Talk:Johns Hopkins University
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
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. |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. |
 |
Johns Hopkins University is part of WikiProject Maryland, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Maryland. |
||
| B | This article has been rated as b-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
||
| Mid | This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale. |
Article merged: See old talk-page here —Preceding unsigned comment added by 214.13.24.91 (talk) 15:09, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] New Headline Photograph
Not a huge fan of the new headline photograph compared to the old one. The aesthetics are off. I suggest replacing it with the old picture, or using a new photograph taken by a competent photographer. --jimeroquai 16:14, October 1, 2006
-
- Most of the new photos seem of poor quality. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.135.82.211 (talk) 00:26, 5 April 2007 (UTC).
[edit] Admissions section
Why did someone take out the admissions section? And the student publications section looks a mess. The second half of the page is in really bad shape compared to previously. I hope someone reverts these changes.
[edit] "Social life is under siege"
I deleted the line in social life saying "The Johns Hopkins Newsletter on October 6, 2005 complained "Hopkins Social Life is Under Siege." This quotation is grossly out of context. If one read the article, he or she would see that it is about new noise ordinances in Baltimore City.
[edit] Encyclopedic?
Do you think this line is truly appropriate for encyclopedic content?
"Although a valuable education is obtained through Hopkins, this is not without what many undergraduates call periods of trials and tribulations. As a challenging university with high admissions standards, classes are filled with highly able students preparing for the transition to graduate or professional school. At times, undergraduates may sacrifice their social lives, but always for the pursuit of higher knowledge."
To me, a simple explanation that academics are rigorous will do; there is no need to go on about trials, tribulations, and the pursiut of knowledge.
[edit] Allegation: This is "A Puff Piece on Wikipedia"
There seems to be a discussion going on on the nettime.org mailing-list regarding the politics of open content, relating to the rigorous control of the information displayed on this page.
http://amsterdam.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0309/msg00161.html
- Note the 'alterations' alluded to in the above link: [1]. No one is 'censoring' this page. They do, however, remove POV nonsense, like what was added. The follow up to the thread bears this out [2]. ThereIsNoSteve 07:56, 1 Oct 2003 (UTC)
The discussion is not the POV nonsense, you are correct there, it is the use of this encyclopedia for advertising. I understand offline, 'Closed' encyclopedia's are used for that as well so there's nothing new there. Is there a model for negotiating content, collaboarative editing that allows for the different views to be heard?
- The only discussion in the link is about how a guy inserted nonsense, it was removed, and then he jumped to the conclusion that someone must be monitoring the page. Anyone can edit the page and add to the page. The encyclopedia is not being used for advertising. ThereIsNoSteve 08:22, 1 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Allright this discussion is kept on a thight leash: the point I wanted to make is made already. I was very enthousiastic when I first learnt about the wikipedia project but now I see the drawbacks of the use of a wiki for the purpose of an encyclopedia. The following discussion is similar to this one, in my view: http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/Policy_discussion/Articles_on_commercial_enterprises
[edit] Less PR, more facts
Yesterday I toned down some of the language in this article, to make it more factual and to sound less like a marketing exercise. JHU is a fine university and this should be evident from the factual claims (of which there are many in the piece). In the meantime, an anonymous user has reinstated the word "elite" in the first sentence, which is inevitably POV. I have removed it again. An objective claim about the standing of the university would be fine in Wikipedia, but a bald assertion is not.
I have also changed the sentence about entry a little, to emphasise the quality of the students over the selectiveness of the institution. I deleted the line about the private school background of the students, because it seems to be phrased as a good point, where in fact it undermines the assertion of the quality of the students (disproportionately privileged rather than disproportionately able).
Overall there is plenty of factual material in the piece, much of which demonstrates JHU's claims to high standing, but it is still written more as a paean of praise (as by an alumnus or PR person) rather than a dispassionate, factual, encyclopedia piece. BrendanH 09:48, May 6, 2004 (UTC)
[edit] "Elite"
To the anonymous user who keeps re-instating the word "elite": JHU is clearly a world-class university, if a little less well-known than Harvard/Yale/Stanford/MIT etc. I can see why you want to highlight this fact upfront, but this is not the way to do it in an encyclopedia. It would be fine in marketing material, where readers tolerate (indeed, expect) unsubstantiated assertions, but in an encyclopedia statements of fact, rather than POV, are needed. And as I said above, the article is full of statements of fact that substantiate JHU's high standing. Finally, not entirely tongue-in-cheek: if you really feel you have to say it, it's probably because you feel people don't think it's true. BrendanH 08:42, May 17, 2004 (UTC)\
-
- Other articles, such as the University of Chicago, have gotten around this by citing dictionary definitions or guidebook definitions. Of course, I am not certain if they would necessarily say JHU is elite, but it would perhaps be a good way to tease out the matter.
