Talk:United States Naval Academy/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents 1 Requested removal from Wikiproject:Maryland 2 Old History 3 NPoV 4 Rape Statistics 5 Notable Graduates 6 Admissions 7 Croquet! 8 GA nomination 9 Good Article nomination has failed 10 Sports 11 28th Company 12 Merchant Mariner License? 13 World's Largest Dormitory 14 Good Article ? 15 Owens case 16 Nowak vs Carter 17 GA Review 18 SSP

Requested removal from Wikiproject:Maryland

I have requested that this article be removed from WikiProject Maryland because this is a national institution, not a state one, and a military base. Please contribute to discussion there (not here).Student7 00:12, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Old History

Remved 1911 text:

In 1911, each midshipman was paid $600 a year, beginning with the date of his admission; and he must bind himself to serve in the United States Navy for eight years (including the years spent in the academy) unless he is discharged sooner. The course of instruction is for four years -- "final graduation" comes only after six years, the additional years being spent at sea -- and is in eleven departments: discipline, seamanship, ordnance an 1 gunnery, navigation, marine engineering and naval construction, mathematics and mechanics, physics and chemistry, electrical engineering, English, modern languages, naval hygiene and physiology. Vessels for practice work of midshipmen in the first, second, and third year classes are attached to the academy during the academic year, and from early in June to September of each year the midshipmen are engaged in practice cruises.

The academy is governed by the Bureau of Navigation of the United States Navy Department, and is under the immediate supervision of a superintendent appointed by the secretary of the navy, with whom are associated the Commandant of Midshipmen, a disciplinary officer, and the Academic Board, which is composed of the superintendent and the head of each of the eleven departments.

Needs to be checked before being put back in. --mav 01:07, 12 Oct 2003 (UTC)

NPoV

The edits of 131.122.37.113 about 04:19, 2004 Nov 23 (UTC) seem non-neutral point of view. Hu

Rape Statistics

We need to include in this article rape statistics -- dont ask -- but if it's pertinent for the USAFA article than it should be in here -- unless we base all of our "encyclopedia" articles on newspaper articles...

• Why should we have rape stats for the Naval Academy unless we have them for every other college described on here?
  • I concur. This would constitute a non-neutral viewpoint unless it is information we provide for all universities. The case of the Air Force Academy is different as the investigation and the depth of the problem has clearly become a part of the history of the institution.

Ray Trygstad 21:05, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I look forward to being able soon to add well sourced information that the atmosphere at the Naval Academy has greatly improved but fail to see any basis for removing well sourced information regarding the current situation and past incidents. Fred Bauder 14:40, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

I corrected the sexual assault statistics. If we're including them, they may as well be correct. - A Midshipman 06 DEC 2005

Make a separate wiki for Academy issues to include sexual assault, honor, gays in the military, prayer, and athletics. These are issues that exist, but should not be included in the wiki about the school. Example: I do not see statistics for how many gays were reported, how many complaints about prayer were reported, or how many people were kicked for honor. Example: Other colleges experience more sexual assaults than any of the SAs, but I do not see statistics included on those pages.

Notable Graduates

The "Graduates famous outside the Navy" should probably me merged with the the other notable graduates. Jimmy Carter certainly acheived his greatest notoriety oustide the Navy, yet is not in the outside the Navy group. John McCain is notable both for his naval service and his post-naval career. Only three astronauts among dozens graduated from the Academy are listed. One of the most well known USNA graduates, astronaut James Lovell is not listed. A deputy assistant cabinet secretary is listed, but 5 secretaries are not. The whole list needs to be rationalized in terms of who to include, and their organization. 24.209.173.129 06:26, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't think naming Cape Leahy is Adm. Byrd's claim to fame. If no one objects, I'm going to remove it.24.209.173.129 07:12, 8 January 2006 (UTC) . No objections, so I removed it (now on famous graduates page).-- MayerG 06:49, 18 January 2006 (UTC) (same person as 24.209.173.129).

Admissions

The USNA does admit non-americans. their website does indicate some sort of admissions process for internationals.

• That's true. I've changed the article accordingly. A small number of international students (<20) are admitted each year. They tend to be from smaller allied/friendly countries that lack their own academies (e.g. Jamaica); "big" allies (e.g. France, Britain) tend to send exchange students from their own military education programs. The number and country of origin of international students is listed in the Class Profiles published by USNA (cited in note 1). MayerG 19:33, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

• Here are the exact figures for the class of 2009, from the Class Profile: "The Class of 2009 also includes 11 international students from the following countries: Guyana (2), Honduras, Ireland, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritius, Philippines, Singapore, Taiwan, and Thailand." MayerG 04:24, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Croquet!

