Jump to content

Talk:North Carolina State University/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Academic Units Table

I have removed political science and put public administration in the academic units table. From what I can tell, NC State offers masters and doctorate level degrees in Public Administration, but only offers undergraduate degrees in political science. I think the table is a good source to highlight those fields where NC State gives degrees that may not be so common - I think it is pretty much expected that every university awards bachelor degrees in political science. AnotherObserver (talk) 02:07, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Flagship Status

This has been a fight for a long time. Is NCSU a flagship campus of the UNC System. Every time the words flagship appeared on the page, somebody deleted it away (usually from a UNC IP Address). I wrote to the UNC System office about the detail and this is what they had to say:

The UNC Board of Governors has not assigned official "flagship" status to any of our 16 university campuses. UNC-Chapel Hill is certainly the oldest campus, and there is no doubt that the entire University's has benefitted from Chapel Hill's national reputation for academic quality. NC State and UNC-Chapel Hill are acknowledged to be our two major research campuses, but again, neither has been granted any special flagship designation. Joni Worthington

--Thunder 23:40, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

The "flagship" word needs to be removed from the UNC article then, seeing how it's in the intro paragraph. theanphibian 02:07, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I wonder home much "Wiki time" is spent on single words. It has caused problems on the University of North Carolina System page. I'm not going to worry with the Chapel Hill page....--Thunder 13:11, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Random

The "strutting wolf" has changed. (see: http://www.ncs.ncsu.edu/trademark/data/trademarks.html) I think the picture in the article should be updated. The same goes for the Block S. --Mtrash 02:32, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Does anybody know if NC State has an official motto? I have looked all over and can’t find one. “Achieve!” is the title of NC State’s capitol campaign, not its motto. --Thunder 14:59, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Referring to the sidewalk mosaics, the page stated "unfortunately, as of May 2004, the one intended to be "E=mc^2" is still out of order".

Before the construction of this particular sidewalk, a tree stood where the equation is now. On the tree was inscribed the equation, and it was transcribed to the brick in remembrance of the tree. The equation in the brick is therefore not an error, but a historical marker; it is written as intended.

The equation itself is not what was referred to as being out of order. The white bricks were rearranged so they no longer spelled out the equation. I do not remember off-hand if it has ever been corrected. Walking past it daily made it a blur in my memory. I'll try to remember to check the next time I'm on campus. Bornyesterday July 5, 2005 16:29 (UTC)

Page Location Change

So, out of curiosity, is there any good reason why the article was changed from "North Carolina State University" to "North Carolina State University at Raleigh"? The official name of the school is the former as there is no other North Carolina State University with which it could be confused (unlike the Universities of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Wilmington, Asheville, Pembroke, etc). I don't think that the new name for the page is appropriate, and unless I am given a good reason not to, I intend on returning the article title to its original form. Bornyesterday 22:42, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

I moved it and I neglected to justify it, sorry. The official legal name of the university is “North Carolina State University at Raleigh”. This is how it is referred to in the Statues of North Carolina. [1] I agree that there are no other North Carolina State University so the “at Raleigh” is redundant, but you will have to take that up with the general assembly.--Thunder 22:38, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

That may be the official name, but it's conventional to put articles at the commonly used and recognized name, rather than the most "officially" correct name. James Earl Carter, Jr., therefore, redirects to Jimmy Carter, which is where the article lives. It is, however, appropriate to put the full "official" name in bold in the first paragraph. Consequently, I'm moving the article back to North Carolina State University -- Seth Ilys 21:01, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Kamau Kambon

Kamau Kambon continually gets deleted and added to people list for NCSU. I am wondering if his association with the university is truly notable. His notability seems to come from his recent association with NCSU and several controversial remarks. I think we should talk about it here, because a University page is not worth an edit war.--Thunder 17:02, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

I would say not. He will end up being a footnote to history and his comments have been blown way out of proportion. He is a minority of a radical minority and beyond this one 15 minute clip, we'll never hear from him again. He has contributed nothing notably good or bad to society as a whole. Bornyesterday 21:06, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
Do y'all think his article should be put up for deletion? Based on a Google search[2], he does seem to have generated some notable press. —Preost talk contribs 21:17, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
Once again, his listing under the NCSU people heading has been deleted (by an anonymous user). I am not sure if the article dedicated to him should be deleted, but his presents at NCSU seem minor. Should he remain on the NCUS people list?--Thunder 21:40, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
After investigating him further, I think he should go unlinked on this article, and I even suspect that his dedicated article should be scrapped, as well. The press he's generated seems mainly to cover the fact that he was virtually unknown before his remarks, which were immediately rejected by pretty much every one. This link offers some interesting thoughts on his non-notability. —Preost talk contribs 21:45, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Make a people page?

