Jump to content

Talk:University of Florida

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 67.109.191.254 (talk) at 22:12, 18 September 2013 (→Merger proposal). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Former good article nomineeUniversity of Florida was a Social sciences and society good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 12, 2008Good article nomineeNot listed

Athletics

Guys & gals, it may be heresy to suggest this, but I think the football and basketball sections are too long and too detailed for the main University of Florida article, to the exclusion of other section topics that should be emphasized in the main UF article (like History, Academics, Rankings, Campus). Something like half of the football and basketball history and trivia should probably be shifted to the separate Florida Gators, Florida Gators Football or Florida Gators Basketball articles. Reactions? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 05:51, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, could one of you Wiki veterans start a stub page for Jan Dowling, the new women's golf coach? If someone will handle the technical creation and set-up of the new article, I'll write the text. Thanks. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 18:28, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Endowment

This article has updated numbers on UF's endowment. I leave it up to the regular editors of this article if they want to use these numbers or the NACUBO numbers from June. KnightLago (talk) 17:19, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd prefer to retain the NACUBO figure, because it's precise. The article in the Palm Beach Post is much less precise, and it's also likely to disappear behind their firewall in two weeks or so (which means it's harder to verify, but still an acceptable source). Horologium (talk) 18:12, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Edit war redux?

Is there really going to be an edit war over whether "The University of Florida is the flagship university of the State University System of Florida" or "The University of Florida is a flagship university of the State University System of Florida"? Wperdue (talk) 00:12, 22 February 2009 (UTC)wperdue[reply]

It is not necessary to edit war over this. All credible references point to FSU and UF being the flagship universities in Florida. There has been obvious extensive discussion and the best evidence points to the joint status. I have watched this for some time and I really think those that keep pushing that UF is the sole flagship need to grow up.
I agree. Sirberus (talk) 12:00, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, gentlemen, there are THREE "research flagship universities," as designated by the Florida legislature. They are Florida, Florida State and South Florida. Please see the new footnote that refers to the legislature's designation of these three, which I have added to the text. FYI, I am the one who is responsible for the most recent a-to-the edit. Florida was the officially designated flagship of the SUS through my undergraduate and law school years, but that was changed in 2007. I now know the official score. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 04:20, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dirtlawyer1, I was reading the citation link for your statement that there are three flagship universities but nowhere in the bill I read did it say anything about that. Can you please check that bill again for me and see if you accidentally linked that citation to the wrong bill? Or could you point out the page and line in the current link where it lays out the "flagship" status or describes it in some manner? I'm not trying to be a jerk, I'm just genuinely curious where it states it. Thanks for your time! Fliry Vorru (talk) 21:48, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fliry Vorru, yes, you are correct, and, no, you are not being a jerk, just a constructive critic. SB 1710 provides for the 30%-40% tuition differentials for Florida, Florida State and South Florida, but it does not use the term "research flagship universities," which was used by state legislators and Gov. Crist when he signed the bill in 2007. I am scouring the SUS Board of Governors website looking for the origin of the term. If I can't find any on-line "official" authority for the term, I will call the SUS BOG offices in the morning, and ask their public relations guy for an explanation. I also have a classmate or two in the UF General Counsel's office who may be of assistance. I'll let you know what I learn. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 00:09, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am glad this discussion came up because I was watching this historical legislation closely when it came out in 2007. Basically the original legislation stipulated that UF & FSU could charge 40% above an beyond the other universities in the State University System of Florida (SUSF). The University of South Florida was allowed to charge tuition differential that was 30% above and beyond the other universities within the SUSF. These 3 institions were officially labeled the Research Flagship Universities within the SUSF. In 2008 UCF & FIU used political influence to also qualify for tuition differential (but they were never officially labeled as Research Flagships). In 2009 all the universities within the SUSF were allowed to charge tuition differential. NorwalkJames (talk) 22:36, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
However in a recent USA Today survey of the 75 public flaghip universities within the USA it labeled ONLY the University of Florida and Florida State University. USF was excluded from the list.suvey NorwalkJames (talk) 22:36, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I spent about an hour scrolling through all sorts of public documents and press releases on the SUS Board of Governors webstite yesterday. In their public documents, the SUS BOG only uses the term "flagship" in reference to UF, not FSU or USF. I've got a call into their PR guy. I'll let you know what he or she tells me. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 22:49, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would not rely on the BOG, they are lucky to even exist. If you want to email me at joejimmis@yahoo.com, I can give you some more details about the Flagship issue. I do not want to use the talk page to go into all of this NorwalkJames (talk) 22:58, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.usnews.com/articles/education/best-colleges/2009/01/26/most-popular-colleges-national-universities.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by All564 (talk • contribs) 18:02, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

UF Establishment Date

I have found very credible sources (among others) that show UF's correct establishment date is actually 1851, not 1853. While this has been a rivalry-driven issue with FSU in the past, it seems appropriate to recognize the dates consistently between the two schools, which is the date the state approved the schools in law. This method of recognition avoids the problems with the East Florida Seminary, which started in Ocala in 1853, ceased to exist for approximately 5 years, and then started back up in Gainesville in 1866. Further, as the primary predecessor for UF was actually the Florida Agricultural College in Lake City, not the bit-player (by comparison) EFS, this method stops contention as to which school was actually formative and most significant to the university as well. I believe this proposed method is consistent with establishment dates of other major universities across the United States and would eliminate argument as to which school is "oldest" in Florida.