I found the previous depiction of the Navy's performance in the annual SJCA/Navy Croquet Match to be rather misleading, as it implied the Navy did something other than suck out loud, and so have rectified this with statistics showing quite clearly that the opposite is true. I wish the Middies good luck this spring; if the past is an indication, they will need it. 69.140.12.199 01:06, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

GA nomination

As much as I am interested in reading the article, it has no references, and thus is unsuitable for good article status. There's nothing that can done to avoid the necessity of good references for good articles on Wikipedia. Harro5 05:51, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

• Er, references appear to be there in the form of external links. ⇒ SWATJester ^Ready Aim _Fire! 06:09, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
  • They need to be formatted into a references section. Harro5 06:12, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
• In reality a great deal of input to this article is firsthand knowledge by present and former Midshipmen which is often not easily documentable. Here's one example: I am certain that somewhere there is a document which lists the 36-to-30 company conversions supporting the point that 28th company, which supplies the USNA Croquet Team, used to be 34th company, but I guarantee you is is very obscure and not easily accessed. This is not to say that there should not be some supporting documentation, but do we have an acceptable format for citing firsthand knowledge possessed by individuals contributing to the article? I have written/rewritten major portions of this article, and I actually happen to be the guy who created the first unofficial Naval Academy homepage, which later became the official USNA homepage, and served as the Naval Academy's first Webmaster. The fact is that people like me with firsthand knowledge contribute to Wikipedia in special ways not equalled by other reference sources, and in ways not always easily documentable. Ray Trygstad 20:47, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
• Ok, to some extent I'm inclined to agree with that but what about the things that can be documented like "The Commandant of Midshipmen is currently Capt. Bruce E. Grooms, USN, who replaced then Capt. Charles J. Leidig in June 2005. The Deputy Commandant of Midshipmen is Col. David C. Fuquea, USMC. The Command Master Chief of the United States Naval Academy is CNOCM(SW) Bernard B. Quibilan."? There was probably a press release or some sort of official Academey website report. That sort of statement surely has to be documentable. The problem I have with this article is that there doesn't seem to be even enough effort, let alone actual documentation.TonyJoe 12:48, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Good Article nomination has failed

The Good article nomination for United States Naval Academy/Archive 1 has failed, for the following reason:

(The first, most glaring thing about this article is it's failure to be "broad in its coverage, addressing all major aspects of the topic."

The history section ends with the institution through World War I. There's about 90 years of history missing. Those 90 years include World War II, desegregation, and the induction of women (later addressed)

Which brings up the point of it being "well written" specifically b "it follows a logical structure, introducing the topic and then grouping together its coverage of related aspects; where appropriate, it contains a succinct lead section summarising the topic, and the remaining text is organised into a system of hierarchical sections (particularly for longer articles.;" It seems to have a lot of things scattered about. For instance, the seperation of the Moral Education section and the Mission of the Article section.

Looking at the recent featured University of Michigan article, I think that a better structure could be thought of for this article, especially given its current content and potential.

References and other citations are a problem too (see above)TonyJoe 12:39, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Sports

Where is the sports' section for the USNA? tdwuhs

28th Company

28th Company needs to be a seperate page. It is bias to give info on one company and not the other 29. (28 sucks anyway) --ProdigySportsman 03:11, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, it seems like it's an example of one of the sports traditions at the academy. (I fixed broken link #1). The article references 28th Company, so I can see leaving it in. If the article went on and on about 28th Company specific info, I can see removing it/spinning it off, but it doesn't. If you don't like it, maybe your company should start a memorable tradition! If it makes you feel better, I edited/updated the article to reflect your shipmates' loss in 2006. :) Pesco 22:26, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

I am the one who added most of the info in the Midshipmen Activities about 28's Croquet match with St. Johns. "There is even an unofficial..." It should have been removed and Lenzi (the one who added it) agreed and un-merged it. What shipmate have we lossed in 2006? We lost one in 2005. Oh and by the way my company does have a tradition, croquet. 28 is my company. --ProdigySportsman 16:17, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

We've had a misunderstanding. On your second point, I was referring to the fact that your croquet team lost in 2006, not a loss of life. I had edited the croquet section to reflect the most recent result. On your first point, when you said "28 sucks anyway" I assumed you weren't in that company. I thought you were bashing 28th Company and the croquet tradition. But I now realize that you were addressing a section already removed talking only about 28th Company not relating to croquet. "Belay my last." Pesco 00:45, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Yep, I am glad you figured it out. --ProdigySportsman 00:54, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

When something mentioned on a talk page is resolved on the article page, please follow up on the talk page. Pesco 01:01, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Merchant Mariner License?

