Talk:List of Amherst College people

Untitled

School year books should provide plentiful copyright free COMMONS images for the older alumni bios. Any at the school have a scanner? In ictu oculi (talk) 00:28, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

WP:Notability

David, I think the onus is on the user who adds someone (to a list of notable people) to explain why that someone is notable. So I'll ask: who the heck is J. Ashley Ebersole 2001? A google search shows a mock trial win and some things in the Student. That seems about as far from notable as you can get, much less notable than, say, Ilya Somin 1995, who doesn't have a mention on the page.

I would also disagree with the addition of Keats to the page. Keats apparently added himself; but at least his "accomplishments" (sic) have gotten him some newspaper articles.

If you have some information on Ebersole that I don't, why not write a brief article? -Rjyanco 07:10, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

All I'm trying to do is end a developing edit war: this individual has been added and removed four or five times, mostly without discussion. Most of the deletions (all of which were done without comment) have been performed by anonymous users. This is the reason I restored Ebersole pending discussion: my policy is to revert controversial edits by anonymous users but retain those made by registered users, calling for discussion in both cases. I personally think you make a compelling case for removing Ebersole, hopefully one that will end the war. -David Schaich 19:50, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, I just removed Keats and Ebersole, both of whom seem to have added themselves, and neither of whom seem remotely notable. (At least Keats added a Wikipedia page about himself, but that just reinforces his non-notability.) -Rjyanco 13:56, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Notability

Hi. I've looked over this list, and there seem to be a few people here who are simply not notable. For example: "John Foley 1987, businessman and primary Boston official of Wayzata Investment Partners." I'm going to purge some of these people soon (I'll add to this list in a little while). If anyone objects to this, please make your objections known. IronDuke 03:54, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

My list

Here is my list of questionable folks (may have more later). Everyone, please weigh in and defend them if you feel so inclined.

• William S. Clark 1848, second president of the Massachusetts Agricultural College
• Historian Gary Kornblith 1973
• Preacher Uriah Balkam 1837, professor at Bates College
• John Foley 1987, businessman and primary Boston official of Wayzata Investment Partners

IronDuke

I'll defend Clark; see his article for more. (a) he was a UMass president, albeit when it was still Mass Aggie, (b) he was hugely influential in Japan; if memory serves me, he was responsible for bringing the Japanese students to Amherst who then initiated Amherst's link with Doshisha U. (c) if necessary, there's a big memorial to him on the UMass campus.

Kornblith and Balkam may be defensible; I'm suspicious of Balkam simply because Bates boosters have a history of seeding Wikipedia with dubious links to their article wherever they can find a pretext, but given his class year and the College's focus on the clergy at that time, he may have been an influential figure. (He's close to Beecher vintage.) I'd want to know more about Kornblith.

I'd say Foley can be removed. If he changes the world, it's easy enough to add him back in. - Pjmorse 13:11, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback, Pj. I'm leaving Clark, deleting the rest. But I'm still flexible on the subject. IronDuke 03:34, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

I just removed this recent addition:

• George Freeman 1971, assistant general counsel, The New York Times

My reasoning: First, The link is clearly not to anyone who was assistant general counsel to anything. Second, there's no reason to expect that "assistant general counsel" at the New York Times reaches our standard of notability, particularly in the lawyers-and-judges category. Third, the user then went on to remove Arkes from faculty without an explanation, which inclines me to distrust their edits. I'm open for correction if anyone can argue at least point #2 (and fix point #1.) - Pjmorse 23:56, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

I second this... IronDuke 00:18, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree. I should have reverted both, but missed one. -David Schaich ^Talk/_Cont 01:04, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Seems like we have a growing list again. Someone added two names, one being Keats again (see discussion above) and another being Itamar Har-Even '94. I removed Har-Even, listed out of order under "Businesspeople" with the dubious title of "Tycoon," because (a) I've not heard of him since he graduated, (b) he's a red link, and (c) I want more proof of notability. (Plus he was added by an unregistered user.) He may in fact be a tycoon, but no documentation has been offered.

However, I left Keats in this time. I may have a soft spot for him since I remember him (two years ahead of me) as the driving force behind the only campus conservative publication at the time; I guess that was how his penchant for messing with people's heads manifested at the time. His wikipedia page has seen extensive contribution/revision from people who aren't him, and includes many references; he has had some not-insignificant media attention.

There's definitely some fodder for "not notable" removals in here, though. Dybner '94 (another name I remember!) leaps to mind, but only because it's a name I remember; there are others who are strangers to me then and now. --Pjmorse 14:05, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I've removed a number of people without articles. This doesn't mean that everyone with an article is notable, but if someone doesn't have an article it's hard to say they're notable. MrVibrating (talk) 06:18, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't think whether or not somebody has a Wikipedia article is a reliable guide to their notability. One of the main purposes of lists such as this is to include notable entries that may not have articles, since they can't be included in the corresponding categories. -David Schaich ^Talk/_Cont 18:05, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