[edit] People of Johns Hopkins
Propose splitting the list of into it's own separate article, a la List of University of Pennsylvania people, List of Harvard University people, List of Stanford University people, List of University of Chicago alumni, et al.
The list is growing and expanding and getting a bit big, which is a good thing. It just thats it's taking up a lot of space on the page, so i think it might be a good idea to migrate the list to it's own article under the name, People of Johns Hopkins University or something similar, in order to differeninate people that are associated with university as opposed to the hospital which though associated with the university not everyone at the hospital is associated with the university more then the hospital or something. If no objections, will go-ahead in the next couple of days, also will mitigate the creation of a new cat looking at Category:Johns Hopkins University. --Boothy443 | comhrá 03:11, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
- Well since their was no comment, for or against, i took the lead and made the changes. The list of people, with the exception of the university presidents and refrences in television shows, has been moved to List of Johns Hopkins University people, a news category, Johns Hopkins University, has been created, which is instead of multiple categories on the main article they are now assiocated with the category. So thats is that. --Boothy443 | comhrá 04:03, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Faculty Size
The sidebar says JHU has 484 faculty, but it is not conceivable for a major university of Hopkins' stature, with programs in so many different fields, to have so few professors. Major medical schools -- and Hopkins' certainly qualifies -- generally have over 1,000 professors by themselves. The Arts & Sciences at JHU may have 484 faculty, but even there this number seems low. I don't know what the correct university-wide figure might be, but it can't be just 484.
- According to the Hopkins website, Full-time faculity is 3,100; staff (university) 15,000 ; (hospital and health system) 12,900; their are some other numbers in the infobox that look off as well like number of students, wich the site list as 18,235 but does not list the split between grad or undergrad. Source website: http://www.johnshopkins.edu/glance/index.html --Boothy443 | comhrá 20:07, 16 October 2005 (UTC0
- if anyone thinks it's worthwhile, i'm sure i can find a citation, but it's common knowledge that jhu and all its many tentacles are the largest private employer in the state of maryland.Toyokuni3 (talk) 00:10, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Pop culture references
The title character of the Fox medical drama House, M.D., went to Johns Hopkins, right? As I'm not sure, I'm waiting on somebody's verification. --Omphaloscope 22:10, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
- Yes, he did.
- So did Dr. Burke from Grey's Anatomy. --Antelan 23:32, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Julie Stiles played in a movie the prince & me where she wanted to attend JHU's medicine program. However they end up showing the Homewood campus in the movie. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0337697/
[edit] 3 Images on this page
| G'day there. This little notice is about Image:JohnsHopkinsStatue.jpg, Image:JohnsHopkinsGilman.jpg, Image:JohnsHopkinsFront.jpg, all images used in this article. All images on wikipedia need to have a) source information (where it was published, or its owner) b) copyright information (choose the appropriate tag from this list) At the moment some of this information is missing, and images like this are usually deleted within a week (these 3 could be candidates for speedy deletion right now) If you want to keep the image on wikipedia, you need to update this information on the image page as soon as possible. (Agnte 20:20, 13 November 2005 (UTC)) |
- I have a digital camera and live ten minutes away from all of these sites. I have to run some errands over at Homewood Campus this week and I'm happy to re-take these photos and upload them if nobody provides any kind of license information on them. --Jfruh 20:38, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
-
- OK, I updated these. --Jfruh 23:32, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Natural light in Eisenhower?
Sez the article:
"Only two of the library's six stories are above ground; the rest are beneath, though architects designed the building so that every level has windows and natural light."