Should we split the people list to another page? This list could also be divided into type (like sports, entertainment, publishing etc).--Thunder 19:21, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

This is a good idea. However, there currently are not enough people under the alumni section to sustain or justify a new page. tim 17:13, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree that there is not enough volume, and until the list gets too cumbersome and long to play nice in the article, it should stay here. Do any other universities have their alumni/faculty/etc. list broken out to another article? --C.Fred 16:46, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes, some universities do have a separate peoples page (see List_of_Harvard_University_people and List_of_Ohio_State_University_people). Some fraternities and sororities have people pages too. I do not like the idea of a separate people page for multiple reasons. First, they turn into inclusion fest. Editors add people to the list just to expand it. Second, they are of very little value. Most people pages could be converted into a category.
I retract my idea and think the people of NC should remain in the same article. The list should be maintained to only include those who are truly notable. --Thunder 16:23, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

John Tesh

I have done some research, but I can't find any good sources on if John Tesh graduated or was kicked out for cheating. Can somebody site sources? The only places I see it stated that he was kicked out for cheating are mirrors of Wikipedia. --Thunder 15:14, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

All I know is that he definitely did not graduate. I don't know for what reason he left the university though. Bornyesterday 04:24, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

It's a pity that Registration & Records can't straighten this out for us. His Yahoo Music bio claims that he graduated with a degree in music and communications. C.Fred 05:28, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
If I were a betting man (and I am), I would bet that NC State didn't have a music degree in 1975. It barely has one now. I wonder if we e-mailed Tesh if he would respond. I think it is funny that on some library page he is listed on noted alumni. I guess you don't have to have a degree to be an alumn.--Thunder 14:38, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
Technically, NCSU doesn't have a music degree. It offers a music minor, and that's it. And I'm going to bet that in 1975 it didn't even have thath. Bornyesterday 21:01, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
If we can't find a good source saying he was kicked out for cheating, the comment will have to go. Perhaps we can just say, did not graduate. --Thunder 21:52, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
The whole cheating thing is false. John Tesh got a degree in communications from NCSU. He wasn't expelled for cheating. He's listed on multiple NCSU pages as an alumnus (which requires a degree), including http://gopack.collegesports.com/school-bio/ncstatecampus.html. His bio in a few places (including http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/tesh2) says he got a degree in communications. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.65.216.23 (talk • contribs) 05:25, 1 March 2006 (UTC).

Rankings

I changed the ranking of NC State from 78th of 120 national universities to 78th of 248 national universities because there are four tiers of national universities totaling 248 according to US News & World Report. I believe this change more accurately reflects NC State's true ranking.

I think we should delete the Princeton Review rankings. They're not relevant, and they make us look bad. You have to consider that -- although we probably didn't when considering schools -- a lot of high school seniors do come here for information. And PR's ranking have about as much credibility as the rankings I made up yesterday: the Ceeded Rankings, where NCSU is first in all categories. tim 14:33, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

How are they not relevant? (Relevant to what?) And who is "us"? Wikipedia articles are encyclopedia entries, not advertisements for universities. Whether "we" like it or not, the Princeton rankings are a high profile set of evaluations and therefore relevant to any entry on a university.
While I am myself an alumnus of NCSU (graduated in '01 with a B.A. in English and minors in Religion, Classical Studies, and Ancient Greek) and former 10-year employee of the university, I think it's dishonest to want to exclude relevant information on the grounds that it makes "us" look bad to prospective students. That doesn't square with Wikipedia's NPOV policy. —Preost talk contribs 14:49, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Good Article