Thoughts?

Sirberus (talk) 14:58, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Frankly, both the UF and the FSU official "founding" dates are bogus. I speak as a triple-Gator alumnus who has read the conflicting and poorly written accounts on the UF website, as well as some fairly scholarly histories available through the UF libraries. Bottom line: there was no such animal as the "University of Florida" until 1905, when the Buckman Act forced the merger of 4 different schools. Yes, there was a "University of Florida" in Lake City for about a year, from 1904 to 1905, but that was a simple renaming of the Florida Agriculture College, and the renaming was not authorized by the legislature. In any event, none of the four predecessor schools that were merged in 1905 to create the University of the State of Florida had a continuous existence, in any single location, dating back to the 1853 date shown on UF's seal. It appears to be a nakedly transparent attempt to legitimize a newly created institution by claiming an earlier "founding" date. An honest assessment would suggest that 1905 was the real founding date. It's all pretty damn sketchy!

FSU's pre-1905 history is equally sketchy. It's a shame that the legislature took such a bush league approach to higher education in Florida, but the Buckman Act did eventually force a consolidation of the previous state-subsidized schools and put UF and FSU on a path to organization as modern state universities.

BTW, what is the authority for the UAA being founded in 1904?! According to the Florida secretary of state's on-line corporate records, UAA was incorporated in 1929 (see the recitals in the amended and restated articles filed in 1998). Is there some authority for UAA existing as an unincorporated association? How can UAA's existence predate the merger that created UF by 1 to 2 years?

Just for giggles, be aware that the Florida-Georgia football series win-loss record is tied up in this confused history. UGA's varsity football team beat the snot out of a club team from the Florida Agriculture College 55-0 in 1904, and UGA's athletic department claims the win as the first game in the UF-UGA series. Naturally, UAA denies that the 1904 game counts, and traces the series history to the first meeting of official varsity teams in 1915. For the record, most third-party sports record-keeping organizations side with UF. But, I digress . . . . = )

Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 05:04, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • I agree that the UF in Gainesville was not really created until the Buckman Act of 1905. I further find the claim of 1853 by UF through the lineage of the EFS not impressive as the sources I have reviewed in my study of the history of FSU show that the principal predecessor of UF was FAC in Lake City, established in 1884. FSU, on the other hand, has a better claim to the 1851 date as it has been in nearly continuous operation in the same spot to around 1855. FSU, under President D'Alemberte, elected to pattern its founding the same way Northwestern University claims its date of founding. FSC also under Murphree used the 1851 date originally as its date of founding - pre-Buckman. I'd suggest that UF go with 1851 as opposed to 1853 as it would equate a pattern followed by other major universities. Further, I'd read an article along the way in the St. Pete Times that had a UF historian claim UF was the oldest university in FL due to some early Congressional records referring to a "University of Florida". The problem with that claim is that FSU was declared the first University of Florida by the Legislature in the mid-1880s which lasted to 1903. Simply adopting the 1851 date as the original establishment date would end the confusion and nonsense, especially with regard to competition with FSU. --Sirberus (talk) 22:43, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Both schools were authorized by state legislation in 1851 as the East Florida Seminary and West Florida Seminary. The eastern started classes in 1853 and the western did in 1857. EFS did suspend classes during the civil war and was encouraged by a gift of land to reestablish in Gainesville after the Civil War. Whatever your take on how hazy the connections of UF to EFS are, the fact is EFS merged with three other schools to become The University of Florida. I would consider the date classes started after the legislation to found the schools as the founding date as UF officials have also. FSU decided in 2000 to change their founding date to coincide with the passing of the legislation and invited UF to do so. UF didn't. Those are the facts without any emotional argument over who can claim being older. opiemc 12:25 23 Jan 2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Opiemc (talk • contribs) 18:27, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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) 12:38, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The short answer is "yes, you can," at least for the University of Florida, Florida State University and the University of South Florida. (Please see comment below.) Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 13:13, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New pictures in Commons

I've been going around campus and through my collections and getting pictures of buildings and other UF related subjects for current and future articles. I have not yet added anything to articles at this time. --WillMcC (talk) 02:15, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Will, these digital campus photos are fabulous. Do you have any O'Dome interior shots during men's and women's basketball and volleyball games that we can add to the "Florida Gators" sports overview article? And while I'm out on a limb, how about a men's or women's cross country shot?

Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 00:30, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]


I've got some more stuff up on Commons. I've also done some re-arranging of the categories over there too. Most building pictures will be in http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Buildings_at_the_University_of_Florida with subcategories for Student Housing, the stadium, the O'Dome, and the historical district. I have a few from Lake Wauburg too My recent uploads will be listed at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:WillMcC/gallery

I don't have any pictures from athletic events (not my thing, plus they probably wouldn't let me into the O'Dome with my Canon EOS)

[large gallery removed by author. See Commons:User:WillMcC/gallery for images]

Share and enjoy, but don't overuse them! --WillMcC (talk) 02:07, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WillMcC, can you find me a good, clear perspective shot of the University Auditorium? I would like to use it on the revamped Albert A. Muprhree article, as a righthand shot next to the "See also" listings. Murphree was responsible for getting the construction of the auditorium started. Also, I am looking for a digital close-up of the gargoyles and other carvings around the Sledd Hall (or Buckman Hall--Sledd and his wife lied in Buckman in 1906-07) passageways and entrances----can you get one? Similar to the Murphree article, I would like use the described shot as a righthand photo to partially fill the white space by the "See also" article listings on the revamped Andrew Sledd article. And . . . a nice digital perspective shot of the front side of Tigert Hall for use in similar fashion on the revamped John J. Tigert article? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 02:06, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the latest batch:

[large gallery removed by author. See Commons:User:WillMcC/gallery for images]

Be sure to check out Commons as there is stuff that others have posted that could be put to use in the UF articles. --WillMcC (talk) 02:05, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A small batch from the last few weeks. Mostly new:

  • The Career Resource Center at the Reitz Union
    The Career Resource Center at the Reitz Union
  • Better shot of Emerson Alumni Hall
    Better shot of Emerson Alumni Hall
  • Large number of cars parking along Mowry Road during UF football game
    Large number of cars parking along Mowry Road during UF football game
  • Large number of cars parking along Mowry Road during UF football game
    Large number of cars parking along Mowry Road during UF football game
  • Large number of cars parking near the Physics and Engineering buildings during UF football game
    Large number of cars parking near the Physics and Engineering buildings during UF football game
  • Large number of cars parking along Newell Drive during UF football game
    Large number of cars parking along Newell Drive during UF football game
  • South elevation of Gerson Hall (Fisher School of Accounting)
    South elevation of Gerson Hall (Fisher School of Accounting)
  • Construction of Hough Hall, the new home for the graduate business school (2009-11-21)
    Construction of Hough Hall, the new home for the graduate business school (2009-11-21)
  • Construction of Hough Hall, the new home for the graduate business school (2009-11-21)
    Construction of Hough Hall, the new home for the graduate business school (2009-11-21)
  • Maguire Apartments, used for graduate and family housing
    Maguire Apartments, used for graduate and family housing
  • Statue of Albert Murphree with beer bottle placed in outstretched hand.
    Statue of Albert Murphree with beer bottle placed in outstretched hand.
  • Nanoscale Research Facility building
    Nanoscale Research Facility building
  • Pedestrian and cyclist tunnel under 13th Street (US Route 441) connecting Norman Hall to the main campus
    Pedestrian and cyclist tunnel under 13th Street (US Route 441) connecting Norman Hall to the main campus
  • Construction of Student Health Care center in October 2009
    Construction of Student Health Care center in October 2009
  • Construction of Student Health Care center in October 2009
    Construction of Student Health Care center in October 2009
  • University of Florida Century Tower and Auditorium
    University of Florida Century Tower and Auditorium
  • New Transportation and Parking Services building and parking garage
    New Transportation and Parking Services building and parking garage
  • University Village Apartments. Used for graduate and family housing.
    University Village Apartments. Used for graduate and family housing.

--WillMcC (talk) 02:07, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some proposed changes

I feel that is article could use a makeover, so I am proposing that we:

  • Break down some of the larger sections. UF has a pretty significant history and I believe that warrants a the creation History of the University of Florida article that would contain information about the historic buildings and the historic district.
  • Trim the number of images in the article. A picture of the Century Tower is fine. A single picture of the stadium is also fine. But multiple picture of the dorms or a view of the stadium from a different angle is a little overboard, especially if they aren't referenced in the text. I took many of the pictures around campus for use in the articles where they were needed, but they aren't necessarily needed for the UF main article. The Wikimedia Commons link serves that purpose.
  • Clean up some of the text to comply with Wikipedia standards and WP:MOS (e.g. WP:NPOV)

If nobody has any objections, I will go ahead and start making a few bold edits to the article. --WillMcC (talk) 19:59, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Will, I agree. Professional quality digital photos can be a significant enhancement of the article, but they should not be added willy-nilly, nor over used. The photos should illustrate a major campus landmark and/or a major point in the text. Otherwise, the article starts to look like a bad high school yearbook. There should also be more use of well=written photo captions. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 00:34, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Endeavor to be a Feature Article

