Talk:Ohio State University

Archives

Archive 1

Name Change

There's no mention of when OSU actually added the "The", which was only in the last few years, and partially in response to the fight with Ohio University over the web domain name www.ohio.edu

That's not my understanding. I'm pretty sure the name was originally The Ohio State University, and has been so since the current name was chartered in the 1880's. Analoguekid 21:04, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Bcirker is correct. The "The" was part of the official, legal name of the university as of its last formal name change in 1878. It's recent emphasis predates the lawsuit and was a response to Governor Rhodes' attempt to dumb down the university system and emphasize quantity rather than quality--in effect, Rhodes attempted to undo the very reason (establish a flagship research university for Ohio) that Ohio State was founded. Emphasizing the "The" was simply a subtle attempt to punture his populist illusions of no differences among Ohio's public universities. In a more direct incident, showing how Ohio State felt about Jim Rhodes, his transcripts were mysteriously leaked to The Plain Dealer showing that he had, in reality, flunked out of Ohio State his freshman year rather than left in good standing "to support his family" as his "official biography" maintained.

The last sentence of the first paragraph in the history section makes note of this.--24.136.28.175 07:07, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

It is true that Governor Rhodes instituted the open admissions policy that undermined the academic standing of the University for a generation, but to suggest that he did so in response to flunking out of the University does not hold up. More students flunked out of Ohio State during the open-admissions era than at any other time. A moment's reflection will reveal why: sub-standard admission will lead to students unready for the demands of a university education. In addition, there is no reason to assume that the emphasis on the "the" in the school's name has anything to do with Governor Rhodes. Indeed, that emphasis predates the Governor's birth. For my own research I have read every issue of the Lantern published in the 19th century, and many if not all of the references to the University published in the Columbus city papers. The emphasis has always been there. ChicJanowicz 15:07, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Incidently, Governor Rhodes relation to the University is more complex than simply the admissions pollicy. The Governor delivered funds from the state legislature that made the Ohio State Medical School one of the finest facilities in the country. Rhodes Hall on the medical campus was named for him for that reason. ChicJanowicz 15:13, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Special projects in engineering

There is an artcle about the Buckeye Bullet -- this may also be of interest to add somewhere: DARPA vehicle. Rkevins82 15:54, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Communistic

Right now, the word communistic (in the first sentence) redirects to homosexuality. I'll change the redirect to communism like it is supposed to. But is that the intention of the word? If the adjective form of 'community' is meant than I'd suggest 'communital'.
John Reaves 05:50, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

If you check older history of the page, the word is supposed to be coeducational but it was vandalized. I corrected it. ~Kruck 15:07, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Moved page

Moved page from "Ohio State University" to "The Ohio State University". Now a question and answer session:

Q. Doesn't having "The" in the title violate Naming conventions?

A. At first glance, it may appear that this is the case; however, it is not that simple. First of all, please note that this page is a guideline, NOT and official policy of wikipedia. Thus we don't necessarily have to follow it, but for the sake of preventing anarchy, I can explain the move within the pretenses of this guideline anyway.

The guideline goes on to say that the most common name should be used. If you follow the Buckeyes or other activities at the institution in the media, you will here the university referred to as "Ohio State". Of course this would not be a correct title for the page, as it is ambiguous at best. It also says a definite article may be used if it is "used in running text throughout university materials and if that usage has caught on elsewhere".

The first point is easy to prove, simply look at News and Information. I encourage all to look through and find a single example of a lack of "The" when referring to the university as a whole. Note that if some department is mentioned, they will say "Ohio State University's Geology Department." However, this page is not about the geology department, it is about the university as a whole, thus "The" should appear.

As for the second point, common usage refers to the university as "Ohio State", and as mentioned, this would not be a proper page title at all.

Q. Isn't this "The" nonsense all made up by some pundit of the university?

A. Although it may seem as such, Ohio law R.C. 3335.01 says "The educational institution originally designated as the Ohio agricultural and mechanical college shall be known as "The Ohio State University."

Q. Doesn't having the page titled with "The" penalize people for not typing it in?

A. No, as wikipedia has many redirects, including "OSU" (disambiguation), "Ohio State", and after the move, "Ohio State University".

Q. Isn't having "The" in the title rather pretentious?

A. You may think so; however, opinions should not dictate this encyclopedia. Thus although you make think graduates from this university are stuck up snobs because they always say they went to "The Ohio State University", that doesn't change the fact that the name is what it is.

Q. Didn't we discuss this before?

A. Yes, and in fact, 6 people were in favor of "The Ohio State University" and 4 people were opposed. As it happens, those opposed were especially vocal with their opinions. --Analogue Kid 19:22, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Move was requested, as it is not possible to move it on it's own.--Analogue Kid 19:30, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

I afraid that 6 to 4 is not a consensus to move. Perhaps opening a new debate with your ideas above is in order. —Mets501 (talk) 20:37, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Debate away!--Analogue Kid 20:59, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Every Buckeye knows that "THE Ohio State University" is the official title of the university, but this article is correct in referring to the university by its proper name within the article while having the title “Ohio State University.” The simple reason for the title to withhold the “THE” is that people would look for Ohio State under “O,” especially non-buckeyes who forget the technicality. For example, the Category:Big_Ten_Conference page would list Ohio State under “T” if the title were “The Ohio State University.” It is correct to list Ohio State under “O.”

The proper name of the university needs to be emphasized, but that is already done every time it is referenced in the article. I disagree with changing the name of the article. ~Kruck 14:34, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

My previous argument wasn't a good one considering that category names can be corrected as in [[Category:Association of American Universities|Ohio State University, The]]. The name of the university is "The Ohio State University," so that should be the title of the article. See http://www.osu.edu and the university's logo - the proper name is "The Ohio State University." ~Kruck 14:55, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

I support the move to The Ohio State University. That is the official name, and whenever the school is refered to by its full name (rather than "Ohio State" which is almost always used), the "The" is included. --- RockMFR 02:54, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

As someone who supported the move when the last serious attempt was made, I wanted to voice my opposition. There is no reason to move the page and the thousands of internal links in this article. The article makes it perfectly clear what the legal name of the university is. Inclusion of the "the" by university officials appears to be a concious branding decision, but it is not one that must be repeated here. Furthermore, it is out of place, when other universities, such as "The Ohio University" (link for official name) or "The University of Arizona" (link for official name). Rkevins82 16:29, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I oppose the move. It does not present any advantages as "The Ohio State University" redirects here anyway. Even though "The" at the beginning of "Ohio State University" is superfluous, the article sufficiently addresses the issue for those who are interested. As far as "The Ohio State University" being its legal name, if we took this stance on all articles, "Virginia" would be moved to "Commonwealth of Virginia" and "New Mexico" would be moved to "State of New Mexico" and so on until we had covered all 50 in the United States, then you could start on the other nations of the world. --Wordbuilder 20:32, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Maybe all of the other ones should have a redirect to their real names? - hmwithtalk

featured article nomination

Hi, I just sent a request for feedback from Wikipedia:Peer review on the Ohio State University article. It is the first step to become a featured article on Wikipedia. Let's work together and respond to peer reviews Wikipedia:Peer_review/Ohio_State_University--140.254.115.133 10:38, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Naming Convention

• OK, Let's stop the frickin' madness. I've probably written the lion's share of the current Ohio State article, and when my browser shortcut directs me to a dead page...enough is enough. The whole "The" thing is getting out of hand. I understand why it was first emphasized a quarter century ago--and with good reason (in response to Jim Rhodes' attempt to dumb down the university and pretend that there was no qualitative difference between The Ohio State University and the other 12 public universities). Today, however, those reasons have long since been negated. Now, it has become simply a "chest thumpin" statement for NFL players--most of whom NEVER GRADUATED from THE university that they're bragging about! Stop this ridiculous B.S. and follow the wikipedia naming convention for every other Xxxxx State University.--Sam Harmon 05:50, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry you got directed to a dead page, I will fix it shortly. I'm sorry you don't like the title as it is now, but it is the proper title. Most former OSU NFL players I've heard say they went to Ohio State. Whether or not they graduated is irrelevant to this discussion. I attended this fine institution, graduated, and I fully support it being titled properly. As illustrated on the talk page, the naming conventions say in this instance that the definite article should be used, as it is used throughout the running text in university materials, and has caught on elsewhere. I.e., nobody says they went to Ohio State University, they either say they went to "Ohio State" or "The Ohio State University", tongue in cheek though it may sound. --Analogue Kid 13:31, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Now you are moving the goalposts. If Ohio University's official name is not important, then how is Ohio State's? They are both in the Ohio Revised Code. Rkevins82 17:57, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

To clairfy, the reason OU's official name is not important is because it is not used in "running text throughout university materials" (per naming conventions). In the above discussion heading, I put a link to the OU news page to show that they never refer to themselves as The Ohio University, but rather Ohio University, whereas OSU always uses the definite article on their news page (as well as other official university materials).--Analogue Kid 18:14, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

So the Revised Code argument is moot? You are leaving out the second part of the naming convention guideline (which is only a proposal): ...if that usage has caught on elsewhere. I doubt that you can make that argument. The local paper doesn't call use the definite article, nor do (my eclectic mix) U.S. News & World Reports in its college guide, The Lantern (school newspaper), NCAA, NNDB, Princeton Review, Encyclopedia Britannica, and ABC News. Those who do include Peterson's and a variety of university-related entities.

