Talk:Auburn University Marching Band

a couple questions

Is this band a student run or university staff run band? Is it part of the music department? I saw an info box on a band page, maybe that would be something to add (I'll try to do it a bit later). --Rocksanddirt 20:34, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Music department; full paid staff. Heck, they even have some (partial) scholarships to give out. AUTiger » talk 20:42, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Wow. Scholarships! I presume one gets academic credit also (at least a wee bit). --Rocksanddirt 15:04, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

One hour credit (valid as elective hours in any curricula) for MUSI-1100. Theoretically, one could accumulate 4 hours of elective credit (= 1+ normal class) over the course of a normal (4yr) undergrad career. AUTiger » talk 15:47, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

So, just enough units/credits to avoid taking that one extra class during the fall...Rocksanddirt 19:46, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

?? Not sure I understand what you mean - most will be taking a full load in their curriculum, plus the 1 credit hour during fall for band which takes substantially more time than the normal classroom hours -> credit hours ratio. AUTiger » talk 20:54, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

When I was at Cal the amount of credits for most classes was either three or four. To count as full load one needed 12 credits, to count as a full load for some wide spread scholarship programs one needed 12.5 or 13 credits. so if you had three 4 unit classes and got a credit for band....you were all set....rather than another three unit class. Even though the hours for Band are substantial, they were not in very far in excess of many of the classes I had with labs, and high expectations. The effect of not getting any credits for Band cut down on the number of people who did band all four years for sure. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rocksanddirt (talk • contribs) 9 July 2007, 12:23 (UTC).

Understand; yes, that could happen, but as I understand it, these days at AU the first two years (aka core curriculm) are now pretty regimented/standard and once you get into your major things are pretty full too assuming you want to finish in the "standard" amount of time. AUTiger » talk 20:04, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Theoretically, one could accumulate 4 hours of elective credit (= 1+ normal class) over the course of a normal (4yr) undergrad career. There have been some who have gotten as many as 5 or 6 credits over the course of their undergraduate careers. Maybe the AUMB should start a 4 or More club like they have at UGA? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Collimd (talk • contribs) 14:44, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Info on band currently on Wikipedia

There is some info on the Auburn University page on the band and its visual ensemble, the Tiger Eyes, that needs to be incorporated into the new article. I created a main article link, but my wiki skills aren't to good to create new parts of an article. Some help in this area would be nice. If there are any requests for photos, I can provide them from the past year. Any other years, ask the band's webmaster. If you need any info at all the webmaster can help you out for most of your questions. This wikipage has the potential to grow, so please explore the bands website more. I could put in what I know from having played and worked for the band within the past 5 years, but I'd like to see what the outside world can dig up first.Dennibr 05:12, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Dennibr; I appreciate you effort (and that of Stephenjoshd) to expand this article; however, to make it a good wikipedia article and the reason why I didn't include substantially more info from the AUMB website is we need to find secondary sources for material rather than relying strictly on the AUMB website which is a primary source and considered autobiographical/promotional. If you know of or can find book references and/or news articles about the AUMB, it would be extremely helpful. Thanks and WDE! AUTiger » talk

I am currently looking for more secondary sources, I added a couple of newspaper articles.hopefully I will add more later tonight, this is my first attempt at a serious contribution to wikipedia, so feel free to correct me if (when) I make mistakes Stephenjoshd 16:58, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Excellent; great to see you using the cite templates too. Take a look at the Fightin' Texas Aggie Band article which made Featured Article status (which surprised me since it relies a bit too much on their official website IMO). Btw, you both should consider adding yourselves as participants at Wikipedia:WikiProject Marching band. Thanks and keep up the good work! AUTiger » talk 20:05, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

There is a book that the AUMB published for their 100th aniversary back in 1997, and I am sure the AU archives has more information as well. Seeing as some of this info would not be directly from the band, would it be seen as acceptable to other wikipedians? Dennibr 14:46, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Images of the AUMB

First of all, its nice that pictures have been put on the page, however, we need to find out if they would fall under the copyright of the band, the university itself, or the photographer who actually took the picture. For pictures taken from the AUMB site, I should be able to provide the names based on what season the picture is from. For example, (I'm not bragging here, but stating the truth) I was the photographer for 2006. Under one of the 2006 photos, I stated that. I am not fully claiming ownership of the picture since it was taken of the band for the band. If that needs to be changed, go ahead. I just believe that both the band/university and photographer should be given credit where possible. Dennibr 15:08, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Ooo... fun subject. The important question are who is the photographer and what is their relationship to the organization. If you were the photographer, did you get paid for that position? Any kind of compensation, fees deferred, etc? If not, the copyright still resides with you. If you were outright paid as the band photographer, then the image copyright belongs to the organization under the works made for hire(WFH) concept. e.g. Do you know Todd, the AthDept photographer? All his images belong to the Athletic Department per WFH.