You know: I really think we should revamp this article so that it is in compliance with Feature Article standards. It has to be well-written, comprehensive, well-researched, neutral, and stable. The style must provide a lead, have appropriate structure, and have consistent citations. The images must be in compliance with copyright standards, and the length must not go into unnecessary details. NorwalkJames (talk) 01:52, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We ought to try to get it to Good Article status first. The article was submitted as a GA candidate in January 2008, long before it was anywhere near ready. You have improved a lot of the article, but it will get torn to shreds at FAC in its current state. Take a look at the comments from the GAC reviewer when she failed the article here; virtually none of the issues she highlighted were corrected during the article's candidacy. Citations are going to be a big issue; there is a ton of uncited stuff. More worrisome is from where some of the cited stuff is referenced; references from university's websites won't cut it at FAC. They are looking for sources independent of the university.
As to WillMcC's suggestions, I support all of his proposals. Horologium (talk) 02:09, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I see what you are saying Horologium, the article has a long way to go before it can even reach Good Article status. I also do not know if we will be able to find enough 3rd party sources to achieve the Feature Article distintion in the near future. So this could be a long-term goal that we can endeavor to achieve in the future. However I do believe that the Good Article distintion is within our grasp. NorwalkJames (talk) 13:14, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In term of coverage of the University of Florida I think there is a strong base of articles out there, multiple editors are stepping up, the Florida Gators articles is nearly complete, and this Flagship University is finally receiving the recognition that it deserves. I also agree with the suggestions by WillMcC. NorwalkJames (talk) 13:14, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Today I added a number of citations, and properly sources alot of information that had been previously stated. I think the article is well upon the way to becoming a Good Article. NorwalkJames (talk) 16:58, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with most of the comments made above about approaching the main University of Florida article with a consensus plan. It is in need of a theme, structure and a consistent writing style throughout. There is also the typical Wikipedia problem of too much detail on popular reader/editor subjects, such as football and basketball, the in-depth details of which should probably be pushed into the sports articles. Frankly, I think we need to come up with a prioritized outline, with approximate word budgets for each section, and see if we can arrive at a consensus among the actively involved writers and editors. Then we can talk about better layout, upgraded graphics, and better photo selection and placement . . . I can write, but I have no present ability in manipulating the Wiki graphics codes.

Guys, one other thing to be aware of -- a great deal of the early 20th century historical information cited on the University of Florida's own webpages is either inaccurate, contradictory or presented with such lack of detail as to be seriously misleading. I would not footnote anything to the UF website's brief historical explanations without including a second corroborating citation. There have been several good hardcover histories of the university published over the years, and I may see if I can locate some new or used copies of these books on line to share with the team. The main UF libraries also have numerous great references about the university's early history, but, unfortunately, I will probably not get down to Gainesville until mid-September. Some of these materials may be available on line through the UF libraries, however. I'll check----I just received my alumni libray privileges a few weeks ago, and I have not had a chance to play with the on line search functions yet. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 06:15, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Bostic(k) Golf Course -- Spelling Correction

Guys and gals, I've been cleaning up the text of the Florida Gators article, but I have no clue how to manipulate the more arcane Wikipedia codes. The name of the Mark Bostick Golf Course is prominently misspelled, without the the "k" on the end of "Bostick," and I have no idea how to correct the title on the current Mark Bostic [sic] Golf Course article and synchronize all of the Wiki cross-links. Can one of you veterans help with the correction? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 13:18, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NorwalkJames, thanks for the fix! You'll have to teach me some of the coding tricks when you have time. I found a similar problem with the NACDA Directors' Cup article--the possessive apostrophe is misplaced, i.e. "NACDA Director's Cup" [sic]. It's supposed to be a plural possessive not a singular possessive. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 15:03, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to help, also to rename an article you have to press the "move" button which is located to the right of the "history" button. You will have to stipulate why you wish to rename the article. Also in terms of horrible grammar on UF related articles: this just seems to be a flaw in Wikipedia (these errors have been accumulating for years). Do not get me wrong it is the 8th most popular site on the internet and next to Ufl.edu and Gatorzone.com is the 3rd best reference that I can think of (the University of Florida wikipedia article alone gets about 50k hits a month). The problem is people from all different education levels have the option of tweaking UF related articles. So I think we should all endeavor to watch for bad grammar when the edits occur. The key is to keep on top of it before it gets out of hand. NorwalkJames (talk) 15:29, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Greek Life at the University of Florida

Wikipedia is considering deleting the Greek Life at the University of Florida article. User:Scpmarlins nominated for the article to be deleted after someone nominated to delete the Greek Life at the University of Central Florida article.Jccort (talk) 02:51, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking as someone who was an active member of an undergraduate social fraternity at Florida, I don't have overwhelmingly strong feelings about it. However, given the historical strength of the UF Greek system (around 15% of all undergrads or 5,000 student at any given time), it would seem to be a topic on which many folks, especially incoming students, would want to have some information. Within the Wiki landscape, there appear to be few school-specific Greek system articles. Perhaps we should fold a well-written paragraph or two regarding the UF Greek system back into the main University of Florida article (Student Life section). IMHO, if we are going to do it, links to individual fraternity events of marginal general interest (Derby Days, Bed Race, etc.) need to be excluded, and lists of fraternities and sororities can be easily be relegated to footnotes. If we do this, it should be done right, and some real and meaningful information should be provided. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 12:36, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Dirtlawyer1, however I wonder if we can find a list of fraternities and sororities located on campus that is complete. Lists of Greek life organizations on collegiate websites are often incomplete and/or not up to date. I fear that the people who are interested in these types of things will see the link to an incomplete list and try to re-make the page. Fliry Vorru (talk) 21:17, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We can get current lists with a single phone call to the IFC/PHC office at the Reitz Union or student services. Rather than listing them in the body text, the lists of fraternities and sororities should probably be buried in two separate footnotes anyway. In the footnotes, we can cross-link the fraternity and sorority names to their national organization Wiki articles. We can also link via footnotes to IFC, PHC and Student Services webpages. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 22:34, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Constructive Criticism Requested