Looking at google, there are a little over 1 million hits for "the ohio state university" -site:osu.edu -site:ohio-state.edu, though this undoubtedly included many mentions that are not supportive of the use, as the "the" would be capitalized. The more restrictive search "the ohio state university" -site:osu.edu -site:ohio-state.edu yields well over 3 million hits. Rkevins82 05:34, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I can indeed make the argument that it has caught on elsewhere. My Moms Brothers Best-Friends Dogs Owners Dads Cousins Aunt always says The Ohio State University, and she's always right. (haha, just kidding) Some of those sources do indeed omit the definite article. However, mentioning the Lantern and the Dispatch doesn't work as a citation if you can't give a specific example from an article. That's not to say they're unreliable sources, just that we can't assume. Google can be confusing in this case, as when you type in "The Ohio State University", it omits the "The". A quick glance through the bookcase next to my desk reveals some more substantial evidence in the form of hard citations from reputable books and publishers. Here is what I found:

Trachtenberg, Marvin (2002). Architecture - From Prehistory to Postmodernity (2nd Edition). Prentice-Hall, Inc., and Harry N. Abrams, Inc. pp. p. 563. ISBN 0-8109-0607-4. {{cite book}}: |pages= has extra text (help); Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help) This book says "At the Wexner Center for the Arts, built at The Ohio State University in 1982-89, Eisenman's..."

Lentz, Ed (1998). As It Were - Stories of Old Columbus. Red Mountain Press. pp. p. 85. ISBN 0-966-7950-0-8. {{cite book}}: |pages= has extra text (help) As some of you know, Ed Lentz is a well regarded Columbus historian. He has written at least two books on Columbus (can't remember if there are more). He frequently appears on Open Line with Fred Andrle and writes a history column for This Week. In chapter 21, Lentz says "...I made the unpardonable error of remarking that this was my first visit to Ohio State University. I was rather peremptorily told that the proper name of the school was and always has been The Ohio State University."

Lyttle, Jeff (1997). Gorillas in Our Midst. Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University Press. pp. Back Cover. ISBN 0-8142-0766-9. This book has nothing to do with the subject at hand, but since it is published by the university press, I thought it a good source. In the biography of the author, it says "Jeff Lyttle is a graduate of The Ohio State University and has worked as a professional writer...". Now before someone points out the name of the publisher, remember that we're discussing the name of the university as a whole, not of it's subdivisions which I strongly feel should not use the definite article in their titles (they don't anyway).

Mitsch, William J. (2000). Wetlands Third Edition. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. pp. p. iii. ISBN 0-471-29232-X. {{cite book}}: |pages= has extra text (help); Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help) Here is some pretty damming evidence. The cited page is the internal title page, with the title, authors, and publisher. Here, it says "William J. Mitsch, Professor, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio". Right below it says "James G. Gosselink, Professor Emeritus, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana.". Note that when referring specifically to Ohio State, the definite article is used, when referring to LSU, it is not. Another example you say?

Brown, Theodore L. (2000). Chemistry - The Central Science Eighth Edition. Prentice Hall. pp. p. i. ISBN 0-13-010310-1. {{cite book}}: |pages= has extra text (help); Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help) Yes, yes, I know its that book from that class you probably don't want to remember. But again, we find the definite article in use. The internal title page is akin to the Wetlands book above. It says "Theodore L. Brown, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; H. Eugene LeMay, Jr., University of Nevada, Reno; and Bruce E. Bursten, The Ohio State University; With contributions from Julia R. Burdge, University of Akron". Yet again we find the institutions rightful title being utilized. One more...

Falkenberg, Barth (1987). The Ohio State University. Harmony House. pp. pp. 8, 13, 15, 17, 81, 87. ISBN 0-916509-08-7. {{cite book}}: |pages= has extra text (help) Well the title pretty much says it all. In addition, the other pages cited also make use of The Ohio State University. Now a quote from page 81 from a person in the news recently: "It is a very great honor for me to be at The Ohio State University, sometimes known as the Land of the Free and the Home of Woody Hayes. I met Woody at the airport. We just had our picture taken together and when the picture appears in today's Dispatch, I'm pretty sure what the caption will say: Woody Hayes and friend. - President Gerald Ford, Commencement Address, 1974."

That about does it for my long drawn out citations. In writing this, I got to thinking as to a possible underlying cause of people's uneasiness about the title. Wikipedia has a strong and well regarded Neutral policy. Perhaps it seems that by including "the" in the title, it somehow becomes POV. I thought about this for a while, but then I came across something: The Greatest Show on Earth. Now there is a POV title if I ever heard one. And yet it remains. What else could you call it? "That one movie by those guys about a show"?--Analogue Kid 02:13, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree with User:Sam Harmon and others that the title should be "Ohio State University" and this debate seems ridiculous. There's a very clear and explicit policy regarding this exact issue. Every school with a similar name uses this convention. There's simply no reason to have moved this page, and the move should be reverted. --MZMcBride 05:47, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

You're right, there is a clear and explicit policy, and I spelled out in the discussion why it should be titled as "The Ohio State University". It does not say never use it, it says use it if and only if you meet the two criteria. With all the hard citations now, is that really in doubt? Who is to say other schools are presently titled improperly because of a blanket policy that was applied to everything and it shouldn't have been? Whether or not the others are titled properly is beyond the scope of this discussion. But the policy does provide for an exception in this case.--Analogue Kid 13:16, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Intentionally or not, you have side-stepped the Google problem. I specified "the ohio state university" and "ohio state university," so the definite article is signigificantly more likely not to be included. The guideline says that the definite article should be included in the title only when the usage has caught on elsewhere. In this case, some places use it, while most don't. Also, there is a difference in our examples. Mine are from broadly used sources (and don't give me that argument about not specifically citing them—that is absurd), while yours are more niche. I hope some more people will join this argument. Rkevins82 19:11, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Analogue Kid has made some great points here, and I support the use of "The" in the university's title. The fact is that its official name is "The Ohio State University." It can be seen in a Google search for "the THE in The Ohio State University," that many people disagree with the use of the definite article, but that's another matter worth discussing within the article. ~Kruck 19:20, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

In this case, Google cannot be used to establish relevance due to the technical limitations of the system. As previously mentioned, when discussing a specific entity of the university, one should say "Ohio State University's Geology Department" (for example). Now when you search for just "Ohio State University", remember you are capturing all of these usages where it didn't stand alone but rather was part of a sentence describing some subdivision. I.e. it was referring to the department, not the official title of the university as a whole. Therefore, the results you get will be highly skewed, as there are probably many more mentions of specific things within the university than to the university as a whole. Broadly used sources do not necessarily make them Reliable Sources. Certainly I wouldn't argue with Britannica as a good source, but the others don't hold as much weight as printed material from a widely distributed book. I fail to see how it is absurd to cite a specific article. Both papers have been around for over a hundred years, and have written thousands of articles. Thus, how am I supposed to know for sure how they use the article? For example, even this Scathing Op/Ed piece from that city up north uses it. Other Opinion pieces such as this also use it. Here is an example of why Google picks up so many more hits without the "The". It says "Ohio State University's President". Searching further, I found another example, and another, and yet another. I too welcome any and all to contribute to the discussion. --Analogue Kid 20:18, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

it seems allot of emotion is wrapped up in this topic. I don't think thats productive. This decision is not that difficult. If we were uncertain of the correct spelling of a university, we would contact that university. same concept here. Give OSU's marketing department a ring and ask them: 614-292-4272 or check their website: [[1]] this particular page makes a total of 8 references to "THE Ohio State University" and zero to "Ohio State University". Would anyone here argue that the band The The should get moved to The (band) ? I doubt it. For that matter, under this argument, shouldn't The Band just be listed as Band (band)? Obviously, I support keeping the article at "The Ohio State University" as labeling it anything else is simply incorrect. Stuph 04:05, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Count me for Ohio State University. The Band is always called as such. The Ohio State University is rarely called as such by anyone who does not work for the university. Wikipedia has a policy of using common names, not using official names, and with respect to articles, we only use them in things like titles of literary works. Ohio State University is universally recognizable, non-ambiguous, and the way people who aren't pretentious Ohio State homers refer to the place. Note also George Washington University, where many of the same arguments were hashed out, and we ended up with, well George Washington University. john k 07:27, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Also note that we have a naming convention about this at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (definite and indefinite articles at beginning of name)#Universities, which says not to use direct articles. john k 07:30, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

a direct quote from the naming conventions page:

If such usage is prevalent on university press releases and press kits, contact information, "about" pages, and internal department websites, and it is reasonably common in external sources, then it is more appropriate to name the Wikipedia article The University of X.