Now as to the organization; the AUMB is not a separate legal entity, merely a part of the School of Music so ultimately the University is the organization that would own the copyright, if the images were WFH. Whoever is the copyright owner gets to determine the license the image is made available under. So depending on your answers, those image may have been uploaded inappropriately. Whether the authority to release the images would have to escalate higher than the Band or SoM, and all the way up to OCM I have no clue.

As to credit, the credit for the photographer (IMO, regardless of the ownership) should be on the image description page, not in the article itself per image use policies.

I have a few pics of the band myself and can easily take more this season if necessary; I do a bit of photography myself. AUTiger » talk 19:09, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

As Autiger said, if you did not get paid (or receive other compensation) you have the copyright, and can do whatever you want with the pictures. Otherwise, I think the ownership would fall to Auburn's College of Liberal Arts.Stephenjoshd 05:16, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

I spoke with Dr. Good (Director of Bands) on Friday (Aug. 2) and he explained to me that all photos, taken by anyone are subject to copyright of the AUMB, in his opinion. For instance, set designs are "copyrighted" by the band, since those would be work for hire (he designed one of the eagle sets). So for a rule of thumb to go by, any photos of the band (any part) should have a copyright label on the image. This would apply, IMO, for any image (taken by anyone, not just staff), since the uniform design is also owned by the band (other schools might have a similar basic design, but the end result is solely the AUMB's). This would, also IMO, a shot of a single member of the band. Most of this dealt with licensing issues with the school for postcards with the band on it. As Autiger said as his opinion above, it would also my opinion to allow documentation of who actually photographed the image, if that information is known or can readily be obtained.Dennibr 04:35, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

The band is part of Auburn University, which is a public, state university. Any picture the University puts out is suitable for inclusion on Wikipedia, as government productions are not "copyrighted". However, pictures taken by other people could be posted through normal Wikipedia processes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.111.163.179 (talk) 13:40, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Tiger Eyes (Auxillaries)

Should the Tiger Eyes be mentioned under instrumentation, or should a separate heading be made for them? If it is decided that we give them their own heading, then I think it would be appropriate under that section to give a brief history of the sections and how they were intergrated as one visual ensemble. Dennibr 16:00, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Probably give them a separate section and certainly agree about the history. Ultimately as this article develops (and as I put some major renovation work into Auburn University, the text at the AU article about both will get downsized substantially. AUTiger » talk 19:09, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

It seems that putting the Tiger Eyes under Traditions seems to demote them as not actually a part of the band, when in fact they are. Maybe we should rename the instrumentation section to "sections" instead??? Or give them an entire subsection??? Dennibr 20:07, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

This discussion tranformed into the Content Restructuring discussion. They were separated for clarity. Dennibr 22:18, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Content Restructuring

(outdent) Ok here's a proposed restructuring:

1. History
2. Organization
   1. Staff (new)
   2. Instrumentation
   3. Tiger Eyes
   4. Rat Program
3. Traditions
   1. Tiger Walk
   2. Spirit March and 4 Corners Pep Rally
   3. March Around
   4. Pregame
   5. Halftime
   6. Singing the Alma Mater
4. Band Camp
5. References
6. External links

What do you think? AUTiger » talk 22:35, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

I like the "Organization" heading, but I would categorize the Rat program under Traditions. In doing that, those traditions that you have above would need to be renamed "Game Day Traditions", as the Rat program begins during band camp and continues throughout the season. I think the author of the rat program info would agree with me, as he is serving as one of the rat leaders. There are other traditions that the band has that may be considered somewhat unique, or that the band prides themselves with doing that would not fit in with the other "Game Day Traditions." That information would generally be from a first person source, so it may not be proper material just yet.