Over the last 7 to 10 days, I have done significant re-writes of the Florida Gators lacrosse, Amanda O'Leary, Becky Burleigh and Ben Hill Griffin, Jr. articles. I would appreciate some suggestions for further improvements and some constructive criticism of my handiwork to date. My next project is to re-work the Florida Gators soccer article. Cheers. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 15:03, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say it all looks very nice. Well planned and well written. I would question is the inclusion of a recruiting section in the women's lacrosse article. Is this year's inaugural recruiting going to be something of note 1, 3, or 5 years from now? Is it "encyclopedic" in a loose sense? As a person who enjoys the recruiting side of sports in general I personally think it's interesting, but will the average person really need to know about this year's recruiting in order to garner some knowledge about the program? That's really the only question I'd ask.
Other than that, it's looking very nice. If you need pictures of anything I'd be happy to go take a few for you since I live in Gainesville right now. Just let me know. Fliry Vorru (talk) 18:19, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, sir. I included the lacrosse recruiting information as filler for the next 6-10 months. Since the program is a new start-up and has no history, I needed to include something for die-hard Gators to chew on. And the number of high-school All-Americans is quite remarkable (11 of 12 scholarship athletes are All-Americans); it's the lacrosse equivalent of Urban Meyer signing an entire class of 4 and 5-star recruits. Once the team has played its first season next spring, I will delete the the recruiting information and insert a couple of sentences about the results of their first season. The nature of these sports team articles is that they all require annual updates after the completion of their seasons anyway.
As for photos, we could use a digital shot of the in-progress construction of the new stadium (maybe an interesting perspective shot), and then another digital shot after the new field is finished at the end of the summer. We also could use a digital head shot of new coach Amanda O'Leary----do you know where she goes for happy hour?! LOL Also, see requests for additional info on the article's discussion page. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 20:22, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Other revamped UF-related articles now include Florida Gators soccer, Marshall Criser, Robert Q. Marston, E. T. York, Stephen C. O'Connell and Andrew Sledd. Comments, criticisms and suggestions for further improvements requested. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:50, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are doing an amazing job! Keep up to great work. NorwalkJames (talk) 14:10, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Newly revamped article on Buddy Alexander, two-time national championship men's golf coach, now available for Project members' review and critique. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 19:00, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Student Traditions

I think this article could use a section that talks about the Student Traditions at the University of Florida. Some of the main things to be discussed are:

Obviously they should not all be included, but it would be good to add some of them. NorwalkJames (talk) 23:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There's a few other "traditions" and parts of culture that might be of interest
  • Turlington Plaza, with the infamous Wacky Evangelists. Also the GPA Rock (or "the Potato" or "Turlington Turd"), which has long been rumored among students to be a piece of fossilized dinosaur scat.
  • The Murphree statue over by Peabody. It seems that at least every other week that someone places an drink container in his outstretched hand. A few weeks ago he had also been TP'ed. http://www.uflib.ufl.edu/ufdc/?g=all&b=UF00033802&v=00001,
  • Unofficial names for monuments on campus - Cheerios, French Fries, and the recently removed Belt Buckle
  • There is a collection of myths and urban legends at http://www.alligator.org/pt2/070815legends.php
  • Alligators on campus. There's at least one who lives in lake near Simpson/Graham dormitories, and also some in Lake Alice. Do they have a name for the one in the Simpson/Graham lake?
Some of these might be difficult to back with reliable sources, but would be nice to incorporate somehow. -:-WillMcC (talk) 01:19, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Gentlemen, as we try to upgrade the main University of Florida article to Good Article and perhaps Feature Article status, it may be necessary to pare, rather than add additional material to some sections of the main article. The emphasis should be on the core areas of discussion that are central to the university's mission (history, academics, scope of programs, admissions, rankings, overview of student activities, etc.), and in comparison to most other well-rated university articles, we already have too much detail in many less "notable" or noteworthy section topics. I know I'm the new guy here, but I am trying to learn and apply the Wiki guidelines to one of my favorite topics----my alma mater. I strongly suggest that we create a word budget for each section of the main article, and do our best not to exceed it. Maybe the solution for dealing with fun trivia that exceeds the word budget for any given topic is to relegate such arcana to footnotes. Thoughts? Reactions? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 02:00, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well we have over 25 topics that can be included in this section (and I think some of the 50,000 visitors a month who visit the UF page would love to read about our traditions). We could create a seperate article for Student Traditions that are taking up space on the main University of Florida article. The thing is we need to be real careful about establishing notability so that the other wikipedia editors do not immediately delete the Student Traditions article. I would hate to spend hours creating this article and then it immediately gets purged from wikipedia. We would have to use a plethora of outside sources so that Notability can truly be established. Thoughts? Reactions? NorwalkJames (talk) 23:11, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of Presidents of the University of Florida