Is it common practice within some majors for Midshipmen to graduate with a Merchant Mariner's License as Third Assistant Engineers or Third Mates? Federal regulation makes it possible, but I wondered if it actually happens. Thanks. Pesco 22:14, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

World's Largest Dormitory

Many references can be found citing Bancroft Hall as the world's largest dormitory. Eliminating Bancroft Hall, I could not find another dormitory that so claimed. Why was that phrase eliminated? Either claim needs to have a citation/footnote.Student7 00:33, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Good Article ?

I believe that with a little more work this article could be renominated for Good Article status again, as said before there needs to be more history added, I have added history from WWI to WWII but there needs to be history from WWII to Present, There was question about desegregation being a point to discuss in the history but seeing is how the military was far ahead of its time and the first african-american graduate (Lieutenant Commander Wesley A. Brown) graduated in 1949 I dont believe anything more than a little sentence about him would be necessary. Also the structre of the article (where to put certain sections) needs to be discussed. Leave comments on this talk page if anyone thinks they can help and share their opinions.--Joebengo 05:03, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

I have nominated the article for Good Article status after I added all the history from WWI to Present, I also rearranged the entire article for better flow. I also fixed the references.--Joebengo 05:15, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Owens case

I removed the following: "other alumni simply realize that there is a profound feminist presence within the administration. Midshipman Owens was separated from the institution for engaging in sexual activity within the dorm. The female with whom he was engaging in these activities remains enrolled and awaits graduation. She was granted immunity for her testimony in the rape case, and despite a number of false statements, has not been reprimanded for her part in the offense." A citation to a Washington Post article documents not this inserted material, but the previous sentence (which remains in the Wiki article). According to the Post, Owens has not been separated (rather, his fate is still undecided). Although the Post article does state that the female midshipman received immunity, it says nothing about her making false statements, nor does it address whether she has been disciplined in some way. The view attributed to "other alumni" is not a view expressed by any of the alumni interviewed by the Post. Rather, they criticized Rempt for being overzealous in cracking down on sexual assault; to quote the Post, "The alumni argue that Rempt's overzealousness in prosecuting high-profile sexual assault cases is part of his effort to advance an agenda designed to appease Congress and women's groups demanding a crackdown on sexual assault and harassment at military academies." This view is contained in the Wiki article, and sourced to the Post. MayerG 04:34, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Nowak vs Carter

I'd like to make Jimmy Carter "disappear" from the article. If the current attempt to make Nowak disappear is ultimately successful, I hope I would get support from the rest of you to make Carter disappear. I am more embarassed about him than Nowak.  :) Thanks in advance. P.S. I promise to support anyone else you guys might want to vanish! Student7 13:18, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

• No one is trying to make the Nowak case "disappear", only removing sections that are not sourced (outside of wikipeida). On another note, Nowak was in the news for 2 weeks and now the whole story has all but disappeared, I don't see why she warrants an entire paragraph when she has already been forgotten by most, additionally she is not made "famous" by her time at the academy but instead her time at NASA so this section would be better fit in the NASA article (which it probably already is).--Joebengo 14:24, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree that this event is a flash in the pan. It will all go away, but not within days. Within months maybe. This paragraph will be greatly shortened, though perhaps never completely eliminated, at that time. I think the point is that we have the opportunity to demonstrate that we are not afraid to report bad news. One of the major faults, IMO, in the US Navy article is that there is no bad news. An absolutely perfect service that's never made any mistakes. What is the problem there? It (therefore) has no credibility.

As far as "fame" goes, almost no one but the football players achieved "fame" at school. It mostly came later. If we take credit when it isn't due, we have to take debit(?) as well.

Actually, I was kind of disappointed to discover that Machine Gun Kelly did not graduate from the Academy, having been told repeatedly, while I was there, that he did! Nowak will have to do, I guess, until we can come up with someone better!  :) Student7 15:20, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

The paragraph you've attempted to add is (a) way too long giving the event undue weight, (b) unsourced by anything except another Wikipedia article which is the same as having no source, and (c) being added into the wrong section. I don't mind Nowak being mentioned as an alumna but the mention must be appropriate in form and content. A brief and well-sourced mention in the new "Graduates currently in the news" subsection would be appropriate, IMHO. --ElKevbo 16:10, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I like that suggestion. (I didn't write the original article and will defer to others). Student7 22:33, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

GA Review

Well, first of all, I think I should note that the GA criteria have changed quite a bit from the last review in May of 2006. I think this is important to note, because the referencing standard may not of been as high back then for articles, and i'm primarily failing this article for not being well-referenced by current standards.