Thus, until someone brings forth evidence of Ohio State University being used MORE than The Ohio State University, the conventions page supports the move to The Ohio State University.

A list of uses by credited sources other than the university itself:

• http://www.petersons.com/ugchannel/code/InstVC.asp?inunid=7934&sponsor=1
• http://www.wexarts.org/
• http://www.thelantern.com/
• http://www.princetonreview.com/mba/research/profiles/schoolsays.asp?category=1&listing=1011056&LTID=2&intbucketid=

Stuph 16:02, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

The text you are quoting is a proposed substitution, not the actual current policy. As to credited sources that use "Ohio State University" rather than "the Ohio State University", Google gives 4.3 million of them, as compared to only 1 million or so for "The Ohio State University". Also check out the 28,700 hits that don't include the direct article on OSU's own website. The comparable figures for "The Ohio state University" on OSU's site is 165,000, but note that this includes many instances where you'd always right that - "The Ohio state University School of Law" and such. At any rate, the general rule is not to use articles. john k 23:10, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

The Googling misconception has already been addressed by Analogue Kid. Referring to "Ohio State University's Geology Department," for example, is a Google hit for "Ohio State University." It does not refer to the entire university, which is the topic of this article. I am an Ohio State University engineering student. I attend THE Ohio State University. Your Googling strategy would say I call OSU "Ohio State University" as often as "THE Ohio State University." This is not correct. ~Kruck 05:45, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

There is no googling misconception, because it works both ways - one also has "The Ohio State University School of Law," and so forth. There is no particular reason to think this issue affects the one side more than the other. john k 06:45, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

To clarify my google note, I agree with what john k said; it shouldn't be used at all in this debate as there are too many variables in writing style to know what the hits are referring to one way or the other. I see in an above post that it was said that people who refer to the university using the definite article are pretentious. This is a borderline personal attack on those who favor using "The". Remember, the issue is not people from the university, it is naming conventions. Let's keep the discussion centered on that issue and not what we might think of those who've attended.

Two more points I'd like to emphasize again: 1. Naming conventions are a Guideline, NOT a rule. There are only 5 firm rules. 2. The naming conventions do NOT say the definite article should never be used. They spell out pretty specifically when it should be allowed. Using Reliable Sources, I have spelled out why it should be "The Ohio State University". Is there any argument over the fact that common usage refers to the university as "Ohio State"? Obviously we can't call it by this name, thus we go with the official and next most common name as shown by my numerous citations. --Analogue Kid 07:52, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

There are two versions of the naming convention. One of them would suggest (but not necessarily mandate) The Ohio State University. The other pretty clearly says Ohio State University. It is the latter that is currently in plain text, and appears so far as I can tell, to be th guideline. The former is a "proposed new version", which has seemingly not been adopted. Let me repeat the text of what appears to be the current guideline:

The definite article should not be used for universities, even if the official name of the university uses the definite article, as indicated on the website links below.

Note also the large number of other articles on universities that call themselves "The University of X", but where the article is not located there. We need to resolve this issue at the level of the naming conventions, I think. john k 17:04, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree, it seems that the naming conventions are flawed as they currently stand. Looking at that talk page, it appears that there was no consensus arrived when originally formulating them. It may have been assumed that common usage never uses the definite article, which is not the case here. The proposed conventions would allow the definite article based on the evidence presented here. There is probably no point in continuing this discussion until the naming conventions are agreed upon, as one can honestly argue that "Ohio State University" meets the naming conventions, even though it is incorrect. --Analogue Kid 20:45, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

"Ohio State University" is not incorrect, it is merely less formal than "The Ohio State University". It is incorrect to state that "Ohio State University" is the formal name of the school. But it is not incorrect to call the school "Ohio State University," any more than it is incorrect to call it "Ohio State." We should not confuse "informal name" with "incorrect name." john k 16:10, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

The Google test that I used is appropriate and I can explain it further if necessary. I would keep Ohio State University in line with the other universities that eschew the definite article and the majority of common users (Google test). I am glad that some more people are joining the discussion and hope more will in the future. In the meantime, we should continue on the the Talk page for Ohio State University. Rkevins82 20:28, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

It's Ohio State University. there is no "the". I went there, received my BS degree. I should know.Thenext 22:55, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Check out the logo in the article and go to the website[2] John Reaves 00:36, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

This surely looks like a topic that could use another opinion (like a hole in the head). Nonetheless, here's how I see it: The school is legally named The Ohio State University. The administration's preferred nomenclature is The Ohio State University. There is a naming convention argument to be made for naming the article The Ohio State University. However, applying a bit of common sense, I have to view the (putatively) best name for the article as Ohio State University, as it is by far the most likely formal name by which both Wikipeida users and editors would refer to the school. Generally, we should put articles where most people expect to find them, so haing Ohio State University be the article name, with redirects from The Ohio State University, Ohio State, and a suitably disambiguated OSU would make the most sense. While the letter of the convention supports the longest of the names, in this case, we should ignore the literal rule and carry out its spirit, instead. After all, Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy. --Ssbohio 05:33, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Thenext, you went there? Then how in God's name do you NOT know what your school was called? Did you sit at home taking online classes or something? I'm confused. I currently attend The Ohio State University. That is the name of the school, officially, and I strong believe that this article should be titled such. - hmwith talk 06:42, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Moved back

The page was recently moved to The Ohio State University. I've moved it back here and dummied edited the aforementioned page. As this is a controversial move, it should be listed on Wikipedia:Requested moves. --- RockMFR 06:36, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

== Football ==Ohio State is the number 1 team in there division. They are number 2 in the nation. They aren't going to be as good next year becase the are loosing so may of there people to the NFL. They will ill be prtty good though because they will get some f the best kids out of high school, and other colleges. Jim Tressel is still a great coac though. I hopee wil lead the team to a championship this year. There program i great for academis and also sports. The students can keep there grades up and still be able to play football. There rival school though stinks. Michigan is a bad col. If yo are choosing your college, then you should pick Ohio State. Another rival school is Texas but they arestill a good school. GO BUCKEYES!!!!!!!!--Brail4 23:07, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

People who are changing Ohio State University references to "the Ohio State University" all over Wikipedia need to stop. Even if your school and its athletes uses the chest-chumping emphasis on the word "the," it doesn't mean the rest of the world has to follow suit. Nobody calls it "the Ohio State University" unless you went there. It's marketing PR that has no place in a neutral encyclopedia. Rcade 16:23, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

See above discussion on the naming of the page. It's fine if people link it as [[Ohio State University|The Ohio State University]] as that is the official name. There are enough examples of sources outside the university PR department to make the case that it in general use, although certainly not exclusively. It's not a matter of being neutral, the name is what it is. The reason the name is without the definite article currently is that Wikipedia's naming conventions say you should never use the definite article, ever. This discussion is a potential can of worms, so I encourage you not to take it too seriously. Your time (and mine) is better spent improving this an other articles rather than debating small details such as linked names, as long as everything works (redirects take care of that). --Analogue Kid 18:00, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

As you acknowledge, Wikipedia guidelines state that the article "the" should be omitted from the school's name. The only reason I'm commenting on this is because of OSU people adding the chest-thumping "the" references to dozens of articles. Rcade 22:22, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

1. Analogue Kid, Wikipedia's naming conventions refer to the naming of Wikipedia articles. Articles pertaining to colleges and universities (other than The Citadel) are not to be named using a leading "the." The naming conventions page is irrelevant to how the universities are to be referred to within articles. Furthermore, Wikipedia tradition permits users, within articles, to accurately render the names of schools using a leading "the": "the University of Nebraska," "the State University of New York," etc.