Improving University of Florida articles

I think Wikiproject University of Florida could use some improvements. Here are some suggestions:

  • Revamp the University of Florida page so that it is not so long
  • Create a semi-annual newsletter to send out about what has gone on with University of Florida and Florida Gators articles. Perhaps discuss some key issues that need to be addressed.
  • Nominate an Executive Director to guide the overall project, to provide a sense of direction, and to get everything/everyone on the same page
  • Revamp the main WikiProject University of Florida page format. A Good example:WikiProject Georgia Tech
  • Revamp our goals now that the project is almost 2 years old
  • Improve the To-do list
  • Strive to have more Good articles
  • Prioritize University of Florida & Florida Gators articles by levels of importance
  • Create an Announcements Section
Comments? Thoughts? Reactions? - NorwalkJames (talk) 15:35, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures still missing as of July 2009

Main article: Buildings at the University of Florida

Academic Buildings

Health Science Center

  • Academic Research Building
  • Dental Science Building
  • Health Prof, Nursing, Pharmacy Building
  • Shands Teaching Hospital
  • Shands Patient Service Buildings
  • Human Development Center
  • Stetson Medical Sciences Building
  • Basic Science Building
  • Health Science Center Admin Services Building
  • University of Florida Veterans Administration Building
  • Davis Cancer Pavilion
  • Vet Med Teaching Hospital
  • Vet Med Academic Wing
  • Courtelis Teaching Hospital
  • Animal Science Building
  • Winn-Dixie Hope Lodge

Athletic Buildings & Facilities

Clubs/Organizations

Pictures Needing an Update

Aerial photo

I took a couple of pictures while flying over Gainesville the last weekend. I'm sure they could be put to good use. Since I have released them under CC, they can be cropped as necessary (as long as they remain CC and link back to the original)

Looking south across campus, with the stadium, the O-Dome, Shands, and many other campus buildings
Same image as above, but cropped to include just the stadium

--WillMcC (talk) 02:07, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here's an off-the-wall question: Why are we using the university's "UF" logo twice on the main and history articles, and not the university seal? Would it not be more appropriate to use the seal and logo? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 12:52, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm believe that copyright is a motivation behind it. The "UF" logo can be used freely (it does not meet the threshold of originality for copyright), whereas the UF identity (http://identity.ufl.edu/) says that the seal is reserved for "official" purposes and it also is likely copyrighted. Since free content should be used wherever possible, the wordmark is used in UF related articles. If we were to create an article or (more likely) a section of an article about the seal and/or its usage, than we may be able to use the seal under fair use. --WillMcC (talk) 19:46, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Will. I see that other university's articles, including FSU's, are using those schools' official seals, but the use is probably not authorized. At NorwalkJames' suggestion, I made contact with the university historian, Carl Van Ness. At an appropriate time, I may raise the authorization issue with him (or other friends in the general counsel's office). My first priority, however, is get better copies of head shots for university presidents and coaches for their Wiki bios----the university will probably be less concerned about unconditionally releasing old photos (no commercial value), than releasing the use of its seal. We may have to make a "fair use" argument for use of the seal. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 20:21, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm currently riding the fence on this issue. Most other university pages have the seal at the top of the infobox, it's how we identify the university, just like we have Nike's swoosh on the Nike page. It also flows really nicely into the motto section of the box, if I do say-so myself. Since the UF doesn't have the seal, it seems to stick out.
As noted above, Florida doesn't use the seal for non-athletic branding as most other universities do, they have the identity system. Just like we would for Nike, it's probably more correct to identify the university with it's current marketing branding, which would be the wordmark (the one currently at the bottom of the infobox, as it so happens)
Now, on many pages we have previous company logos, and since the seal was used as a logo, we could make a fair use claim, but it's a little thin.
It's also worth noting the seal is a derivative of the Seal of Florida, which is in the public domain, and also strange the identity system words the section about the seal in such a way to explicitly say that it's a registered trademark, but makes no comment on it's copyright status. I'm not saying it's not copyrighted, but it might be worth someone taking a look at it. Terinjokes (talk) 05:09, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, I never noticed that this article didn't have the university's seal in the infobox. It's our standard so I've corrected that. ElKevbo (talk) 06:30, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Glad to see my rant made something happen, and pretty quickly too. :) Terinjokes (talk) 23:58, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject University of Florida on Facebook