It looks like earlier today, User:Thunder8 self-nominated the article for WP:GA status. After reading the article, I entirely agree that it meets (and exceeds, in many cases) each requirement of a Wikipedia "good article." I hope everyone concurs. Can I say congratulations?  :) Justen Deal 06:34, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Excellent. User:Thunder8 has done a lot of work on getting this article looking great. Thanks to him and everyone else who has contributed! Bornyesterday 17:11, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Athletics: Cheerleading and the Dance Team

Neither cheerleading nor the dance team are full varsity sports. (The only full varsity cheer team is at Maryland, per this Baltimore Sun article.) Should we delist them both, or at least keep cheerleading (since they have national titles) and note that they're not varsity? —C.Fred (talk) 00:29, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Competitive cheerleading is a sport and there are resulting sports organizations governing their competetions. Just because it isn't recognized as a sport by the NCAA doesn't take away anything from the skills required to perform or the success that the NCSU teams have had. Bornyesterday 02:37, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
Correct, but it's not a varsity sport. Hence, I think it should be moved out of the varisty section and down with club sports. —C.Fred (talk) 02:43, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Carnesale portrait?

In an edit today Thunder8 replaced the portrait of Governor Hunt—a well-known figure in NC after his graduation, with A. Carnesale, now the Chancellor of UCLA. Who is the better portrait to keep in the article, or keep both? Given Hunt was a 4-term governor, I lean toward him, but that may be NC-centric bias. —C.Fred (talk) 23:29, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

I was trying to get a picture that didn’t include an American flag in the background. I took Hunt out because he is a regional figure. --Thunder 23:41, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

I put Hunt back in before I noticed the discussion here. While I understand that the repeated presence of the American flag is probably not the best thing to present in the idea of global equality or whatever, a state governor is a much more significant graduate than a university chancellor, regardless of the state. Bornyesterday 02:57, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
At first I agreed that Hunt is more notable, and that's why I restored his photo on May 22. However, after reading the Carnesale article, I saw that he's more than just the UCLA chancellor. He was a US diplomat in the 1970s and the Harvard provost in the 1990s. Hunt is clearly more notable regionally, but Carnesale is probably more notable nationally and internationally. I think including either photo would be appropriate. Perhaps another solution is to devote a separate page to notable alums, giving us room for more photos. The current page is getting a "this page may be too long" warning anyway, so perhaps now is the time to split the pages. Rjmorris 02:23, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

GPA

Does anyone know the average high school GTA for admission into NCSU? I did not find it. Zachorious 02:49, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Is that even a meaningful metric? I know there are high school students taking math classes at NCSU who are probably getting 5 points for an A toward their GPA. —C.Fred (talk) 03:42, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Oops! I meant GPA. Zachorious 04:36, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, there are a lot of students from New Jersey. They can probably break into a car, even if they haven't been convicted of GTA. :) Seriously, because GPA's vary so much from school to school, I'm not sure they're a valid admission statistic. —C.Fred (talk) 05:14, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
If the school uses them to determine acceptance, and they do, how is it not a valid statistic? - Bornyesterday 15:16, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
Right. But the school probably has different thresholds for different scales. That's my point: is there a homogenized average that's published, or would we have to somehow aggregate the data or list multiple averages (e.g. 3.4 on a 4.0 scale, 4.1 on a 5.0 scale, 4.3 on a 6.0 scale). —C.Fred (talk) 15:23, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

In California we have a GPA system out of 4.0, but you can get above a 4.0 if you get As in Honor/AP classes. What was your GPA in high school for those in NCSU? Zachorious 20:03, 23 July 2006 (UTC)


I'm removing the link to TheWolfWeb, at least from the Official Links section. That site has no affiliation with the university, but its placement there seems to imply that it does. Ncsupimaster 01:42, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Suburban?

The infobox classifies NC State's location as "suburban." While that may have been true several decades ago, the location is, as far as I can tell, definitely "urban." -- T.o.n.y 18:30, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree, North Campus is most definately urban. It is just few miles from Raleigh's tallest towers and downtown district. Yet, the southern and western parts of campus and Centennial Campus could be considered suburban. Just look at all the residences and such nearby. Therefore, I think we should use the same designation UNC Charlotte uses: "Urban/suburban".