2. Rcade, if it is true that "Nobody calls it 'the Ohio State University' unless you went there," then it seems education is in order. Perhaps the best place to provide such education is in an encyclopedia entry. Accuracy is what Wikipedia is supposed to be about. Accuracy is not "chest-thumping." A better example of chest-thumping, Rogers Cadenhead, is writing an article about yourself to test Wikipedia's notability policy. ChicJanowicz 21:04, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Although the Wikipedia article naming conventions state not to use the word the, Rcade's reasoning is incorrect; the official name of the school is indeed The Ohio State University. Simply read the Wikipedia article and you will see that "In 1878, and in light of its expanded focus, the college permanently changed its name to the now-familiar "The Ohio State University."" --Urzadek 21:44, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, ChicJanowicz, for your comments, especially what you said to Rcade. Just because many people who don't know better use "ain't" or "cuz" in everyday language due to lack of education on the subject (English) doesn't mean that we should start using those words on Wikipedia. Just as some correct others for using poor grammar, people who use the incorrect term for The Ohio State University will also be corrected. - hmwith talk 06:42, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Mediation

There is a mediation case going on about this current issue. I have made a statement saying what I think is going on, and what the problem seems to be from a third point of view, please correct me if I am off on any of the finer points of this issue. Feel free to comment on the mediation page, or if you all decide to comment here, then do so! I hope that you all will accept me as a neutral third party in this issue, and we can resolve this quickly and efficiently. Cheers! —— Eagle101 ^{Need help?} 09:29, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Removal of "Size" Chart

I removed this chart for a couple of reasons. First, I don't see the need to include it. The infobox breaks down current enrollment, and the overview notes that Ohio State is the largest single campus in the country. I don't see the need to take up that much space in the article to detail enrollment figures that are out of date. Second, the article was orignally placed squarely in the middle of the rankings and recognition section by an anonymous editor. I moved it to the campus section and left it there to see if the editor planned on making any additions that might have made its inclusion more relevent. This never happened, leading me to believe that--given its placement--it was simply included a by a partisan of a certain other Ohio university in some lame belief that Ohio State's large enrollment somehow negates its top rankings in the state.--Sam Harmon 20:47, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Requested move (old)

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no consensus to move, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 00:22, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

---

Ohio State University → The Ohio State University — This is what the university is called. ABCBS 17:10, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Survey

Add  # '''Support'''  or  # '''Oppose'''  on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~. Please remember that this is not a vote; comments must include reasons to carry weight.

1. Support ABCBS 17:11, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
2. Support This is the subject of much discussion both on this page and others. The official name is of course "The Ohio State University". In all press materials put out by the univeristy, this usage is consistant. People have suggested that using the most common name would preclude this title. However, the most common name is simply "Ohio State" which of course is far too vague to use as the title of an encyclopedia article. One of the main reasons for opposition previously was the fact that the naming conventions said never use the definite article. They have since changed noting that if it can be shown that it is in common use, then it is allowed. A note to people who are opposed: Using the arguement about "chest thumping" is not appropriate here. It is fine if you oppose it but please give a valid reason. Just stating "you don't like it" doesn't help. --Analogue Kid 18:12, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
3. Oppose. I am sympathetic with the above statement by User:Analogue Kid, who adopted the new formulation of the naming convention this afternoon. However, it is my opinion that even under the new formulation, this move isn't justified. The Ohio State University has done an exceedingly good job in enforcing its brand image: the "The" is capitalised on everything coming out of the school. And yet, this usage still hasn't been adopted by others! Example: The New York Times, (whose "The", incidentally, is in common use) do not capitalise the T, even when they get the name right. I do not dispute that the proper name of this school is the Ohio State University. I do not dispute the "The" in bold text in the intro paragraph, or the "The" in the infobox, or the university's name given (quite correctly) as "the Ohio State University" in running text. I don't however, support the definite article for the page name. Additionally, I concur with the above suggestion that an "oppose" argument based on the short form "Ohio State" is on shaky ground - a "compromise" would be a fudge, in my opinion. — mholland (talk) 18:33, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
4. Comment The discussion of who calls the university what could go on forever. I do find it funny that the Times insists on calling itself "The New York Times" but not calling Ohio State it's proper name. I cited a bunch of reliable sources in one of the discussions above showing it is commonly called "The Ohio State University", especially in academic circles. I'm a little confused by your compromise comment though. You say a compromise would be a "fudge". But isn't the article without the "The" but with the "University" already a compromise? Also there is a flaw with searches on this subject in general. Although I would call the university as a whole "The Ohio State University", if I were referring to a subdivision, I would say "Ohio State University's Department of Wikipedia discussions" (for example of course). So by searching on it, you're picking up all the additional uses that don't acutally refer to Ohio State in general.--Analogue Kid 18:49, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

   When I say compromise, I mean editors arguing that "the Ohio State University" (official) + "Ohio State" (common) = "Ohio State University". That's just spurious reasoning. The current page name doesn't seem like a compromise to me. There is a pattern: "the University of Oxford", but "Oxford Brookes University"; "the University of Pennsylvania" but "Pennsylvania State University" etc. When the place name comes first, the "the" is grammatically awkward. Now, Ohio State have broken this pattern. Successfully so, because I agree that common, even popular usage is now "the Ohio State University". But that applies to content and running text: Wikipedia page names run to different rules, for good reasons. — mholland (talk) 19:10, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

   Thanks for the clairification. It's true sometimes you have to say "the" university in order for the sentence to make sense. I guess the distinction here is "the Ohio State University" vs. "The Ohio State University". A matter of capitalization really.--Analogue Kid 20:04, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

5. Oppose per Mholland and also WP:COMMONNAME. While I would agree that "Ohio State" is probably the most common, Ohio State University is certainly more common of usage then "The Ohio State University". 205.157.110.11 04:01, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
6. Oppose per WP:NCD. —  AjaxSmack  06:02, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

   Comment Remember  AjaxSmack , NCD no longer says it's innapropriate to use it. Perhaps you'd like to reconsider?--Analogue Kid 12:39, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

   No, WP:NCD should be reconsidered. —  AjaxSmack  06:39, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

7. Oppose While as an Ohio State grad, I smile at the chest-thumping approach of The Ohio State University, typically style books stand against using the upper-case The for organizations like this except at the beginning of a sentence. Chicago Manual specifies to use the lower case (for an American example). The Guardian style-book specifies to use the lower case (for a British example). The upper case The was developed for marketing purposes and an encyclopedia is probably not a place to perpetuate a marketing strategy (inspired though it might have been); in proper prose,it would be the lower case. Alas, it is not in common use beyond the University itself and those of us who call it our alma mater -- indeed, it is often made fun of by folks from other universities. Cyg-nifier 18:01, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
8. Oppose--Sam Harmon 18:26, 12 April 2007 (UTC)I think that the article should be "Ohio State University" in keeping with standard wikipedia conventions for other xxxx State Universities. That said, however, I think the use of "The Ohio State University" within the article as well as elsewhere on wikipedia is perfectly acceptable and is a correct usage of the university's proper, legal name since 1878.--Sam Harmon 18:26, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
9. Oppose Wikipedia is not obliged to defer to institutional vanity. older ≠ wiser 13:28, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
10. Oppose - many institutions, technically, have the definite article in their names but for consistency and clarity it should be dropped. TerriersFan 22:27, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent

Questioning accuracy of survey with few votes

Shouldn't this survey have lasted longer to get more opinions? I think one should be up for at least a week or two, as there are clearly much more people who have strong opinions on this controversial topic than the 10 or so who checked this talk page on their watchlist those few days (check the users who commented on this topic in the archives). I think that to gain true consensus on this topic, we should have more users commenting.  hmwith  talk 16:01, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Flagship Status

Reasons both historical and contemporary for viewing Ohio State as the flagship of Ohio's public university system.

1) At the time,Governor Rutherford B. Hayes and the political and economic leadership of the state founded Ohio State specifically to be the state's comprehensive flagship institution. In fact, Hayes manipulated the university's founding to a great degree both in terms of its location and board of trustees to ensure that it would fulfill this role. The reference standard scholarship on the subject and the period is Kinnison, William A. (1970). Building Sullivant's Pyramid; An Administrative History of The Ohio State University, 1870-1907. Kinnison also goes into great detail outlining why neither Miami or OU (despite their extensive lobbying) were awarded the lang grant funds, making Ohio the only Great Lakes state that did not designate an existing university as its land-grant institution. It should also be noted that Kinnison was a professional historian who was neither an alumnus nor a faculty member at Ohio State.

