Talk:Duke University/Archive 4

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive 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

Notable Alumni

Should Paul Farmer be added to the list of notable alumni?

  • He's already in the list of notable alumni article. I personally don't think he is famous enough to be included in the short section about alumni on this page. -Bluedog423Talk 00:14, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Paul farmer has multiple books written about him. He's equally famous to the other's included in this section, I don't think there's any question he should be included. I added two names to the list of current NBA players from Duke: Luol Deng and Corey Maggette. Also, I fixed the link to Chris Duhon's Wikipedia page. - DukeGrad —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.174.137.52 (talk) 04:48, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I reverted the deletion of Christian Laettner from the Notable Alumni section and linked his name to the exsiting article in Wikipedia. --Hennap (talk) 00:07, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Duke Blue

hey someone change this pic to the official duke blue color #003893. thanks. DP08 (talk) 22:41, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Edit to the Athletics: Rose Bowl was not the national championship in 1938

I deleted the reference to the Rose Bowl as the national championship game that season: up until the 1960s, the national champion was selected before the bowl season by the AP and equivalents. In the 60s people finally realized that selecting a national champion, only to have them lose in their bowl game, was silly. This is the basis for why several schools are now claiming new championships from this period, but also why the Rose Bowl couldn't have been considered a "championship game" --at best it established a champion. Here's a reliable link that mentions what I'm talking about. --Bobak (talk) 19:18, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Duke University Wiki External Link

Now having been in existence over 2 years, http://www.duiki.com has become a definitive source of information about Duke University and will not likely be supplanted by any other wiki. With the inclusion of the Chronicle as a mainstream media source its only right to include an alternative perspectiove. Readers of the Duke article will also find it useful to read: perspectives about the university written by current and former students, guides to student life, and information all about Duke and Durham all published from the perspective of those who live and work at Duke. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.3.78.87 (talk) 05:04, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Andrew, I know you want to include Duiki because you created it and clearly you've done a lot of work in all your endeavors, but it's an embellishment to say it "has become a definitive source of information about Duke University." The Chronicle gets around 75,000 online readers DAILY. Duiki has had 218,937 in two YEARS for around 300 readers daily (according to [1]). How can a source with 250 times as few hits be compared to the Chronicle? They are not even close to the same level. Please see conflict of interest, which should already be aware of due to your creation of LA Wiki and its subsequent deletion proceedings. You should also know to sign your posts. I'll leave the external link for now, but really it shouldn't stay and you haven't established notability. Take it easy, -Bluedog423Talk 02:20, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
What other alternative Duke-focused media do you know of? Even if the Chronicle has 99% market-share, it is the only alternative media outlet there is for Duke. In that sense, it is very important. --152.3.78.87 (talk) 00:35, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps more importantly, it is the largest and most popular independent college wiki that exists. It used to be CaseWiki except it is not independent of its university it turns out. --152.3.78.87 (talk) 00:38, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
I personally don't really care if it's included in the external links or not. It certainly doesn't hurt the article as a whole and isn't blatant advertising or anything. It's also a fairly informative website...but it certainly is not obvious that it should be included. I just don't want to go down a slippery slope - if Duiki is important enough for inclusion, why not Duke Health System, Duke hospital, Pratt's webpage, Trinity's webpage, Duke University archives, etc.? In any event, I'm not going to remove the link for now. Keep up the good work! Cheers, Bluedog423Talk 02:28, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

"one of the the nation's elite"

The sentence stating that Duke's athletic program is "one of the nation's elite," though true, strikes me as POV. Can anyone think of a way to reword it? LaszloWalrus (talk) 17:35, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

  • Well, after the sentence is a reference to the Director's cup standings supporting this assertion, but I do understand your point. The athletics section is more descriptive about how it's "one of the nation's elite" and says "In the past ten years, Duke has finished in the top 30 every year in the NACDA Director's Cup, an overall measure of an institution's athletic success. In the past three years, Duke has finished 11th (2007), eighth (2006), and fifth (2005)." While this is more NPOV, it's difficult to replicate this in the concise manner that the lead requires. I think it might make sense to have an addendum to the reference so that it serves also as a footnote (that includes this additional information about Director's Cup standings). I don't think it'd make sense to have that much detail in the lead. Or, if you wanted you could say something like "its athletic program is historically ranked among the top fifteen in the nation according to NACDA Director's Cup standings." That's as concise as I could make it. -Bluedog423Talk 00:45, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

That sounds pretty good. I'll wait a while to see if anyone objects, or comes up with something else. Then, I'll change it. LaszloWalrus (talk) 06:12, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

  • Hi, I don't go to Duke but Duke's athletic is one of the country's best. It might be POV so how about change that to some concerete facts instead? However, I still think you should keep that line. (One of the nation's elite is an understatement.) Duke actually does a lot better than that. Firewal2 (talk) 02:32, 30 April 2008 (UTC)