The first three sections, Description, Mission, and History, don't appear to have any obvious citations at all. The Mission section isn't attributed to a source, which makes it look ambiguous, leaving the reader to question whether it is a direct quote, (Which it is, for example, this reference- [1]) or an insanely POV pushing interpretation of the mission (Which would actually be better titled "Mission Statement" instead of just "Mission" in my opinion) by an editor. The sections on war look to be fine, and the campus section appears to comply with Wikipedia:Embedded lists. However, the next four references also have unclear referencing, is something in the Bibliography covering them? And why are there so many citation needed tags in the midshipman activities section? And then there's this sentence- "Robinson himself was the consensus best all-around American college player at the time." Considered by whom, and who mattered in terms of consensus building? Notable graduates seems fine because the parent article is referenced, but the Appointment process section looks suspicious because of lack of apparent referencing and the lack of wikilinks. For one thing, what does "then as long as that candidate is physically, medically, and academically found qualified by the academy, he or she will be admitted, even if there are more qualified applicants." even mean? What standards does the academy use to decide what physically, edically, and academically qualified mean? It looks like somebody just copy and pasted the about page of the collage for the moral education section, which definently is not right, as a reader doesn't have any indication of this, and might assume that some increadibly obvious POV pusher advertiser wrote this section because it is written in such glowing terms. It really ought to be attributed to the source properly, especially if its going to be the limit of content in this section. The satellite program section also appears to of been mostly copy and pasted from various web sources, (I googled a line and got something straight from a collage related site I think) its mostly the compleatly un-wikilinked sections that seem to be copy and pasted. This really isn't a very reliable way to write an encyclopedia article.

Therefore, for a combination of ambiguous referencing, copy and paste jobs in several sections, several sections which a bunch of citation needed tags, and various other problems, I am failing this article. Also, reference 20 isn't a reference, its just an unsourced statement, where are these Class Profiles? Homestarmy 15:27, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Sure reference 20 is a reference, it just isn't an online reference [BTW, it's reference 21 now]. The Class Profiles are printed documents, produced and distributed by the Academy, just like the Catalog. Printed documents are available in libraries, archives, and from the publisher. Class Profiles, in particular, are available for free to anyone in the Academy's Visitor Center; I've not inquired of the Academy how extensive its distribution list is. Parts of some of the Class Profiles are available on the web (the 2009 profile is linked to later in the article), but online sources are prone to instability, so a citation to the actual document is preferable (just as, for example, the Wiki article on Gregor Mendel's Experiments on Plant Hybridization cites the original published paper), although an online link is useful if available (again, for example, as does the plant hybridization article). Reference 20 provides the title, dates, and publisher of the cited documents, which are the proper elements for citation of a periodical of this sort. You are right, however, that the state of citation in the article is quite heterogeneous. MayerG 02:04, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

The implication seems to be that online references are superior to hard copy. I disagree. Hardcopy doesn't change. Web pages tend to vaporize. Usually someone spent good money on publishing hard copy. Soft copies are often "for free." Sometimes you get what you pay for! Yes, offline references are harder to check. But they can be way more accurate and "encyclopedic."Student7 02:40, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

I have addressed all of the issues in the GA review and here are the major ones:

• The Mission section isn't attributed to a source--Y
• why are there so many citation needed tags in the midshipman activities section--Y
• this sentence- "Robinson himself was the consensus best all-around American college player at the time."--Y
• Appointment process section looks suspicious because of lack of apparent referencing and the lack of wikilinks--Y, (the whole section is now under one citation)
• The satellite program section also appears to of been mostly copy and pasted from various web sources--Y (mostly removed)

I'd like to get some feedback and I plan on resubmitting the article for GA soon.--Joebengo 23:32, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

SSP

I have never understood the importance of the article on the SSP, it does not seem to help the article in any way and the SSP program is not what makes the academy an important place, either the section should be turned into another article or it should just be removed entirely. If anything it surely does not warrant so much space in the article. If anyone else agrees with me I will be removing/shortening the section by the end of the week.--Joebengo 23:58, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree. As per your suggestion, I changed it. See what you think. The original article did go on. Seems funny to have a stranded college article, but what can you do? Student7 01:41, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I read too quickly. Had skipped your message that you were intending to work on it later in the week. Feel free to change anything. You've probably thought about it longer than I did! Student7 02:14, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

I already thanked you on your talk page but I'll do it here too, you actually saved me from having to do it and since you agreed with me then it is perfectly fine. You did an excellent job.--Joebengo 03:37, 21 March 2007 (UTC)