2) The Eagleson Bill of 1906 specifically barred all other state universities from offering doctoral education or conducting basic research. These policies would remain in force until the 1950s. In other words, Ohio State was literally written into Ohio law as the flagship institution until right before the dawning of the Rhodes era.

3) AAU Membership: Ohio State was elected to the nation's premier organization of research universities as early as 1916. No other public university in Ohio has ever been offered membership.

4) Contemporary factors such as any ranking of undergraduate or graduate universities that one would care to look at; indicators of faculty quality such as National Academy members (Ohio State-23; all other Ohio publics=1) and Guggenheim Fellows (Ohio State-32 in the last 25 years; Miami and OU combined-5), endowment resources; amount of research conducted

5) The Ohio board of regents has been stripped of most of its power. Ohio has created a cabinet level "higher education czar" filled by Eric Fingerhut who recently gave this quote to Cleveland's Plain Dealer,

Ohio State fills the state's needs as the comprehensive, research university. When I met with the trustees, I told them we are committing to making Ohio State the No. 1 public research university in this country and, hopefully, in the world, he said. Notice the nomenclature. He uses, "the" not "a"...not "one of the"

Gov. Strickland and Fingerhut have also repeatedly said that they plan to do away with the funding compact of the 1960's which treated all universities equally and based funding upon a simple head count. Stickland's plan is to begin funding the universities in accordance with their "unique mission."

During the Jim Rhodes era, I might be inclined to agree with the notion that Ohio did not have a singular flagship university. Rhodes' populist, anti-intellectual policies favored quantity over quality and gave rise to the misguided notion among some Ohioans that all public unviersities were equal. That, however, was not the historical norm. Rather, it was a temporary abberration borne of Rhodes' peculiar policies. It hasn't been reality since Rhodes left office in 1982. In fact, as evidenced by the forthcoming changes in funding, it's last vestiges are being snuffed out as we speak.

So in summation, we have the historical record, the current rankings and status and the recent pronouncements of Ohio's higher education czar. I know that some will never reconcile themselves to this fact, but that doesn't make it any less real. People can argue about this on wikipedia until the cows come home. It, however, won't change the historical record or the facts on the ground as they exist today. At the end of the day, if one were to ask 500 Ohioans and 500 out of staters, "what is Ohio's flagship state university?" 990+ would say, "Ohio State" and it has nothing to do with football or BCS affiliations. It's simply a reality that some, for various reasons and ingrained prejudices, tend to view as "an inconvenient truth."--Sam Harmon 03:33, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm inclined to agree. Of course I graduated from said "flagship" university, so I'm sure that's something of a conflict of interest right there. Still I think the case can be made. The fact that other universities such as Miami, OU, and BGSU are as good as they are speaks to the quality of OSU itself.--Analogue Kid 03:57, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

All of which is POV, and none of which-- as yet-- have you substantiated in the article via cited sources. Come now, Sam, you're a better editor than this. Please take another look at my edit, in which I cited a source for Ohio's decentralized system of higher education, and tell us how this edit is erroneous or POV. I even allowed for the claim that tOSU is a "flagship institution", despite my opinion that your substantiating citation is weak indeed. At the very least, let's re-insert the Ohio Board of Regents source that demonstrates the decentralization; a claim that, at the moment, is unverified without the source. Can't we compromise here? -- SwissCelt 01:43, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi Swisscelt, I have no problem reinserting the reference that you had provided; although, I do think it (along with the entire BOR--also a legacy of the Rhodes era) is becoming increasingly irrelevant with each passing month.

Eh... I might be tempted to agree, but I don't think we could substantiate that opinion.

I do take exception to the idea that everything that I posted is POV. The reference point scholarship on the subject, the 1906 actions of the Ohio legislature and the comments and descriptions of Ohio State made by Fingerhut this year are hardly POV in the wikipedia sense. Also, the Kinnison book is referenced in either the main article or the history of... article. If there is a wiki way to specifically footnote relevent passages, I'd be happy to do so. I can reference Fingerhut's speech, but given the Plain Dealer's web policy, the link will quickly become outdated.

Actually, Sam, that's not a bad idea... referencing Fingerhut's speech. Even if it's not on the PD website, it still made it to print, no? Just use the "Cite news" template with the "reprint" option, which if I'm not mistaken indicates that the source is no longer available online yet still available in paper copies. Sources need not be online, so long as they are available to the public.

I do note in the article that Ohio's system of public education is decentralized and that Ohio State is widely "percieved" as the flagship. Even so, one institution is still very much capable of functioning and widely being viewed to function as the flagship institution. The same argument could be made to many other states also, which is the point that Berdahl makes rather convincingly in his speech. I've read up on this matter fairly diligently for several years, and I truly believe that the Rhodes era was a temporary episode and not the historical norm. Nor is it primary research as the Kinnison's scholarship on this matter is unchallenged. Even, The Miami Years (which I would hardly call serious historical scholarship) notes the Eagleson Bill and what it represented.--Sam Harmon 02:22, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

I think we need more than the one source to demonstrate wide perception. How's this: Keep the language as is, but add another source or two. The Fingerhut speech would be perfect. -- SwissCelt 02:48, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

An anon IP just deleted the sentences in question, then deleted this discussion on the talk page. I reverted the latter, but I haven't been involved enough with this discussion to know if there's real consensus on whether to keep what was removed from the article. If one of y'all wants to revert the anon edit, be my guest.. --Jaysweet 20:33, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I'll put it back, there was no consensus to remove it although discussion is certainly encouraged on the subject.--Analogue Kid 00:18, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

I think its difficult to declare one school in Ohio as flagship for the state. Ohio's public education system was created in a five quadrant system to serve the state. North East Ohio is Kent State University, South East Ohio is Ohio University, South West Ohio is Miami, North West Ohio is BGSU and Central Ohio is OSU. The original intent of this geographic layout was to serve each region of the state with a 4-yr residential university. But due to poor oversight, schools such as YSU, University of Akron, Cleveland State, Toledo, have all tried to compete with these 5 schools by creating residence halls and trying to copy the mission and purpose of the Ohio-Five region system.

Yes, Kent and Bowling Green were founded to give the NW and NE corners of the state a public university. They, however, were NOT founded to be in any way co-equals with Ohio State. You can't just pass over the Eagleson Bill and what it represented. Ohio State was designated by law to the be the flagship university. The founding of two regional schools to serve the northern part of the state did not undo that. The notion that all public universities were created equally did not arise until the Rhodes era, and has been thoroughly repudiated by the state government since his departure. The fact that Rhodes essentially controlled higher education for two decades has unfortunately led some Ohioans to believe that his policies were the historical norm not the historical departure that they truly were.--24.136.30.203 18:21, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Each university offers strengths that others do not have. While it is obvious that OSU is a research-heavy school, you must keep in mind Cincinnatti, Kent State, and others do a great deal of research too. But if I had to delegate a title of "flagship" for research, OSU would be on the top of the list. BUT, it is not secret that OSU is not an Undergraduate friendly school, due to the heavy emphasis of research and graduate students. I feel therefore its hard to say its the flagship school all around. I think that too many people try to compare us to states like Wisconsin or Michigan that have state-wide public systems. Here in Ohio, we do not have any large public universities with "directional" names and each university competes well nationally and internationally.

Ex. Ohio U - School of Journalism Kent State - Liquid Crystal institute, largest nursing college in Ohio, 3rd best fashion school in the country. UC - Many Medical Break Throughs

Every regional public university in every state can point to one or two strong programs and "points of pride" it does not mean that they're equal to the state's flagship university. Cal Poly has some highly regarded engineering programs, but nobody in their right mind considers it an equal of Berkeley. Look at national rankings across the board. Look at the indicators of faculty quality that I listed above. Look at the 650 million dollars in research funding at Ohio STate last year. It's far more than every other public university in the state--COMBINED. It's almost as much as every public and private university in the state combined, including Case. Look at AAU status. If these universities are Ohio State's equal then why have none of them been extended membership into the Association of American Universities during the organization's 107 years of existence?

