Talk:University of Notre Dame

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 25 October 2024 by Red-tailed hawk in topic Orchestra subsection
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Template:Category handlerScript error: No such module "Copied".

<templatestyles src="Module:Message box/tmbox.css"/><templatestyles src="Talk header/styles.css" />

Script error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".Script error: No such module "Check for deprecated parameters".

Script error: No such module "Article history". Script error: No such module "Banner shell". Template:Annual readership Template:Afd-merged-from Script error: No such module "Message box". User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn User:MiszaBot/config

Talk:University of Notre Dame/GA2 Talk:University of Notre Dame/GA4

"Notre Dame is one of the top universities in the United States."

I'm unsure why this is being removed. It's both cited and there was specific conversation in the #Boosterism subsection above, where a source was provided and nobody has objected to the sourcing on talk. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 06:04, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

It was removed because what was cited is nowhere near what we need to justify including such a strong statement in the lede of an article as required by the current consensus about statements like this. Additionally, the discussion above doesn't demonstrate a consensus nor can a discussion between a couple of editors override that broader consensus.
Frankly, the sources included in the current "Rankings" section of the article are also insufficient to justify including this statement in the lede. In particular, nothing in that section tells readers that this super high ranking has occurred more than once which is what we'd need to support this statement. And we really need a diversity of sources that support this claim, ideally with many of them coming from scholars and experts and not just ranking organizations who have a self-interest in promoting their commercial publications. ElKevbo (talk) 13:38, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
Proper citations used to be present, but they were removed without discussion. I re-insrted them. This has been litigated before [[1]], but then it was removed months later without discussion. Eccekevin (talk) 08:35, 22 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Eccekevin @ElKevbo The "top university" statement also lacks the WP:DUE weight in the body to support its placement in the lede, another violation of WP:HIGHEREDREP. It jumps the gun and even so, there's no reason to put it in such a prominent place in the lede. It is better placed in the body, and its reputation section and rankings section can be expanded. GuardianH (talk) 22:53, 27 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
Added the neutrality tag to reflect the concerns over WP:HIGHEREDREP. GuardianH (talk) 23:01, 27 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
In light of the discussion, update to booster tag. GuardianH (talk) 21:16, 5 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
There is no discussion or consensus present on the talk page that warrants an update to booster tag Heeheeheecollege (talk) 04:29, 8 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
The booster tag represents the lack of due weight mentioned. Tags are not placed only with consensus. GuardianH (talk) 16:51, 8 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Brittanica

Brittanica is an encyclopedia. Summerdays1 (talk) 22:25, 28 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

A vague statement presented without context is unlikely to make sense much less convince anyone of anything. ElKevbo (talk) 00:03, 29 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
Regarding GH questioning Brittanica as it relates to UND. Summerdays1 (talk) 00:54, 29 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Proposed merge of Notre Dame Symphony Orchestra into University of Notre Dame

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
To merge for notability, short text and context. Klbrain (talk) 14:03, 22 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

The symphony orchestra does exist, and its presence isn't small, but I'm having trouble finding the sourcing for this as an independent entity. In light of WP:NOPAGE and general organizational principles, I think it would be better to move the content of the merge subject into our article on the parent institution. As such, I propose merging the article on the orchestra into the relevant section on the larger Notre Dame page. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 18:13, 22 March 2024 (UTC) Reply

Strong oppose: A quick Google search turned up these: [2], [3]. A lot more turns up from various US periodicals in newspaper archives. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 21:29, 5 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
I'm seeing coverage from The Observer, but that's the student paper, and per WP:RSSM Template:Tq. Is there broader coverage than that? — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 05:26, 17 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
Ah, thanks for clarifying that about The Observer. Wasn't aware. When I last checked, a number of items popped up on Newspapers.com. However, service has been down for weeks now and there is no word yet as to when it will be restored. So, unfortunately, I can't offer you more sources, at least for now. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 21:20, 22 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Support - I can't find much independent coverage either. W9793 (talk) 23:38, 11 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Template:Merge done Klbrain (talk) 14:03, 22 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Orchestra subsection

Would it be worthwhile to merge it to the section we have on student clubs, since the ND Symphony Orchestra is a student club? I understand that it is wholly unsourced at the moment, but we might be able to put a sentence or two into the general clubs section if we can find sourcing. Otherwise, we're just kinda having an unsourced standalone section for no particular reason. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 17:59, 25 October 2024 (UTC)Reply