Back to the Organization heading, what info do you plan to put under staff? Would it just be a further listing of assistant directors, or would there be other listings as well? Should reference be made to the support fraternity and sorority groups that help the band as well (See The Pride of the Sunshine)? How much detail should we be getting into? Dennibr 03:02, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Dennibr that the RAT program should be listed under traditions. Perhaps we could list Game Day Traditions and then Other Traditions. As far as the organization heading, under staff I assume a listing of assistants, GTA's and perhaps student leadership positions (Drum major, etc) The support fraternities and sororities should probably get their own heading.

Good call with the Tiger Eyes, listing them under traditions is probably the wrong place (guess I shouldn't have put them there...)Stephenjoshd 05:31, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

I'll defer to you guys on which section to put the RAT program; I was just interpreting it as a subsection of the membership. The two different Traditions sections sound fine, just FYI it will be Game day traditions; lower caps per WP:MOS. As for staff, I think it would be appropriate to have a short bio (paragraph each, at most) of Drs. Good and Spurlin, (as they are unlikely to merit their own articles re: WP:BIO) as well as a listing of assistants. Having student leaders (DMs, etc) listed would be fine too. AUTiger » talk 18:01, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Autiger, thank you for helping to guide this project. I didn't know that Wikipedia was as picky as my 10th grade English teacher! (Does Wikipedia have spellcheck?) As for the short bios for the directors, what is the best way to get info on them, as most of it is on the band website? Should we also give bios to previous but historically significant directors?

For the rest of the layout of the article, it does make much more sense to keep band traditions separate from the game day traditions that the fans are exposed to. I would like it if some one from KKPsi or TBS could detail how their groups support the band. I am not a member of KKPsi (Yet), so I don't want to touch those sections unless it is necessary. With that said, I'd like to offer the following "fleshed out" restructuring (which is similar to the one offered by Autiger):

1. History
2. Organization
   1. Staff (new)
      1. Directors (new)
      2. Support staff (new)
         1. Graduate Teaching Assistants (new)
         2. Student Leadership (new)
   2. Instrumentation
   3. Tiger Eyes
3. Traditions
   1. Game day traditions (new)
      1. Tiger Walk
      2. Spirit March and 4 Corners Pep Rally
      3. March Around
      4. Pregame
      5. Halftime
      6. Tiger Bandits (new)
      7. Singing the Alma Mater
   2. Band Traditions (new)
      1. Rat Program
      2. Alumni Band (new)
4. Band Camp
5. Support organizations (new)
   1. Kappa Kappa Psi
   2. Tau Beta Sigma
6. References
7. External links

Note that I have kept KKPsi and TBS separate from the support staff under organization. I suggest that it is done this way because those groups are not seen as staff, their involvement goes beyond that of the marching band, etc.

Please comment on the structure, and note any changes that need to be made to adhere to the style guide. Thanks! Dennibr 20:28, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

LOL, it's really not quite that bad on style and guidelines; ok, maybe it is, but it's not that big a deal if you get something wrong - no one is going to convene a firing squad or drop you a letter grade. However, the closer to MOS it is, the more likely it could earn a good rating if submitted to the recognition process. The quick and dirty on section heading capitalization: only capitalize the first word and proper names, everything else in the heading (or article title for that matter) is lower case. This is different from the "capitalize everything in a title" style you might be used to, so just remember that as you add those new sections. :-)

Bios probably do come from the AUMB site, but it's possible Spurlin may still have one online at LSU which would be nice to have as an additional source. As to historical director bios (assume you mainly mean Vinson?), that could be handled under history (would be nice at some point to convert that section into prose rather than a bulleted list) or called out as a separate sub-section (Notable former directors?) at the bottom of Organization. Also, some section hierarchy is good, but I'd be careful about getting too deep; for instance, can GTAs and Student leadership live at the same level as Directors? Also in the structure, I wonder if Band camp might move under Band traditions?

Btw, Firefox 2.x includes an inline spell-checker for big text fields. I recommend Firefox generally, but the spell-check is very helpful for editing Wikipedia. Oh, and thanks, it's my pleasure; thank you guys for doing the real heavy work of expanding the article which was probably going to languish on my To Do list. AUTiger » talk 21:51, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

I did some restructuring based on Autiger's first proposed restructuring. I like the fleshed out version that you created, Dennibr. However, I do think that GTA's and student leaders can be placed in the same level of the hierarchy as the directors (which is how it is now). Just my $.02. As far as sources for the bios, the little that I wrote came from the band site and a bio I found on Dr. Good on the Macy's Great American Marching Band site. I will look and see if the LSU site has anything on Dr. Spurlin.