Define "undergraduate friendly" because, now that the Rhodes era has been put behind us, we are easily the most selective public university in Ohio (Miami included) The numbers for the '07 freshman class are 52% of applicants accepted/56% from the top 10% of their high school class and 93% from the top quarter/an average ACT of over 28/over 300 valedictorians in a class of 6100. Miami is the only public university in the state from which a significant portion of their student body would also be accepted into Ohio State. Ohio State undergraduates are also the most likely to eventually go on to earn a Ph.D. In a recent ten year period studied 2.7% of Ohio State baccalurate graduates eventually earned a Ph.D. The number for Miami was 2.5%, and no other public school was over 1%. Look at the national scholarships won this year by Ohio State undergraduates [3]. Something must be going on there at the undergraduate level, or the top high school seniors in the state would not be flocking to Ohio State in recrod numbers.--24.136.30.203 18:21, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

How about how OSU had to recently change its criteria for graduation because it was impossible to graduate in 4 years for the majority of undergraduate students? Also, consider in recent years the increase in undergrad tuition for what? Research funding for Graduate students...thats really friendly.

Ohio State did make this change. We looked at the credit hours required for a bachelor's degree at the schools that we benchmark ourselves against (Wisconsin, Illinois, Michigan, UCLA, Texas, Washington, Penn State, Minnesota) and found that we required significantly more credit hours than these schools. We lowered the number to be in line with these schools.

As for tuition, Ohio as a state has ridiculously high tuition throughout its higher education system. This is a result of decades of funding neglect and the money being spread too thin because of redundant programs and too many universities. Ohio State--despite being the most highly ranked undergraduate school in Ohio--is only the fifth most expensive for in-state students. We may not be tuition friendly relative to other states, but I certainly think that we're very tuition friendly on a cost-quality ratio relative to the other Ohio schools.

At the end of the day, applications for the 2007 class grew by 20% over the previous year and 50% among students with a 32+ on the ACT. I think those numbers speak quite directly to how "undergraduate friendly" Ohio State has become.--Sam Harmon 18:00, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

As for your source to the statement about flagships status, I read it and it gave no particular support to OSU as flagship so I do think you need to back it up more.

He specifically mentions Ohio as a "one flagship" state. Who was he talking about? Bowling Green? I am working on footnoting specific references in Kinnison's history of the period, which is the reference point scholarship conducted by a professional historian who was neither an alumnus or faculty member at Ohio State.--24.136.30.203 18:21, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Also, realize that the football program plays a big role in your flagship status "preception" which might not be the best thing.

Perhaps among everyday Ohioans it is one factor. I guarantee you that if one were to poll 1,000 professors, deans and university presidents from outside the state of Ohio and with no connections to any Ohio university (like Berdahl for example), 1,000 would say that Ohio State was Ohio's flagship public university.--24.136.30.203 18:21, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

You make good arguments, and you have lucky for you, some obsolete bills in the past still exist. I think it will be interesting to see how higher education fairs in the future with Fingerhut. I still am not convinced that Ohio St. is "declared" a flagship school for reasons other than their football program. Do not get me wrong, I think OSU is a fine school but I do not feel it soley could be considered the ONE and only flagship school in Ohio. I wish I had the link to the article in the New York Times that was doing a tuition comparison amongst states and from each state it chose two or three flagship schools and for Ohio it chose, OSU, Ohio U. and Miami.

Strickland and Fingerhut definately are intent on making fundamental changes to the higher education system. With each passing month, however, it becomes very clear that they are intent on doing away with the last vestiges of the Rhodes policies. So far, they've advocated tearing up the funding model from the 1960's which treated each university equally and begin funding universities according to their "unique mission." As noted above, Fingerhut has repeatedly stated that Ohio State's "unique mission" is to be the state's leading comprehensive research university and one of the best in the country (a role that I might add is impossible without it also being the top undergraduate school in the state). They've advocated doing away with the numerous redundant, lowly ranked graduate programs that sprung up around the state under Rhodes. While I certainly don't foresee a return to the Eagleson Bill (where only Ohio State was allowed doctoral programs and primary research), I certainly see an undoing of the Rhodes era where every school in the state was free to add Ph.D programs in the vain attempt of turning themselves into mini-Ohio States. In recent months, they've also been strongly hinting at a forced merger of Kent State and Akron. If successful there, I'm sure that Toledo and Bowling Green might face the same.

Since taking office, they're essentially advocating and instituting Ohio State's dream list. I think that in five years, we'll see a system very similar to Virginia's with Ohio STate assuming the UVA role, Miami assuming a William & Mary role as a selective undergraduate focused college, Cincinnati (over OU because of the power of the Cincy business/political community) assuming the Virginia Tech role as the secondary/easier admission research university and the rest assuming regional roles as either moderate admissions/limited grad program schools or open admission/undergraduate focused schools.--Sam Harmon 18:00, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Those are some very bold statements, you can not force merge two schools with distinct histories, traditions and alumni base. I whole heartly disagree with the above statement. If anything were to happen, I forsee YSU shutting down, Akron becoming more of a community college, and changes along those ends. You have to keep in mind that our universities are 25% funded by the state, so the state's ability to force mergings is very limited.

What would their names be? Who would keep there name in the Akron/Kent merger? How do you decide who's 100 years + of history and identy is destroyed?

Also, I highly doubt you can take the OLDEST school in Ohio, OU and say its going to become a med-grade college. Ohio is unique, just because the state has a horrible investment in education doesn't mean we have to conform to another state's model. Ohio has 5 very large very good universities, all arguments behind, these 5 schools, OU, KSU, Miami, UC and OSU are capable of standing up to other very good schools.

I think you need to examine each school, I bet if you looked into each university you would be amazed at their abilities. I think if Strickland were to force merge any schools it would be political suicide. You don't mess with peoples alma maters, for example, Kent State is THE university of importance in NE Ohio, with a very large and strong base of alumni, you don't wanna make those people mad.

Also if you can please supply some data/support for your belief that a force merger between KSU and UA, that would be appreciated...

For many of the reasons that you've brought up, they're only hinting at it at this point. While it is among the more extreme measures being discussed, I do, however, know for a fact that it is on the table. Remember also that the state essentially owns the buildings and land that the univesities are on, and the Governor controls appointments to their boards of trustees. I also believe that Case is considered THE university in NE Ohio. Because of the presence of Case and the Cleveland Clinic, the Cleveland business-political infrastructure has never felt the need to pump up their local state universities in the manner that Toledo and Cincinnati have. When it comes down to brass tacks, the political and business leaders in NE Ohio will throw their support behind Ohio State--as they always have. I wouldn't expect you to take this at face value on an anonymous message board, but I am fairly connected to these decisions that are taking place behind the scenes. As for OU, it has become a "med grade college" quite well on its own, which is quite frankly what it always has been. They can cry "Ohio's First and Finest" until they're blue (green) in the face. It doesn't change the history that they've always been a mediocre, fall back school. There's a reason that they were passed over for the land grant funding in the 1860s. Look at it by any standard, undergraduate rankings, graduate rankings, research funding, admissions standards. OU is far more similar to Kent, Bowling Green or UC than it is to Ohio State or even Miami. Do the political calculus:

Central Ohio will support whatever is in Ohio State's best interests as will NE Ohio. SW Ohio, content with the William & Mary and Va Tech roles for Miami and UC will get on board. SE Ohio won't fully support OU. Political and business support will probably split evenly with Ohio State. The only region that will fight tooth and nail for its local universities is Toledo and The Toledo Blade which has always resented the rest of the state and seen anything coming out of Columbus as a direct conspiracy to keep Toledo down.

The changes are coming, and while I don't expect you to take my word for anything, check back with me in two to three years, and I think you'll be shocked at what has transpired. Here's a recent article discussing some of their plans: [4] In it, Fingerhut and the Republican Speaker of the House talk of disbanding lowly ranked, redundant grad programs, forcing universities not to compete with each other and funding universities on an individual (rather than the universal formula from the Rhodes era) basis and in accordance with what their "unique mission" is.--Sam Harmon 22:17, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Case Western is not THE college in NE Ohio. Actually, if you did your research, Kent State has a large stake hold in Cleveland, Who's helping redevelop downtown cleveland, with urban design and architecture? Kent State, Who has the most start up companies with highest profit yields per dollar invested for the region, Kent State, Who's contributing the largest amount of nursing students, and teachers to the region and the state, Kent State, who's among the largest employers in NE Ohio, Kent State. And you have to look beyond Ohio, Kent State has campuses in Florence Italy, Geneva Switzerland, Chicago, and New York City. The Governor could force all he wants but in politics, reelection is a proximate goal, he'd be pissing off a lot of people. Also, Governor Strickland personally praised Kent State for its research and economic impact on Cleveland/Akron area.