Is this really true? The underground stacks seem pretty sealed off from the outside world to me. --Jfruh 18:49, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
- Check the south wall of the building (facing the power plant). (omphaloscope talk) 21:36, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Peabody
I've renamed and restructures the sections so that makes more sense, I think. Where does Peabody belong? In its own section? Omphaloscope » talk 04:13, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
- I suppose so, but i would nto go in depth, being that their is an article already on the subject. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 05:10, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
- Not to expand on the Peabody info, just to put the existing paragraph in the right place. Omphaloscope » talk 06:04, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Library lore?
- Only two of the library's six stories are above ground; the rest are beneath, though architects designed the building so that every level has windows and natural light. The design accords with a bit of traditional campus lore which says no structure on campus can be taller than Gilman Hall, the oldest academic building.
I am sooooooo tempted to edit this to read:
- Only two of the library's six stories are above ground; the rest are beneath. Traditional campus lore holds that when built all six stories were above ground, but the structure has been gradually sinking due to the architects' failure to allow for the weight of the books.
Dpbsmith (talk) 16:53, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Wyman Park
A note on Wynman Park would seem to be in order. Loodog 22:02, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
- Wyman Park is adjacent to the Homewood campus, but is a Baltimore City park and is not part of the University itself... --Jfruh 21:45, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Separate Lax article?
There isn't a separate section on JHU Men's Lacrosse...I would think it would warrant a separate article. Also, the section that says that Princeton and Virginia are 2 of the main rivals...says who? Consensus usually is that Syracuse and/or Maryland are the 2 biggest rivals, the answer usually depending on when you went to JHU.--Diogenes00 01:18, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Publications - The Black & Blue Jay
Has anyone seen The Black & Blue Jay on campus recently? Can anyone verify its disappearance? If it is dead, then — more importantly — can anyone revive the publication? It sounds really cool. Omphaloscope » talk 10:39, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
- It's back! Omphaloscope talk 13:40, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] unsourced accolades
This needs a source: "Notably, the biomedical engineering department is widely recognized as one of the best in the nation."
This needs a new source: The computer science doctoral program is ranked 6th in the world. This is the current source given: [3]. It's six years old, however. A newer source actually breaks the departments down by criteria, so there is no absolute single ranking given. If any allusion to this research appears in the article, it will have to be a discussion, not just a number. I'm not sure where to begin with this. Omphaloscope » talk 04:17, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Discussion of "Crime" section
I've removed the section on "Crime", which you can read at Johns Hopkins University/Crime.
My gripes:
- There should be information on security and crime on the various campuses, not just Homewood.
- And "crime" needs to be more broadly interpreted; the term encompasses all illegal activity including white-collar crime from underage drinking to copyright violations.
- The text I removed implied heavily that the Homewood Campus was somehow besieged by murderers. It is my understanding (and I have no citation for this) that following the enormous security upgrade the Homewood campus is actually one of the safest in the country, despite its location.
If you think this text belongs back in the article, feel free to revert my change and discuss below.
Omphaloscope talk 03:55, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- Plus, Homewood is not exactly in a part of Baltimore that is going to appear on "The Wire" any time soon. --Jfruh (talk) 16:26, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
-
- Actually, I've just redirected Johns Hopkins University/Crime back to the main article. That section is indeed pretty lousy as it consists mostly of unrelated discussion of crime in Baltimore. As the section is giving undue weight to something that is not a significant part of what Johns Hopkins University is. Pascal.Tesson 18:57, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] School of Professional Studies
It's not clear from the press releases whether the School of Professional Studies is being replaced entirely by the two new schools, or if the business and education programs are just being split off. Looking at the web site, it seems that there are some programs in the school (public safety leadership in particular) that would not fit well in either a business or an education school, but the fate of the old school, or a new name for it, isn't really discussed in the release. [4] -- Vary | Talk
[edit] On "People affiliated"
User:68.34.74.181 (talk), who has been vandalizing some other pages, is adding a list of Hopkins alumni to this page. I just wanted to point out that these names are smartly tucked away in a separate list (List of Johns Hopkins University people), because there are far too many to list here, and no clear way to determine who would make a shortlist. Omphaloscope talk 01:49, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:JHUSeal.png
Image:JHUSeal.png 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 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 10:06, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] The Whiting School does not have ten academic departments
I have deleted the reference to "Applied Physics" under the list of academic departments for the Whiting School of Engineering. Applied Physics is a master's-level program offered through the Whiting School's Engineering and Applied Science Programs for Professionals (EPP). EPP is the continuing education component of the Whiting School. A stub will be added soon that will cover EPP and all the programs it offers. Whitecottageco 14:50, 11 September 2007 (UTC)whitecottageco
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:JHUSeal.png
Image:JHUSeal.png 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 05:23, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:JHUlogo.png
Image:JHUlogo.png 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 05:24, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] First Ph.D., needs revision
Johns Hopkins University was not the first university in America to confer the Ph.D. (or the doctor's degree of any kind).