With the history section, we need to be careful not to parrot the AUMB site. Rewriting the history in prose would probably allow the incorporation of previous director bios into that section.

Also, do you guys think a subsection about the basketball pep band is appropriate? It is made up of members of the AUMB, and performs similar functions at basketball games. Maybe in a section near the end?Stephenjoshd 23:29, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Dr. Spurlin's bio is still on the Bands site. However, we don't know if they plan to take it down, so it could become worthless. I do mean Dr. Vinson BTW, since he has been made Director of Bands Emeritus. The history section should keep the date format in prose, but should not get off the time line as the actual band's history page does. From recent edits (by other users), the staff section seems to be including more information than needed. The statement about paid staff is redundant. It would be obvious to anyone that the directors would get paid. I would also assume that other readers would know that the GTAs are also compensated. I'll do a quick fix to correct that. Also, I will be changing "Rat Leaders" to Freshmen advisers, as the Rat leaders would be the colloquial title.

As far as including the basketball pep band goes, I would vote not to include it, because of its size. Not all of the AUMB members participate, as the instrumentation changes slightly and there is a reduction of parts. However, I may be seen as biased since I haven't directly participated in the band. What I know comes from some of my friends in that band. It might be better to create an Auburn University Bands wiki page and then list it there. That way the symphonic and jazz bands may also be listed.Dennibr 22:56, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh boy... I'm no good at navigating Wikipedia talk pages. Anyway. I'd just like to note that "tradition" isn't really a good word to describe the RAT Program or Alumni Band. Rather, they're sub-programs of the Auburn University Marching Band. Also, I'd like to make a huge distinction between the paid staff positions and student leadership positions, since they pull from two entirely different groups. Here's my proposal.

1. History
2. Leadership
   1. Staff
      1. Directors (new)
      2. Graduate Teaching Assistants
   2. Student Leadership (new)
      1. Drum majors
      2. Freshmen advisers
      3. Section leaders
      4. Librarians
      5. Other student leadership positions
3. Organization (new)
   1. Wind instrumentation (new)
   2. Percussion
   3. Tiger Eyes
4. Traditions
   1. Tiger Walk
   2. Spirit March and Four Corners Pep Rally
   3. March Around
   4. Pregame
   5. Halftime
   6. Tiger Bandits
   7. Singing the Alma Mater
5. Other Programs (new)
   1. Rat Program
   2. Alumni Band
6. Band Camp
7. Service organizations (new)
   1. Kappa Kappa Psi
   2. Tau Beta Sigma
8. References
9. External links

What do you think? --StebenXC 00:44, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok, let's see, first: I went ahead and put a reference to the LSU site, I figure as long as they leave it up, we can leave it here, if they take it down we can remove it. We can definitely include a bio of Vinson, but if we are going to include former directors, maybe a mention of Bodie Hinton as well? Since the band's field is named after him and all.

So a no vote on the basketball pep bands. I think a new wiki for all of the AU bands could work. Presumably describing each and then a link to this page for the AUMB.

I think if we add the Service organizations section we can remove the current "Other student leadership positions" under leadership. Since it is simply referring to KKPsi and TBS. I think the service organizations definitely need a section, however, I don't think I should write it, we need to get somebody actually part of one of those organizations to do it. I could summarize their involvement if need be, but I am not in either.

I think the leadership section needs to be tightened up some, it seems a little...um... cluttered. (Too many headings, not enough content) I'm not sure exactly what to do though. StebenXC: I think a staff heading and a student leadership heading makes it clear that there is a difference. If you want to list the percussion separately from the instrumentation, that's fine, just make sure that something is said about them, other than just that there is a percussion section (I'm not quite as sure what this would be) And maybe the RAT program and the Alumni Band could just each get their own headings, instead of trying to group them together?

