-largest venue in the Rochester area"

One piece of trivia that's been popping up on this article is the claim that RIT's Field House is the "second-largest venue in the Rochester area," after the Rochester War Memorial downtown. While old press releases dating before the field house's opening, like this one, do state that it will be the second-largest indoor venue in the area with a capacity of "over 8,000" upon completion, there are no sources that prove this was actually the case upon completion, or today; in fact, RIT itself now officially claims the field house's capacity is only "almost 7,000.". The Main Street Armory, renovated and expanded in 2007 (a few years after those "second-largest" press releases), has an official capacity of 6,500, which could very well be equal or larger than the vague "almost 7,000." Without solid evidence either way for a superlative claim like "second-largest," it's best to just leave it out. Fran Rogers (talk) 22:28, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

• It's impossible to get a hard capacity number because a lot depends on where the stage is placed. There are only 2500 or so permanent seats. Even if an exact ranking is impossible, it's important to note that it's among the top two or three venues in the county. Powers ^T 01:08, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Dated claim about the quarter system

In this edit, an editor asserted the claim that "RIT sets itself apart from its peers by its vigorous quarter schedule". This seems flimsy given that RIT is within a year and a half of abandoning quarters for semesters. Anyone up for the challenge of capturing what really makes the RIT experience different than Caltech or the Rose–Hulman Institute of Technology or DeVry University? -- DanielPenfield (talk) 22:13, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

"The" preceding "Rochester Institute of Technology"

An anonymous editor added the article "the" before RIT's full name. I can't find anything to substantiate this--the RIT website uses "Rochester Institute of Technology" without the leading article extensively--and during my time at RIT I don't remember it being used. Also, other schools on Wikipedia (MIT, Carnegie Mellon University, RPI) all seem to omit a leading article, even if in the official school name. Please discuss if you disagree. -- Tvh2k (talk) 03:10, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

New photos

I visited the campus recently with my son and took numerous photos during a tour. They are labeled "Rochester Institute of Technology 1.jpg" incrementing the number through 57, so the last one is "Rochester Institute of Technology 57.jpg" and people can find them here. While walking I didn't take notes so the captions can be improved by those who are knowledgeable.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 13:53, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for releasing your photos under a free license. It would be nice if they had more descriptive filenames, even if it was just to add "by Tomwsulcer" or "April 2012" -- something to distinguish them from all of the other files that have "Rochester Institute of Technology" in their filenames. Powers ^T 18:07, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes, thanks for saying thanks. Feel free to change the filenames if you wish; it was difficult for me to come up with other names because I didn't know specifics such as the building names, and I figure that more knowledgeable people will come along and improve them and perhaps change their names if necessary. Pretty campus btw.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 18:49, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Sure, totally understandable that you don't know the context. Just pointing out for future reference (in case you visit other campuses in the future) that adding a little distinguishing factor to the filenames could be helpful, even if it's just your name or the date. Powers ^T 15:55, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes I visited University of Rochester, Cornell University, Colgate University, and before that Gettysburg College, Dickinson College, Bucknell University, Carnegie-Mellon University, and took photos too. I've also done Union County College, many others. Taking the pictures is easy; but then there's downloading them to the computer, trimming them, resizing them, naming them -- and then uploading to Wikimedia Commons has its own difficulties -- declaring copyright status (I always choose "public domain" so people can use them freely), adding categories, names. To top it off, the date on my camera is wrong; to change the date on each picture would take even more time, so I just put a note in the cut-and-paste. Still, it takes me half of a day to upload say 100 pictures. I try to streamline it a bit with cutting-and-pasting the common parts of a description. Overall I hope the picture people at Wikimedia Commons find ways to make the process less cumbersome.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 01:21, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Quarter Mile

Under the Campus section, there's this:

The Quarter Mile is actually 0.41 miles (0.66 km) long when measured between the mobius sculpture and the sundial. The name comes from a student fundraiser, where quarters were lined up from the sundial to the Infinity Sculpture.

I don't think this is true. To the best of my knowledge, the Quarter Mile is actually 0.25 miles long and extends from the dormitory buildings to the SAU, connecting the academic and residential sides together. I know that the road extends further in each direction, but the term "Quarter Mile" was initially used simply to express how far it was from the dorms to the academic buildings.

I don't know anything about the student fundraiser mentioned, but I'm willing to bet that they used quarters because it was already called the Quarter Mile. Togamoos (talk) 14:11, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Move mention of the quarter system to another section?

Now that the quarter to semester transition is complete, should it be removed from the Academics section?

"RIT's full-time undergraduate and graduate programs operate an approximately 10-week quarter system with the primary three academic quarters beginning on Labor Day in early September and ending in late May.[30] Effective in August 2013, RIT will transition from a quarter system to a semester system.[32] The change was hotly debated on campus, with a majority of students opposed according to an informal survey; Student Government also voted against the change."