The campus is definetly not suburban. Being surrounded by residental neighborhoods does not equate with 'suburban'. Orlière 19:18, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

I was wondering how you guys/gals want to incorporate some info that I finally found on the size of our campus and other sites. In the Infobox_University our campus is listed as 2,139 acres and it got me wondering what that includes. I'm not sure if there's a standard for what should be reported for that figure (prolly should be one) since Duke's infobox lists that campus as 8,610 acres (includes the 7200 acre Duke Forest). Anyways, this recent news article ends by referencing a "2,200-acre main campus, as well as more than 106,000 acres of research and extension land across the state." Given this official citation should we update the figure in the infobox and what should we say about our other sites around the state? -Callowschoolboy 23:30, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Athletics section

I see that expanding the Athletics section is on the to-do list. However, how much information do we want to duplicate here? There's already a separate article on athletics. —C.Fred (talk) 16:03, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I made the todo list out of the suggestions after the nomination for featured article. I think people like to see a short summary of the larger athletics article. What is the Wiki policy on this?--Thunder 00:50, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

North Carolina State University at Raleigh

(Memo to self: Read examples before trying to use them. :) )

Given that I have two diplomas on the wall behind me, and the phrase "at Raleigh" does not appear on either of them, it stands to reason that the name should not be used in the infobox and throughout the article. At most, it should get a sentence in the intro that its statutory name includes the phrase—so long as it's duly cited. Reasonable? —C.Fred (talk) 01:01, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Sure, does it really need to be cited though? You are a graduate of the school and admit it. A commonly known fact such as that doesn't need a citation. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ebtunc2006 (talk • contribs) 03:19, 19 December 2006 (UTC).

Commonly known facts don't need to be cited, which is precisely why this does need to be cited. I wouldn't know about it if I hadn't married a history major who gained the information for other purposes. That said, though, I've cited the GS in the history article where the renaming is told in detail. I've also added North Carolina State University into the also-known-as sentence, since it is the most commonly used first-reference name. —C.Fred (talk) 03:58, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Also see #Page Location Change for other reasons to drop the "at Raleigh." I have stepped in this before.--Thunder 05:05, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I had a feeling this wasn't the first go-round of this dance; I missed it in the talk earlier. Throwing this out as a possibility: strike "at Raleigh" from the intro, mention it as the statutory name in the history paragraph? We mention the old name there, so it makes sense that the formal name go there. I'd like to get a feel for what the group thinks here and then make the change; I worried that it was headed toward an edit war on the main page. —C.Fred (talk) 22:58, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
I agree with Cfred. It is only "... at Raleigh" by statue only. The official seal doesn't feature it, the website only mentions it in history... not even the CollegeBoard, which runs the SAT's, shows "at Raleigh" (http://apps.collegeboard.com/search/CollegeDetail.jsp?collegeId=614&type=qfs&word=North%20Carolina%20State). It's not even colloquial. --TinMan 00:29, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Format for sources

The current format for sources does not meet GA requirements. See WP:Cite#Templates for information and tools to correct this. Additionally, PDF files, books, magazines, newspapers, etc. need page specifications in the reference. --LaraLoveTalk/Contribs 06:20, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

GA comment

For the article to maintain its GA status, the copyrighted images need detailed fair use rationales. Look to other passed GA/FAs for examples. Let me know on my talk page if you have any questions. --Nehrams2020 06:50, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

I updated all the fair use descriptions. Please let me know if more needs to be done.--Thunder 19:50, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Looks good, keep up the good work. --Nehrams2020 05:29, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Greek Life

I personally don't think listing the greek organizations on campus add to this article and is in fact a distraction. Is there any alternatives to having the list on this page?--Thunder 14:22, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

GA delisting

Unfortunately, I am delisting this article from the good articles list. Please see below for my comments. I'm disheartened that the article hasn't improved and the only activity is vandalism. I encourage you to improve and resubmit the article as I'm sure it can be "good again" with a little effort. Thanks. HolomorphicHamster (talk) 20:14, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

GA reassessment – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    The lead does not adequately summarize the article. Try expanding it some. See WP:LEAD for more information. Also suggest copyediting the whole article and peer review.
    B. MoS compliance:
    See semi-automated peer review below.
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    The "athletics" section could be expanded. See WP:SS for advice on summarizing the "NC State Wolfpack" page.
    B. Focused:
    The long list of Greek organizations seems out of place. Other good school articles don't tend to list every fraternity or sorority. Is North Carolina State University especially notable for these? Also is dodgeball more significant than other elements of student-life at the university?
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
    Be careful to justify phrases such as "The university is well known for its award-winning, celebratory Homecoming traditions".
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
    Much vandalism, maybe seek semi-protection if it continues.
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
    Do the "NC State Wolfpack" and "Technician" logos meet the significance criterion of WP:FAIR?: "Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding."
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    I'm sure this could be a good article again. Please improve and resubmit it and I or another editor would be more than happy to review it.