I hope this post is coherent, it is late and I should go to bed :-) Stephenjoshd 05:27, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I concur on the ...um.. clutter. I think the sub-sections for the student leadership positions are probably overkill; those could be paragraphs or bullet lists in the Student leadership section, without adding extra TOC headings. Also, naming student people beyond the DMs is probably not appropriate either, and I might say that about the GTAs as well - it's a bit too detailed, the people are transient (changing substantially each year) and could be questioned regarding notability. Notability does not directly apply to people just mentioned in articles, but it could be used to characterize the information as trivia which is frowned upon.

Re: Spurlin's bio at LSU; if it goes away, it'll probably still be in the Google cache or possibly in the Wayback machine/Internet Archive. Keep up the good work guys. AUTiger » talk 05:55, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I went ahead and removed TOC headings for Staff and Student Leadership positions, and changed Instrumentation to Organization. I also gave the RAT Program and Alumni Band their own headings. Does that look alright? --StebenXC 20:26, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I shouldn't have mentioned bullets; they didn't look good with the lengths of some of the paragraphs so I removed them. I also moved the pic to the right and did a bit of copyediting to make the tone more encyclopedic. That did include removing the bit about the student leaders doing more than their counterparts in other college bands as that is unlikely to be verified by a reliable source. If you have a question or concern about anything else I changed, just ask. AUTiger » talk 21:40, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Stephenjoshd, thank you for seeing what I was getting at regarding the basketball pep band, and potentially creating an AU Bands wikipage. By doing this we can keep out extra clutter, and keep a better organization of the content. I agree with you also on including Bodie Hinton to the important former director list. If I remember right, the Opelika-Auburn News article recently published mentioned that he, like Spurlin, did their undergraduate studies at UA. Maybe we could add others as we get more info. As for the service organizations, I have contacted a KKpsi brother, who in turn suggested another person. I need to find someone for TBS as well.

To all, thank you for cleaning up the clutter! As Autiger suggested, we probably can do without the names of the GTAs, and student leaders past DM, if there are any. This can cut down on future upkeep of the article. The article is starting to look good now, but I miss seeing some of the photos that were removed. I'm still waiting for a word from the band regarding the copyright on the images from their website. I feel the article would be better with more photos. As far as the instrumentation section regarding percussion (properly termed drumline / drum line, the band keeps changing the spelling!), we could keep it the way it is (this is coming from a vet of the [[Drumline|drumline). Alternatively, we could list snares, tenors, bass, cymbal, and front ensemble (pit). This really doesn't need to be done, since there is a link to Drumline. That page shows a picture of the tenors as taken by Autiger. I only included the part about front ensemble (w/ link) because not all college bands, including some SEC bands, do not have front ensembles. (That is why I chose Auburn!)

Like Stephenjoshd said before, I too hope I sound comprehensible. (I just had a thermodynamics final, and I have my last final tomorrow.) Dennibr 23:31, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Service Organizations

Brian approached me about contributing to the service organizations section, specifically in describing Kappa Kappa Psi and how the P chapter works to serve the AUMB. Below is a brief draft of what I would include in such a section:

I'll edit his description (below) later on tonight and place it on the actual page. If someone wants to go ahead, that's fine. I'm still waiting on someone to contact me from TBS. Thanks Dennibr 21:01, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

OK, I have edited what Collimd has below and placed it on the main page. In my discussions with him on Facebook, he said that it is prefered that the number of students in the AUMB that are also in KKPsi is not mentioned. Basically, I took what he gave below, chopped of the first paragraph since Kappa Kappa Psi is serving that area already, and then added a thumbnail of the crest. I also cited the sources properly (i hope). Dennibr 03:54, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Looks good, though I wonder if we shouldn't include the sentence about membership in, maybe even with a little addition:

"The fraternity operates to serve the college and university bands. While the fraternity operates as a service organization, selection for membership is considered honorary as “it is an honor to be selected to serve”. As the fraternity operates within the band program, membership in a band is a requirement for active membership in the fraternity.[cite: http://www.kkpsi.org/whoiskkpsi.asp]"

Granted this may be repeating what's on the Kappa Kappa Psi entry. Collimd 21:31, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

If there is anything that may be on that page, then in my experience, it is best not to put them on the AUMB page. That is one of the reasons your statement below was shortened a little. Dennibr 01:07, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

KKΨ – Π chapter

File:Http://www.kkpsi.org/images/CrestHi.jpg Kappa Kappa Psi, Honorary Band Fraternity, was founded in 1919 at Oklahoma Agricultural & Mechanical College (now Oklahoma State University). The fraternity operates to serve the college and university bands. While the fraternity operates as a service organization, selection for membership is considered honorary as “it is an honor to be selected to serve”. [cite: http://www.kkpsi.org/whoiskkpsi.asp]

The AUMB is served by the Pi chapter of Kappa Kappa Psi. The Pi chapter was founded in 1926, but like many chapters of the then all male organization, the chapter went inactive during the years of the Great Depression and World War II. The chapter was rechartered on June 6, 1992.