As for that article, I've read it before, I think losing a Graduate History program in the 80's is something we can move on from. Yes I agree the duplication of programs amongst schools is disgusting, but it doesn't serve the state well to place the majority of the programs and funding in one school in Columbus. You obviously go to OSU, so I know your statements are very biased, as are mine of KSU, but this debate has clearly moved from the topic of flagship school to a blatant belittling on the other research intensive and extensive universities in Ohio. I have an internship this summer working with the administration of KSU, I'm interested to see how they view this topic.

While Ohio State University will be the flagship of the system, Strickland and Fingerhut said all the public institutions will benefit from combining efforts. Fingerhut refused to say whether programs would be cut, because he has yet to map out a plan.[5]

The announcement of The University System of Ohio BTW, the average Bowling Green, OU or Kent State alum doesn't care whether their alma mater gets to keep some research or doctoral programs. They only care about how much it will cost to send their kids there, and a large part of this debate will be framed specifically in terms of redundancy=high tuition.--Sam Harmon 05:44, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

After reading this entire section (it was tedious), I have to agree with Ohio State being the flagship university in Ohio. I also reiterate the already stated fact that OSU is harder to get into than any other university in the entire state (yes, including Miami). Even in 2006, Miami was admitting students that Ohio State denied on the spot. In 2007, it's been documented as official. I know that difficulty to get into a university doesn't necessarily compare to the quality of the university, but it says something.  hmwith  talk 16:06, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

The actual quote from Strickland and Fingerhut has beeen referenced on the articles opening paragraph. The quote is below.

:While Ohio State University will be the flagship of the system, Strickland and Fingerhut said all the public institutions will benefit from combining efforts.

The "for research" comment was actually made by an Ohio State VP. Seeing that Fingerhut has stated that Ohio State's role as the flagship is to compete with the top public universities in the nation, anybody who doesn't think that this also means "undergraduate flagship" (which according to recent admissions data it is anyways) is willfully deluding themselves. Then again, I've always maintained that if an Ohio governor ever publicly declared on the steps of the capitol that "Ohio State is the flagship, the state flag was being replaced with an Ohio State flag and Woody Hayes picture was going into the state seal" partisans of the regional colleges would still continue to reject reality.--Sam Harmon 18:15, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Hahahaha, I feel the same way, Sam.  hmwith  talk 18:17, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Merging Ohio Stadium Cake into article

Opposed: While it's a great thing that this group does, being authorized to raise scholarship money is not really the same as being an actual part of the university's operations--or in particular, its honors program. I have no problem with a seperate article, but it shouldn't be part of the main university article. Ohio State has thousands of similar (if not quite so unique) scholarship funds. Are we going to include them all? The Young Scholars and Land Grant Sholars programs are fundamentally different. They are large scale (each over 100 students per year), run and funded solely by the university and are central to the university's mission of access.--Sam Harmon 16:14, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Opposed While it's a nice thing they've got going, it's not notable enough to be included in Wikipedia anywhere, be it the Ohio State article or by itself.--Analogue Kid 19:03, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Some comments on the article

I just redid the OSU template ({{Ohio State University}}) because, frankly, it was too big. I decided to take a look at this article and noticed it was up for GA nomination. This is not a GA review but I'm sure that will come later. However, I did have some comments that I believe will get this article a pretty quick rejection from the GA people. First of all, please correct your citations to follow WP:CITE (i.e. use the citation templates). Also, please minimize the number of external jumps in the article. Having them in the See also section is fine, but there are too many in the Schools and colleges section. I, also, would like to see more content in the History section. I am not a fan of short paragraphs, so please try to work paragraphs that are less than 4 sentences long into other paragraphs or try to expand them. Please resolve any merge suggestions before nominating for GA, so you all may want to solve that one pretty quick. Some sections look too short; such as Student organization, Leadership & service, and Ohio State-affiliated media (also, you and instead of the ampersand in the section title per WP:HEAD). This will also reduce the size of your TOC which I believe is too long. I also question the necessity of the Points of interest section. But anyway, that is a quick review. Bear in mind I didn't actually read the article so I do not have any advice on wording or opinion on unsourced statements which may come later from either myself or a GA reviewer. Good luck!↔NMajdan•talk 19:47, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

spam?

I was doing cleanup and WP seemed to think that this link below (with a break in the URL) is a spam link and wouldn't let me save the page.

http://collegeuniversity. suite101.com/article.cfm/gay_friendly_college_campuses The Advocate College Guide

No clue what the story is there, so I'll let one of the regular editors figure out what (if anything) to do about it. Esrever 01:23, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

GA fail

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Comments

Overall the article is well-written, includes broad coverage of the university, and has generally nice images. I did find some problems with the article which I don't believe can be completed in a week (thus my decision to fail the article rather than put it on hold). I realize that the article was nominated over a month ago, so if it has changed significantly since then feel free to bring the article up to GA standards and nominate again. Here are my suggestions for improvements:

• Adherence to the manual of style was for the most part good. However, the lead should not be an introduction. Rather, it should be a stand-alone summary of the entire article. Consider placing some important facts and data snippets in the lead that would explain the entirety of the university in a few short paragraphs.
• Similar to the comments that were left by Nmajdan above, the table of contents needs to be cleaned up a bit. Student life is especially clunky. The last 4 of those subsections (4.4 Activities and organizations, 4.5 Student organizations, 4.6 Leadership and service, and 4.7 Student governments) can probably be combined in some way. Also, the Points of interest section seems like a trivia section to me. I would integrate the points into the rest of the article. A few of them can go under the campus section. The Ohio State media section is not worth its own header — it only has two sentences. Integrate that into another section that you deem appropriate.
• The references that were used in the article were appropriate and reliable, as far as I could see. However, there are numerous reference problems. First, the references cited need to be adequately referenced in the article. What I mean is that you should include the title of the work, the publisher, the date, date accessed, and any other information. Simply including the URL is not enough (but it's a good start). Second, the article is very lacking of needed citations. Some sections have no references, which needs to be improved. This is especially important in the History section. But other sections have similar problems: Rankings, much of the Student Life section, and Notable Alumni. Any time you quote anything it needs to have a reference immediately following. I also found a number of potentially controversial claims that needed references: "Ohio State was the first university in Ohio to be extended membership into the Association of American Universities", "Although development had been hindered in the 1870's by hostility from the state's agricultural interests and competition for resources from Miami University and Ohio University, both issues were eventually resolved", and "The Ohio Union was the first student union built by a public university", for example. Read through the article as if you knew nothing about Ohio State and put references where you think something needs support. Generally any time you cite a statistic, something that may be questioned, a quote, or refer to something people claim or argue, you need a reference.
• The article was very broad in its coverage, which was good. However, it was not focused at all. Sections like Student Life are far too descriptive. If all of that information is really notable then consider creating a new article for all Ohio State Student Life. I imagine, though, that most of it does not need to be included. For example, in Student Governments, the sentence "this goal will be achieved through student advocacy, programming, promoting student leadership and involvement, and facilitating communication with university administrators to promote student success in all facets" can be removed as it does not add much. If readers need to know more about what student governments do, then wikilink them to the page on Student governments. Other sections I noticed this focus problem were Academics (rankings are not needed for every school and every program - try to include only those that are most important) and Campuses (again, consider breaking this section of into a new article if it is all important - though that may be doubtful).
• I questioned the fair representation without bias because there was nothing in the article that would give OSU a bad reputation. I don't think the article quite fell into a categorization of boosterism, but considering there were no news stories or references to information about bad practices, labor disputes, budget issues, town-gown relations, or anything that would present the more negative side of OSU (every major university has one) - that made me question whether the article gave fair representation.
  • I do not understand it since when that a good article has to include a bad mark (reputation). Also, this is an institution of higher education, the institution itself cannot do any wrong, it is just what it is. This article is just a report that provides some information about OSU. Personal opinions should be included separately from facts. If someone at OSU does something wrong and gives a bad reputation to the school, it should also be reported separately in his/her biography.Ohho (talk) 11:44, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

• Most images were excellent, but the OSU logo and the athletics logo were not accompanied by fair-use rationale. Once you add that, they will be fine.
• The section on schools and colleges should not be just a collection of links. Integrate the bullet points into a paragraph or two and (rather than linking to their OSU website) wikilink to the schools that have their own Wiki articles. If you want to link to the OSU school pages this needs to be done in the external links section. Consider linking to a page with all of the schools on one page. Otherwise, you can link to each individual school but it is not preferred.