What criteria do you propose for notability? Whether someone has a WP page is a reliable guide to their notability because there are established standards for the notability of articles on people. And far more people are involved in the oversight of article notability than in the oversight of college notable alum lists. Note that I'm only talking about removing people w/o articles--there could be additional criteria for people w/ articles, or everyone w/ an article could be included. MrVibrating (talk) 10:27, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Also see Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Lists_of_people, which takes precedence because it is more specific (lists of people vs. lists). I'm re-removing the people w/o articles. MrVibrating (talk) 18:16, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Would the fictional Athena College in Philip Roth's book (and later movie) The Human Stain warrant inclusion under the section "fictional characters" for Amherst ? Roth's biography states that Athena was Amherst, fictionalized. Thanks, Nathan Frank '90 144.73.94.27 (talk) 22:12, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Clarifications

The new edit for Charles Pratt mentions that he donated Pratt Gymnasium and Pratt Dorm. Unfortunately, current campus constructions requires that the second be disambiguated: Did he donate Charles Pratt (formerly the Natural History Museum and geology building) or Morris Pratt (between Morrow and Converse, looks out on Noah Webster's statue)? - Pjmorse 11:47, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Faculty

With a list of "notable faculty" (albeit not in list format) already in the main article, do we need the tacked-on graph here? Many of them don't seem particularly notable to me; the ones worth mentioning (IMO) are already in the College article.

If we should keep them, we should do list format like the notable alumni. - Pjmorse 16:05, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

How's it look now? I converted the faculty into a list, added a couple from the Amherst College article, and removed all of those with red links or whose articles didn't include any information about Amherst. I've tried to include information about what they taught and when, along with noting important prizes. I think this list is worth keeping since the one in the main article only mentions faculty currently teaching at Amherst. -David Schaich ^Talk/_Cont 21:12, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Rosen

Seems like this one has come up before. I just removed

• Actress Daphne Rosen

...because I can't find any evidence that she attended/graduated from the College. I think if we're linking alumni, the link should include a class year; Rosen isn't in the alumni database under that name. The bio on her website (NSFW, but R rather than X rated) says she graduated, but doesn't say when (or under what name.) The Wikipedia page hedges with "may have attended." Anyone want to admit they know more? - Pjmorse 23:16, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Ahh, the things you see when you follow links on Wikipedia... IronDuke 00:17, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Annnnd out it goes again. "She says so" is not evidence that Rosen attended Amherst College. Let me put that in more clear terms: the only sources tying Rosen to Amherst College are her, and articles quoting her. She's not in the alumni database under the name "Daphne Rosen." (So don't revert saying, "Someone should look it up." I did. She's not there.) This doesn't mean she didn't attend the College; it means that there's no evidence that she attended the College. Could she have attended under a different name? Sure, but we don't know that name, so we can't look it up. Could she have attended and dropped out? Again, sure, but I don't have the resources to check that without more details. Show me some other evidence, and I'll be happy to restore the link, but until you can do that I'll keep reverting it. - Pjmorse 20:27, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Pulitzer

Are we getting to need a Pulitzer Prize category? Applegate is the first alum on the list, but there are three faculty with them.--Pjmorse 12:49, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Article name

Just a thought, but would anyone consider renaming this article to something a bit less awkward sounding? Something like Noteworthy Members of the Amherst College Community, or Noteworthy people at Amherst College. While neither of these are great alternatives, I thought maybe someone could come up with an improvement. Msbradbury 22:39, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

The "List of X people" is pretty standard (cf. Category:Lists of people by college affiliation and Category:Lists of people by university in the United States). It's also more concise and inclusive than those you've proposed; I can't come up with anything better. -David Schaich ^Talk/_Cont 14:46, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

notability not established

Magnolia677 recently removed a number of individuals from this list, claiming that their notability was not established . This set consisted of the individuals who do not have individual Wikipedia entries in just the one section === Diplomats and government officials === (but ignoring the same in other sections). Magnolia677 seems to be applying the notability standard for having a separate Wikipedia entry (though not having one doesn’t mean that one shouldn’t have one). I would argue in any case that the standard should be different within this page — people who take on important roles in government, Ambassadors and such, may not be generally notable but are still of interest to the Amherst College community and others who might come to this page. So this revision should be reverted. — Andy Anderson 21:15, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

@AndyAnderson: Typically, when creating a standalone list of people, it is good practice to "document the list selection criteria on the talk page of the list", per WP:LISTPEOPLE. This was not done, although an editor's note was added here way back in 2012 outlining that the criteria for inclusion on this list would be that: "Only people who already have a Wikipedia article may appear here as Notable people.... All others will be deleted without further explanation." Looking at the discussions on the talk page above, attempts to include individuals who do not have a Wikipedia article have been rejected. Moreover, even if there was a consensus to use less stringent selection criteria, for example, the one discussed in the first point at WP:CSC, it is doubtful that even then the names that were removed would meet the notability requirements, per WP:POLOUTCOMES. If you would like to see the selection criteria for this article changed so that "people who take on important roles in government" can be included, please gain a consensus. Magnolia677 (talk) 11:09, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Inconsistent ordering

Some of these sections appear to be ordered alphabetically, others chronologically by year of graduation. Should they not be consistent? - Kzirkel (talk) 14:19, 6 September 2021 (UTC)