Talk:History of Georgia Tech

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the History of Georgia Tech article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	History of Georgia Tech has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
Article milestones Date Process Result February 17, 2007 Good article nominee Listed June 16, 2007 Peer review Reviewed August 8, 2007 Peer review Reviewed August 14, 2007 Featured article candidate Not promoted February 25, 2008 Good article reassessment Kept Current Status: Good article

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state) (Rated A-Class) Georgia (U.S. state) Portal This article is part of WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state), an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Georgia (U.S. state) on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. A This article has been rated as A-Class on the quality scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. WikiProject Atlanta (Rated A-Class) History of Georgia Tech is within the scope of WikiProject Atlanta, dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of Metro Atlanta. For more information see the project page. A This article has been rated as A-Class on the quality scale. WikiProject Universities (Rated A-Class) Portal This article is part of WikiProject Universities, an attempt to standardise coverage of universities and colleges. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this notice, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion. A This article has been rated as A-Class on the quality scale. WikiProject History     (Rated GA-Class) (Rated Mid-importance) This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a group devoted to the the study, and improvement of Wikipedia articles on the subject, of History. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked Neutrality: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no <!-- 6. It is written from a neutral point of view. --> |B-Class-6=yes/no WikiProject Georgia Tech (Rated A-Class) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Georgia Tech. If you would like to help, you can edit this article or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. A This article has been rated as A-Class on the quality scale.

To-do list for History of Georgia Tech:	edit · history · watch · refresh
Lead: Explain what happened to the school from 1901 to 1980. Establishment: Some context on industries would be relevant. Was someone espousing this view or is it just a historical perspective? What was Georgia doing to industrialize or de-agrarianize? What were neighboring states doing with regards to education and industrialization that might have been influential? What industries were important or prevalent? (railroads, telegraphs, mechanized farming, food processing, etc.) Was GT intended to be an important educational component within a larger framework of industrialization (which you imply) or just a vocational school? If the latter, then some mention of the founding mission or charter would be appropriate. Cquote the mission as stated in the bill that established the school Technological university: Mention the 1929 Rose Bowl. What is the distinction between a trade school and a university? If it's research programs and advanced degrees, then the reader should know when these are introduced. Further explain the development of the School of Commerce. What was the impact of the Great Depression? Expand the creation of the Board of Regents and the controversy surrounding the removal of the Commerce School. (Engineering the New South, page 175) How was GT "swiftly enlisted" for the war effort (World War II) other than providing young men? Source: Edwards, Pat. "Ramblins - Tech provided valuable services during WWII", The Technique, 1998-02-20. Retrieved on 2007-05-20.  ENS 203 onwards Add The Cocking Affair, as that surely affected Georgia Tech. See also: Eugene Talmadge. This is discussed at length in ENS 193-200 and DHWG 206-212 Integration: Expand paragraph about women. Add info from Helen Grenga, Tech’s first female professor, dies What's this about a Southern Technical Institute's contributions to WW2 after the section on WW2? What's this about a split in 1981 within a section about integration in the 1950s? There has to be a lot more history on the racial integration of the university beyond "the student body voted to endorse all qualified applications" and some guy closing his restaurant in protest. Presidential addresses, dissension among the board of trustees, student group opposition, politicking in the legislature or governor's mansion, lessons from the U[sic]GA forced integration. ENS 312-onward Expansion into modern-day west campus: Webb, Chris. "Hemphill’s heyday ended with westward campus growth", The Technique, 2003-03-14. Retrieved on 2007-03-16.  Reorganization and Expansion: Certainly vocational schools weren't expressly founded to conduct scientific research, but many like MIT, Caltech, GT, VT, Texas A&M, Michigan State, etc. came into this capacity. By the 1920s and 1930s, many American colleges and universities were emulating German and French research universities by funding faculty research and graduate programs. Other schools emphasized it after WW2. When did the shift to graduate education begin, what were early programs, etc? Covered in ENS 357 onwards; during Van Leer's term went from 6 grads to 300 What the hell happened to the end of the 1960s and entire decade of the 70s? Nothing about Vietnam protests, women's rights, environmentalism, civil rights? ENS 342 onwards Women: ENS 348 Apparently President Pettit served for 14 years but didn't do anything to warrant mention, even being inaugurated or stepping down for any reason. Looking back, likewise for Van Leer and Harrison. For Harrison: Edwards, Pat. "Ramblins - Titanic land acquisitions shape the campus", The Technique, 1998-02-27. Retrieved on 2007-05-20.  There must have been more costs and benefits involved with the Crecine reorganization than just management style to warrant such narrow approval margins. That crytpically-worded cquote about being under fire should probably be a citation, not a prominently displayed feature of the article because it provides absolutely no depth or context. I imagine GT was just as affected by budgetary belt-tightening during the 80s and 90s, how did they respond? (tuition increases, program cutbacks, etc) See also this source, which details history that occurred after ENS was published: Encyclopedia of library and information science: Georgia Institute of Technology Libraries (ISBN 0824720520) I definitely want to hear more about how the Olympic Village was secured, the construction and changes impacting the campus and community, boost in admissions after being featured prominently, etc. Look at the NGE article for more info: Olympic Games in 1996. New Georgia Encyclopedia. University of Georgia Press. Retrieved on 2007-06-24. Future: Master plan: Baucom, Chris. "Master Plan sets goals for future", The Technique, 1999-01-22. Retrieved on 2007-03-16.
Priority 5