HolomorphicHamster (talk) 20:35, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Semi-automatic peer review

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas.

HolomorphicHamster (talk) 20:35, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

"North Carolina State University at Raleigh"

I don't doubt the correctness of the name, but I've never heard it used, so it would be useful if someone could explain the usage and add a reference. Hippo (talk) 15:17, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

"North Carolina State University at Raleigh" is the official name as set by NC General Statute. This was a compromise during the time after NC State was officially called "North Carolina State of the University of North Carolina at Raleigh" (no joke). Convention drops the "at raleigh" part of the name.

NC State as Named in NC GS

History of NC State

--Thunder (talk) 15:44, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Interesting... The NCGA do the strangest things at times... Hippo (talk) 17:05, 24 June 2008 (UTC)


I think the info box is too much. It is to be a high level view of the university, but having every name that NC State has had is too much. Can we cut that back?--Thunder (talk) 04:23, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Of course, though I'm not sure if we can just pick one of the former names as before. Since I think they're all in the article, I propose we remove the field. Hippo (talk) 17:38, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
I agree, the "at Raleigh" should be in the opening of the article but we should not otherwise muddy the water.--Thunder (talk) 13:33, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

The university does not even recognize "at Raleigh" as part of the university name. It is in the statute but the univeristy refuses to recognize it. It should be removed from this article in my opinion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.176.83.238 (talk) 06:44, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

I think the article very clearly states that the "at Raleigh" is only in the statutory name and not commonly used. This is also generally consistent with other entities whose legal names differ from the names they refer to themselves by. —C.Fred (talk) 06:57, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Agree. Fletch81 (talk) 08:02, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
For example, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill rarely uses the "at Chapel Hill" designation, but take a glance at their official website and you'll see it on the front page. NC State on the other hand dismisses "at Raliegh" completely, and it cannot be found anywhere on the official web page. The official website first refers to the univeristy as North Carolina State University and from there on out as NC State Univeristy. Also, the university seal and diplomas do not even use "at Raleigh." The statutory name is used by no one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.176.83.238 (talk) 16:05, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
But it is the statutory name. Saying it is used by no one is not a statement of fact. The statutory name is properly referenced and should not be ignored. Fletch81 (talk) 17:27, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Also, the University does acknowledge that it is the legal name.[3] They are far from the only entity that brands itself with something other than its full legal name. That does not change the fact that the full, formal name includes "at Raleigh," and Wikipedia convention is to use the full formal name in the intro, regardless of what the pagename may be. —C.Fred (talk) 17:47, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

North Carolina State University name guidelines

  • North Carolina State University at Raleigh* is the full, official name of our institution and may be written when explicitly required on official documents. Editors should otherwise avoid using this name because of the implication that another branch of North Carolina State University exists in another city.Italic text
  • North Carolina State University* is the preferred form of the university’s full name. It should be paired with the university’s identifier on the front or back covers of publications and on World Wide Web (WWW) pages. This form should be used on title pages, in addresses and on first reference in text.
  • NC State* is the preferred second reference, mainly used as nouns (i.e., “Welcome to NC State”). Because “university” is missing from this short form, be cautious using it as an adjective; i.e., “NC State Department of…” may be confused with a State of NC department.

The “university” is also a preferred third reference.

Note: Editors should exercise caution to avoid confusion with units of North Carolina State Government or units at other universities, and the creation of incorrect names, (i.e., NC State Libraries).

  • ncsu.edu* (lowercase) is the university’s domain address in electronic mail and Web addressing. Although this is the URL for the university, “NCSU” should not be used to refer to the university in any form of communication. NCSU Libraries is the only exception.

D'oh (talk) 01:46, 10 August 2013 (UTC) - just trying for clarity, not insult.