Yale University holds that title, conferring the Ph.D. degree on three candidates in 1861, fifteen years before Johns Hopkins opened.
Jlalbee 16:19, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] History of Coed Students at Johns Hopkins University needs to be merged and/or deleted
History of Coed Students at Johns Hopkins University (sic) was created 28 November 2007, IMHO needs to be merged into Johns Hopkins University and/or deleted. -- Writtenonsand (talk) 13:26, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Did it. Why didn't you just do it yourself??? 214.13.24.91 (talk) 15:14, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Campuses
The article lists only the Homewood and medical campuses, and neglects to mention the Peabody campus. Beggarsbanquet (talk) 04:34, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
- It doesn't mention the DC campus, except in the lead. Here is a picture I took today if someone writes about the DC campus. APK yada yada 02:32, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
There's a mention of SAIS and a link to it, so it's already been covered. I'll see if I can incorporate it into the SAIS page ... it'd be cool if you took a picture of that portion of the Berlin Wall that's there (if it's still there, it's been a while) and if you took a picture of the Advanced Academic Studies building, which I think is pretty much on the opposite side of the street. 214.13.24.91 (talk) 09:43, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
I looked at the SAIS page ... they have an image similar to the one you put on, but it has some bad-ass DC cherry blossoms in bloom in it. 214.13.24.91 (talk) 09:46, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
I just went through and made the campuses & divisions portion in-line with what JHU has on their page. The bit about the Johns Hopkins University Information Security Institute was moved to the Whiting school's page ... it's not a "top level" division, it falls under the Whiting School ... like the Advanced Academic Programs, though they have their own building ... which is in D.C. ... falls under Krieger. 214.13.24.91 (talk) 10:32, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Johns Hopkins University vs. The Johns Hopkins University
Is there any reason why there's no "The" ? If you go to JHU.edu, the naming convention is "The". Examples:
- http://www.jhu.edu/ - http://webapps.jhu.edu/jhuniverse/information_about_hopkins/about_jhu/
... I'm going to follow The Ohio State University's page as a guideline. 214.13.24.91 (talk) 09:51, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Athletics too pov
the entire athletics section is entirely too pov. words like 'powerhouse' simply have no place here. and women's lax --'only losses to'-- and then lists 7 losses. 'only' 7 losses! i'm as big a jays fan as you'll find, but this is way over the top.Toyokuni3 (talk) 06:13, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
I made the changes because I wanted to add something about the baseball team making the world series this year ... but why didn't you just make the above changes yourself??? 214.13.24.91 (talk) 14:52, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
- i can do that,but before doing any but the most minor of edits, i like to invite some discussion. i mean, that's my opinion, others may feel differently. perhaps i expressed the idea a little forcefully, it was late and i was tired. not to mention the fact that, although i have been following hopkins sports since 1968, i've only been doing wikipedia since march, and still feel somewhat at sea.if you've read the whole discussion on the article, it has come under criticism from others for being too much like a recruiting brochure.incidentally, in the aftermath of the unfortunate episode in foxboro (sp.?) i've lost track. how did the baseball team do? anyway, what's your opinion?Toyokuni3 (talk) 15:12, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
i agree with you 100% about the changes being needed, I changed 'em. you're probably right to be cautious, but if they're just unsourced adjectives, you can probably cut them without anyone really noticing. the baseball team lost to trinity in the finals ... it was a double elimination tournament, so they lost to them the first time they played, beat them for game 1 of the finals, and then lost to them in game 2 ... so at least they went the distance ... but it was disappointing, since I'd hope they'd win after the lacrosse team lost the day before. 214.13.24.91 (talk) 15:18, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