  • The Official Wikiproject University of Florida now has a group on Facebook. This seemed like a good idea considering that we now have over 30 members.[4]
  • Yes, IMHO, we need an organizational structure. Some sort of UF Project chairman, coordinator or director would be entirely appropriate . . . and, no, I'm not volunteering to do it. We need someone who has the free time to coordinate volunteer efforts by posted Wiki messages, outside e-mail and telephone calls with the active members of the group. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 23:45, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Maybe we can contact the University of Florida Student Government and have them appoint a current student (or perhaps the University of Florida Alumni Association). However, I think first dibbs should be given out to a current member who would has already proven themselves worthy of the task. This is a big responsibility and I would be willing to write a Letter of Recommendation for anyone willing to serve in this capacity for a year (it would also look good on a resume). NorwalkJames (talk) 00:28, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • It would require a student of very substantial maturity. Given the time constraints of (responsible) students, perhaps an adult UF Project member would be best. Do you have someone in mind? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 00:50, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • It really depends on who would want to take the position. I think a couple of the current members might have what it takes to bring the project to the next level. Obviously I will continue to play a support role (I would assume you will as well?). Ideally what would be best is if we had a yearly Director to oversee the project. The Director could have a vision, and benchmarks for how the project could improve for the academic year (obviously this is a long term project, but I think we can make a dent if we focus our efforts on a yearly basis). Right now the project is at a point where we have a significant amount of articles, but unfortunately the majority are mere stubs and expansion is needed. We have all of the individual colleges & schools but they also fail to quantify what they can offer the academic community. In addition, the University of Florida has over 800 famous alumni listed on wikipedia, hundreds of olympians, and a countless number of athletes that could use expansions as well. Lastly, the university has a major research component that could be revamped. I could go on and on about how the project could be improved, but overall progress is being made each day. I think we need more man-power, a plan of action, greater enthusiasm, and a longterm stategy for improving the project. NorwalkJames (talk) 03:17, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lovebug Myth

Does anyone think it is necessary to add a section about the Love Bug Myth. Its possible to write two paragraphs about it, and there are plenty of sources on the internet. 03:30, 7 September 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.121.251.65 (talk)

All-Steinway Schools

See also Category talk:All-Steinway Schools. Fanoftheworld (talk) 19:16, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Leadwreck

The lead paragraph of this article is an absolute peacock and weasel-worded booster wreck. It mentions unencyclopedic and non-neutral superlatives like "prestigious" twice, no fewer than five overt rankings, four appeals to "largest", and a prevalence of other pointless peacock words such as "major", "continuously", "consistently", "well-known". The lead conveys no actual information except that which allows it to assert its dominance (presumably over unmentioned rival institutions). The university press office would be proud, but this Wikipedian is not. Madcoverboy (talk) 04:02, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Enough edit-warring

This is unacceptable. As I just saw it now, I won't hand out blocks yet, but further reverts by the same users will result in blocks being handed out. Enigmamsg 03:31, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bernie Machen's 2009 US News Ranking

I tend to agree. At a minimum, the wording should be condensed immensely to one line at the most. This kind of gamesmanship with the USN&WR rankings isn't new or particularly notable. In fact, it's one of the main reasons why higher education scholars condemn the rankings and strongly discourage their use. ElKevbo (talk) 03:49, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have rewritten the controversial passage to include only the facts, removing incendiary words such as "scandal" and "used," and deleting the St. Petersburg Times editorial reference—editorials by definition are not reliable sources, but an expression of opinion. I believe the rewritten passage complies with both WP:WEIGHT and WP:NPOV. Frankly, I think the rewritten passage still gives far more attention to the subject than it objectively deserves, but I'll let it go at that . . . .
I would be grateful if someone would discuss with our new young "editor" that the deletion of properly sourced statements because he disagrees with them (in his opinion), the inclusion of gratuitous and non-pertinent references to the athletic accomplishments of other universities, and the insertion of blog-sourced humorous references to "jorts" (see diff [[5]], do not necessarily constitute an exercise of "free speech" or even good Wikipedia editing. Frankly, it is clear anyone who objectively assesses the "editor's" intent, as evidenced by his original edit, that it was to vandalize the article in accordance with his own biases and attempts at humor. I do not believe it deserves much of an assumption of Wikipedia "good faith" in this light.
Moreover, someone should also explain to the young "editor" who "Jccort" was and is—the originator of both the FSU and UF Wikiprojects. I have seen no evidence of pro-UF/anti-FSU bias in Jccort's work, only an objective attempt to paint both institutions in their respective "best lights." It is regrettable that our young editor feels the need to exercise his anti-UF bias in any way possible, rather than finding something constructive to do on Wiklipedia. Well, that's my "opinion," for what it's worth. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:20, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Contribution to Florida's domestic product

An editor added text that suggested that UF indirectly generated so many jobs and so much domestic product to Florida's economy. These are the types of figures that aficionados like to promulgate. C-of-c stuff. Great in print or in a speech. If you total them all up, they amount to a lot more jobs and a lot more product than a given area has or can contain.