The article is well on its way to become a good article, but these concerns should be addressed first. I was impressed that information on budgeting and research was already included, as many university articles do not. Once these issues are tackled resubmit the article and we'll get it reviewed much more quickly (and probably approved). Good job! :) -- Noetic Sage 16:42, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Ohio State buckeyes logo.png

Image:Ohio State buckeyes logo.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 ensure 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 16:34, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no consensus. JPG-GR (talk) 00:21, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Ohio State University → The Ohio State University — In light of the recent move of AFC Wimbledon to its proper name, I think that this article should also be moved for the same reason. The Ohio State University is the proper, legal name used by the University in all of its officially released information. The fact that we have a common format for "XYZ State University" should not matter if it leads to the article being given an incorrect title. Whenever possible we should call things by their proper names, and this name is well known enough to not create problems. Also, we can link Ohio State University to The Ohio State University in the same way that we currently do the inverse. I see no reason why we shouldn't make this move. —-- Grant.Alpaugh 09:55, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.

• Support as nominator. -- Grant.Alpaugh 09:56, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
• Oppose: per para 1.9 of Wikipedia:Naming conventions. 201.228.123.66 (talk) 14:08, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
• Oppose per the WP:NC stated above. Apples and oranges. JPG-GR (talk) 16:19, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
• Oppose per naming conventions and my own comments the last time this was mooted. AFC Wimbledon does not seem relevant here. — mholland (talk) 16:34, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
• Oppose per use common names and the last time this was beaten to death. older ≠ wiser 17:16, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
• Support. The para 1.9 cited above refers to unnecessary the/a/an at the beginning of an article name; however, the linked section Wikipedia:Naming conventions (definite and indefinite articles at beginning of name)#Rule of thumb says to include it if it would be capitalized as part of the official name. That, as well as the Official names section below, with link to The Citadel and others, makes this issue seem pretty clear to me. Neier (talk) 14:35, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
• Oppose; see more below. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 15:47, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
• Support yet again. From WP Naming conventions: On the other hand, some universities religiously refer to themselves as "... The University of X..." even in running text. If such usage is prevalent on university press releases and press kits, contact information, "about" pages, and internal department websites, and it is reasonably common in external sources (try a Google search), then it is more appropriate to name the Wikipedia article The University of X.

Find me ONE press release from the university that doesn't say "The Ohio State University" when referring to the institution as a whole. Can't do it, can you? As station previously, if we were to apply the common name rule, the article would be titled "Ohio State" which is of course way too ambiguous for Wikipedia.

Incidentally, votes from IP addresses cannot be counted in a poll. Please sign if if you would like you have your vote counted.--Analogue Kid (talk) 17:02, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

I think that quote makes it a pretty open and shut case as far as naming conventions go. Anyone with any new arguments care to weigh in? -- Grant.Alpaugh 17:22, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

No, your position has no support from the naming conventions, and very little support from the consensus of editors (which is more important). Septentrionalis PMAnderson 18:14, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Wait so the quote above isn't from WP:Naming conventions? All of the protests to date except one have been based on that policy. If the policy also contains that quote, then I think that nulifies those objections. The only other complaint has been that this was brought up before. If that's the only reason not to move then I think there's consensus to do so. -- Grant.Alpaugh 20:57, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

It is an artful misquotation of the subpage on The. The true wording is "A definite article should be applied only if "The" is used in running text throughout university materials and if that usage has caught on elsewhere. This is a weak version of the common-name rule." There is no evidence, and we should require the same evidence as the page linked to, that this is common usage outside OSU. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:59, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Discussion

Any additional comments:

AFC Wimbledon was moved from A.F.C. Wimbledon because it was the proper name of the club. People opposed the move because normally Wikipedia includes the periods as part of a consistent naming policy, but because the title was patently incorrect, it was appropriate to move. The Ohio State University is the proper title of the institution, despite the fact that naming conventions says don't include "the" in the title of articles. When naming conventions prevent us from properly naming an article, we should overrule the conventions in favor of a proper, commonly used alternative. -- Grant.Alpaugh 16:57, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

The periods are a question of style; if indeed A.F.C. Wimbledon is clear majority usage, we should follow, but I doubt it is. Do most people call OSU The Ohio State University? does anyone outside the present University Administration? (See WP:MOSTRADE) If the answers are No and Almost none, as I believe, we should not be pedantic; we should speak the common tongue for the common reader. Evidence? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 20:28, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

While I agree with you that the most common name is Ohio State or just OSU, The Ohio State University is not so uncommon to justify not using the proper name of the article. We can link Ohio State University to this page after the switch just as we like The Ohio State University to the article now. The linking and searching argument simply doesn't fly. -- Grant.Alpaugh 00:42, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Then you concede the only fact considered by our naming conventions. If you wish to change those conventions, their talk page is the place to do so. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 18:57, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The?

The? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.80.179.67 (talk) 07:36, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Ohio State report

What is the average GPA of the school

There is no Ohio State Cortland campus

just thought i would let someone know, there is no OSU Cortland campus 128.146.115.93 (talk) 04:20, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

The Ohio State University Medical Center

I was planning on establishing an OSU Medical Center entry, but wanted to inquire with the authors of this page at to whether I should branch off of the University's entry. I noticed the stem for The James and the request for further information on the Ross Heart Hospital. I could assist in contributions to those areas. I'm assuming I would be directed to contribute Medical Center information to the University's entry, so I thought I'd start by asking. LukeRussell17 (talk) 19:52, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

It definitely deserves its own article. --- RockMFR 23:18, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. I'm building the entry on my user page and will shift to public in a few weeks. LukeRussell17 (talk) 14:59, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Traditions

I was thinking about adding a small section on traditions. If it becomes too large, I would probably make it its own article and leave a link in this page. Before I get started, I want to see what others think and get some input on traditions. Some of them are covered in Student Life but I think it might warrant at least its own section. OlYeller^Talktome 18:39, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Be careful about sourcing; we don't need invented traditions, which can fade as rapidly as they sprang up. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 15:54, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Whether the "flagship" status of a university can be presented as objective fact

There is currently an RfC on this question at Talk:University of Maine#Flagship RFC. ☺Coppertwig (talk) 12:55, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

University seal

Per the manual of style for university articles, the lead image in the infobox should be the university's academic [6]. Does anyone possess or know where to find a higher-resolution version? AniRaptor2001 (talk) 02:53, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Image request

Image searching came up with nothing, as a student, I can request copies of images and marks provided I state intent. I filed a request with some padding but the guts of it are here:

When displaying icons, it is the policy of Wikipedia to show the icon in low resolution and to tag the photo with a large copyright notice, and a description of how the image obeys United States copyright law. An example of how the logo would be displayed in the article is here, and, viewing the file in detail, a user is directed here to see the aforementioned legal notices.

I am hereby formally requesting a release of a low resolution (>200 x 200pixels, < 700 x 700 pixels) image of The Ohio State University Seal, to be used as a protected, copyrighted trademark that is not used for profit . The statement of the purpose of the seal:

"The image is used to identify The Ohio State University, a subject of public interest. The significance of the logo is to help the reader identify the organization, assure the readers that they have reached the right article containing critical commentary about the organization, and illustrate the organization's intended branding message in a way that words alone could not convey.For fair use on the topic of The Ohio State University. This image is a low-resolution image of The Ohio State University Seal. This image does not limit the copyright holder's ability to profit from the original source, nor will it dilute the importance or recognition of the logo in connection with its organization. This image enhances the article in which it's displayed, as it provides an immediate relevance to the reader more capably than the textual description alone. Use of the logo visually identifies the university and its products in a manner that mere prose cannot, and meets all criteria in WP:NFCC."

It is kind of an odd request as you don't usually ask for the actual file of a trademark from the owner. As expected, I got a polite "no":

The university logo, which appears on Ohio State's Wikipedia is the correct and appropriate logo to use on that page and elsewhere. The seal is reserved for use by the Board of Trustees on official documents such as diplomas. It's our preference that the box logo be a universal representation of the university.

I've done the research we're well within our legal rights to post the logo as public domain or by replication under the protection of copyright law. The formal request was worth a shot. Westherm (talk) 17:57, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Aerospace Engineering Research Laboratory

I created an article outlining the Aerospace and Astronautical Research Laboratory, a research facility owned and operated by the university. I felt the facility was important to include as an article on wikipedia because of its large budget, non-main campus location, and the magnitude of research conducted there.Famous, international companies like Boeing, GE, Honda, and Lockheed Martin all regularly use the lab and past research conducted at the lab. The article can be linked from numerous other Ohio State articles. I put also put a link under the research tab in the OSU template. Westherm (talk) 18:02, 11 August 2009 (UTC)