Contents 1 User subpage 2 Hammertime! 3 GA Review 4 A-Class 5 Fair use rationale for Image:Georgia Tech Gym.jpg 6 Page name 7 GA Sweeps Review: Pass

[edit] User subpage

Why is this a user subpage, and not a main namespace article? ----Rodzilla (talk) 06:47, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

The rationale for using a user subpage is that it serves as a place to develop text that isn't not mature or stable enough to be a mainspace article. Also, once this history article is fleshed out, I'd like a summary of the expanded article to replace the contents of Georgia Institute of Technology#History. I'm leaving the "readyness" up to MaxVeers more than anything, as it is his user subpage. Make sense? —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 07:03, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Or more simply, we could move it to the mainspace. We just don't want to yet. :p —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 07:07, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hammertime!

I think the page is mature enough for the mainspace. What do you guys think? I know it needs some serious expansion, but it's no longer the young section that it once was. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 21:41, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't know...perhaps we should tick a few more things off the to-do list first. On that note, might I suggest a subsection about the history of women at Tech? There is a lot of specific information about the subject that is distinct from the rest of the timeline and doesn't particularly flow well with the rest of the text. For example, there is the info about the women at the school of business, then women being admitted, then actually being able to enroll in programs,the opening of dorms, then finally the issue of "tripling" in female dorms the 1980s (?) because more women were admitted than they had housing for.

Also, speaking of "flow," that's another reason I don't think it's quite ready...parts of it feel really choppy. I think some consideration for style should be made before it goes "live." LaMenta3 20:58, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

It's good enough to be a mainspace article after that last expansion. I'm moving it. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 17:18, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Amazing work! MaxVeers 15:40, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm especially proud of my paragraph on Crecine's institute reorganization :) —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 19:47, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA Review

Spotted a sentence or two that needs an individual citation, but overall the article meets all the criteria for GA. Congratulations and good work. Mocko13 22:01, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A-Class

I have downgraded this from an A to a B for WikiProject History. There was no formal A-class review and I don't believe it would pass one in it's current state--Phoenix-wiki (talk · contribs) 10:51, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

It passed a Good Article nomination, and as such is at least GA-class. Also, it has had one FAC (unsuccessful, but barely so) - so despite the length of the to do list, this is a high-quality article. If you want to put it up for A-class review, or if you don't believe it's GA-class and you wish to put it up for Good Article review, please do so. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 21:47, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

No, it was fine as a GA. It has improved somewhat now and might pass an A-Class review. I won't be nominating it though, as I haven't worked on it.--Phoenix-wiki (talk · contribs) 19:18, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Georgia Tech Gym.jpg

Image:Georgia Tech Gym.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 11:39, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Page name

Surely this should be located at History of Georgia Institute of Technology, shouldn't it? I mean, the article on the university itself is at Georgia Institute of Technology, not at Georgia Tech. Just seems like we should use the official rather than colloquial name.

Any objections to my moving it? Dylan (talk) 21:18, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm sort of on the fence with this one; while I believe that the main article (Georgia Institute of Technology) should adhere to the official name, I'm not so sure about the sub-articles such as History of Georgia Tech and Georgia Tech traditions. I'm actually rather happy about where they are at the moment. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 21:25, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm inclined towards keeping the colloquial name, personally. Some school articles use their common name like Georgia Tech does:

• List of Virginia Tech alumni and Virginia Tech Hokies (school's main article: Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University)
• Traditions and student activities at MIT and MIT class ring (school's main article: Massachusetts Institute of Technology; admittedly, some other MIT articles use the school's full name)
• Cal Poly football team plane crash and Cal Poly Mustang Band (school's main article: California Polytechnic State University)

I'm not dead set on it, but it seems to at least be acceptable to use the school's colloquial name in related articles, while the main article uses the official name. • WarpFlyght (talk • contribs) 21:40, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Good examples. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 23:59, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

The official name of Georgia Tech is THE Georgia Institute of Technology. If you thing it should be the title at least get it correct. Need proof? Look at the school seal, its around the rim. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.237.34.177 (talk) 02:44, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

No it's not. Don't even pretend. Seriously. If you want proof, GT's trademarks are listed on this page. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 04:35, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GA Sweeps Review: Pass

As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. I'm specifically going over all of the "World History-Americas" articles. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. I have made several minor corrections throughout the article. Altogether the article is well-written and is still in great shape after its passing in 2006. Continue to improve the article making sure all new information is properly sourced and neutral. I would recommend taking the article back to WP:FAC if editors are interested. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. I have updated the article history to reflect this review. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 07:23, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

I've been working on the suggestions from the last FAC (listed in the to do list) but it's hard to maintain momentum with that many pending tasks for this article. Thanks for the corrections, though. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 14:22, 26 February 2008 (UTC)