Pursuant withe purposes of Kappa Kappa Psi [cite: http://www.kkpsi.org/purposes.asp], the Pi chapter works to serve the Auburn University Bands and the students involved with the band program. Some of this service is done through providing logistical support for the bands, such as the movement and set up of equipment and supplies, while other projects, such as fund raisers and social events, are also organized or supported by the chapter as a service to the Auburn University Bands.

The Pi Chapter was recognized as a Chapter Leadership Award Finalist by Kappa Kappa Psi for the 2005-2007 biennium at the fraternity's 2007 National Convention in Orlando, Florida. [cite: http://www.kkpsi.org/PodiumSpring2007.pdf]

Collimd 20:25, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

ΤΒΣ entry

We should mention something about ΤΒΣ. I'm going ahead and making an edit, but it'll need some work.. --StebenXC 04:05, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

I have been working with TBS to get a statement of activities from them, but it has taken awhile because of band camp and classes starting up. Hopefully I can get something from them to help fill this section in. Dennibr 13:40, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, the sisters of TBS have decided that they would like something from their website, which would have to be quoted. It was not specified what exactly they wanted. If someone wanted to head over to their site and qoute some info to fill in their section, that would be great.

Dennibr 04:00, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Article stub status

With the current length and content of the article, can it still be considered a stub? If not, can we go ahead and remove the code declaring as such? Dennibr 03:54, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Definitely not a stub anymore. Great work guys! AUTiger » talk 04:35, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

OK, then as far as the WikiProject Alabama stub rating that is at the top of the talk page, I'm going to ask them to re-assess the article. From their scale, I would say we are currently in the start class. Once we get more pictures up (with proper credentials), and possibly provide citations for the traditions section (is it a good idea to have them?), we might be able to move up to B class.Dennibr 15:02, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I've reassessed the article and rated it as a B class, it has surpassed Start class too. Altairisfar^talk 05:17, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:CrestHi.jpg

The image Image:CrestHi.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

• Image:Crestlo.JPG

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --05:56, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Is it RAT or R.A.T. ?

The article needs to reflect one or the other, not both. I see that the AUMB website is also confused about this matter. However, if memory serves me correctly it has been RAT and not R.A.T. Dennibr (talk) 18:35, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

The official phrase these days is R.A.T., to emphasize that it is an acronym for Rookie Auburn Tiger and not a derogatory term. But since this is cumbersome to write, the periods are often omitted. Wikipedia should probably use the official abbreviation complete with periods, however. --StebenXC (talk) 01:20, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

R.A.T.s at Georgia Tech

In the Georgia Tech Yellow Jacket marching band, first-year members are called RATs, for Recruit At Tech (though RATS can stand for Recently Acquired Tech Students). I find it hard to believe that both Auburn and GT developed RATs by sheer coincidence. The question is, who came up with it first? Did GT steal from Auburn, or did Auburn steal from GT? I am asking the same question on Georgia Tech Yellow Jacket Marching Band. According to that page, GT first began using the term in 1915. Mellophonius (talk) 23:57, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Someone would need to check the AU band Centennial book, or the 75th Anniversary book that had details. However, since GT played Auburn every year up until the late 1980's when GT joined the ACC, it's very likely that it was cross-pollination. GT and Auburn's bands once had a close relationship since so many Auburn students hail from Georgia, and many GT students were from Alabama. Kids who'd gone to high school together often were 'reunited' at halftimes on the sidelines. But the key connection is that GT's band was started by R.L. Bidez of Mobile, Alabama in 1908, and his brother P.R. Bidez of Mobile, Alabama was the assistant at AU, and then ran AU's band from 1911 to 1951. Hence, there's probably the origin, not that it's documented anywhere!—Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.111.163.179 (talk) 13:43, 7 September 2010 (UTC)