One problem here is the state is subsidizing 60% or more of the tuition. So if I tax 10 million people $100 each = $1 billion. Then I hand it back to them through an institution, how much have I "contributed" to the economy? It just doesn't make sense in aggregate. Smoke and mirrors. Similarly for taking their tuition and handing it back to the parents through an institution. "Filtering" money is not necessarily helpful. One might argue that it is economically inefficient since it slows it down. This is a zero sum game without manufacturing or credit (banking). Student7 (talk) 13:04, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's not as cut and dry as you're saying. The article discusses how they came up with those numbers, and it includes things like research, health care, and visitors to the university (sports, museums, performing arts), as well as the spin-off companies making various widgets. These are things that wouldn't be produced if the university didn't exist as it does, regardless of how else the tax money might be spent. I reworded the sentence to be closer to the source.--Cúchullain t/c 14:46, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This is not smoke and mirrors - the report was commissioned by the Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences. Please keep in mind that IFAS is primarily funded by the United States Government and the State of Florida. Jccort (talk) 01:31, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Merger proposal

I propose that Gator Wrap Ring be merged into University of Florida. I think that the content in the Gator Wrap Ring article can easily be explained in the context of University of Florida, and the University of Florida article is of a reasonable size in which the merging of Gator Wrap Ring will not cause any problems as far as article size or undue weight is concerned. The Gator Wrap Ring is a small article, especially when one removes info that already appears in the U of Fl article. Dave [[WP:NPP|You can help!]] (talk) 02:17, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Admissions rates

For some reason comparing and contrasting schools' admissions rates has become something of a pissing contest, and it's even sillier than most forms of boosterism. The real significance of the admissions rate statistic is internal to the institution; it has very little to do with what's going on at other schools. For example, ten years ago the University of North Florida had nearly open admissions. Since then its admissions rate has dropped precipitously; in 2007-2008 it was under 64% and last year it dropped to under 50%. The reason? The school hit its enrollment cap. Staying the size it wanted meant accepting fewer applicants; accepting fewer applicants meant accepting the applicants with the highest grades and test scores.
Additionally, admissions rates are affected by the number of applicants, which in turn is affected by college recruitment. There are also different ways of calculating the number (freshman applicants vs. total applicants, etc.) Bottom line, comparing admissions rates between (sometimes very different) schools is unnecessary boostersism at best and misleading twaddle at worst.Cúchullain t/c 15:30, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There's also the issue of scholarships to top applicants and college recruiting, both of which affect admissions rates. Also, the effect of external factors such as budget cuts and tuition raises, which may lower the total number of applicants, thereby raising the admissions rate even if the admissions standards aren't lowered. Grumble grumble.--Cúchullain t/c 13:54, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Notable alums

In the section on notable alums I notice where Joe Kittinger, former command pilot and record holder for longest, fastest and highest skydive, is not on here. I'm not a contributor,but thought someone who was may want to look at this and add him. He's a pretty big deal and to boot, he was born in Tampa and attended Jacksonville Bolles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.51.148.195 (talk) 19:22, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Top x00 Schools Worldwide

I noticed that the "top 100 universities worldwide" claim had no reference so I looked for one. Could only find evidence that University of Florida is consistently in top 250 (actually top 226). I elected to remove the claim completely and let somebody with a reference put in the correct number. This is the reference I found: 

*  QS World University Rankings website's U of Fl page -- QS World University Rankings

Dave (djkernen)|Talk to me|Please help! 14:32, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dave, the most widely recognized world-wide ranking system for universities is the Academic Ranking of World Universities. This was footnoted in the body text of the University of Florida article, but not in its lede section. I have corrected that. FYI, QS has been widely criticized and its methodology discredited over the last several years, even to the point where The Times (London) dropped QS as the source for its Times Higher Education (THE) rankings. Wikipdia editors who are far more knowledgeable than I am deleted most of the QS rankings from university articles when QS was dropped by THE. Subsequently, Wikipedia has been repeatedly besieged by single-purpose account (SPA) editors who have attempted to reinsert the QS rankings into articles about major universities. These were mostly deleted, again, last year when an SPA editor, apparently affiliated with QS, was adding them to every university article, along with various puffery statements about QS. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 15:55, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Dirtylawyer, thank you for putting in the correct number with a reference. (That was all I was asking for; I do not have another agenda.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djkernen (talk • contribs) 17:13, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Notable alumni

Surely it's worth mentioning that the journalist Dexter Filkins got his BA at UF?

File:MurphreeStatue.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:MurphreeStatue.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests October 2011
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 15:11, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Description of Public Ivy In The Wiki Article

As noted in the wiki entry of public_ivy, the term originated with a 1950's publication by Moll regarding 8 colleges. In 2001, Greene et al co-opted the term, and expanded it to nearly 30 colleges. The distinction between the first usage of the term, by Moll, and the second, by Greene, are differing in definition and prestige. While the public ivy reference is footnoted to Greene, I believe the difference should be noted in the wiki article as to not mislead the public regarding the prestige of the title in its original usage. In other words, UF wasn't one of the true public ivies as listed by moll, but as a public ivy listed by Greene. The editor who keeps reverting is a UF alum, and thus has a bias to keep it as is. I'm requesting another wiki editor please examine the matter.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.134.186.77 (talk • contribs)

I've cleaned up the wording and moved the discussion into the article body. The fuller discussion belongs there rather than the lead, though it doesn't need any more than a brief sentence indicating that UF is on the Greenes' list of the Public Ivies. At any rate, I can assure you that almost no one cares one way or the other about these lists besides current and former students.Cúchullain t/c 20:54, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:University_of_Florida&oldid=573563487"