Which means the introduction should include the "at Raleigh" part, because the introduction includes the full, official name of the subject. (Consider the Bill Clinton article, which begins "William Jefferson "Bill" Clinton (born William Jefferson Blythe III; August 19, 1946)…") Because it's uncommon, that's not the title of the article, though; the common/preferred full name of "North Carolina State University" is used instead.
Further, those are guidelines that aren't necessarily used consistently within the university; I have received email from the "NCSU Jenkins MAC Program" (granted, that was in the From: field, where space is at a premium). And at any rate, they're guidelines. Wikipedia generally honors stylistic requests, but when our MOS says use the full, official name, that trumps the University's preferences. —C.Fred (talk) 03:20, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Associate's Degree

Shouldn't there be inclusion of the Associate's degree programs offered at NCSU? I've only found a few on the NCSU homepage, though it seems there's a long tradition of offering these degrees at NCSU. Perhaps someone who is more familiar with the subject could take charge? Fletch81 (talk) 00:18, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

NC State offers a few associate degrees programs through its Ag school. I can't see why this small program (less than 400) students should be high lighted in a encyclopedia article. There are many other, larger more notable programs that don't have their own section.--Thunder (talk) 01:52, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
I'm not advocating its own section, but it should be included in the summary of academics. The number of Bachelors, Masters, and Doctoral programs are all at least mentioned. This seems to be a logical inclusion. Fletch81 (talk) 04:57, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Removal of John Edwards photo

Jun 12, 2008 Thunder8 added an image of John Edwards to the people section of the NC State article. I have attempted to remove this image, along with others. My objection to the image is that John Edwards does not meet the criteria for significance as suggested in the article. The article as written on Sept 1, 2008 says “A number of NC State alumni and faculty have made significant contributions in the fields of government, military, science, academia, business, arts, and athletics, among others.” The next sentence reads “John Edwards, former senator and two time presidential candidate, and James B. Hunt Jr., 4-term Governor of North Carolina, are among the most notable alumni with involvement in politics.” John Edwards 6 year term as a U.S. Senator and failed presidential runs along with his failed bid for the vice presidency on the Democratic ticket with John Kerry certainly gained him notoriety. However, as events occur to elevate an individual in terms of their notability (and importantly with regard to their “contributions”), events may also contribute to lessoning and even reversing that notability. At this point in time John Edwards’s notability is certain, but not as a politician. I would argue that John Edwards is a pop culture figure (i.e. scandalized national politician). Any claim to significance was largely dependent on his ability to gain national office (elected or appointed), a task at which he has consistently failed. Governor James Hunt is a much more “significant” political figure having reshaped the office of governor in the state of North Carolina. I would argue for his picture to appear on this page. The publication of John Edwards’s picture is simply a nod to a popular obsession with scandal. This article was created in August of 2002; the content I am objecting to was just 70 odd days prior to my first edit. jk1lee (talk) 03:17, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Edwards is not a "pop culture figure." Failed bid or not, he is extremely notable as a politician and the recent scandal does not lessen or reverse his notoriety. Your attempt to remove his photo seems to be in vanity. The date the image was added is irrelevant, as the image was added in good faith and wiki is a constantly evolving document. I think this is a clear case of WP:COI. The image should remain. Fletch81 (talk) 03:26, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
I agree that Edwards is a very well-known figure and I am suspicious that editors may attempt to remove his photo from this article only because of his recent scandal. However, I don't understand or agree with some of Fletch81's accusations against Jk1lee and I urge editors here to discuss this issue calmly without tossing about unproven or personal accusations. --ElKevbo (talk) 10:06, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
I suppose my suspicions arise from jk1lee's user page that says he is an educator from Raleigh, the home of NC State. These aren't personal accusations. He admitted to removing the picture because of the scandal. That's a clear cut vanity issue. Fletch81 (talk) 16:20, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Funny the things that are important enough for the discussion page. I wrote that alumni section BEFORE the scandal broke. I personally feel that he is a significant national political figure.--Thunder (talk) 02:56, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
The picture should stay, as the text of the article makes no mention of the scandal (not SHOULD it). Edwards was a serious candidate for both President (twice) and Vice President (once) and a senator. Between him and Governor Hunt, they are truly the two most important political figures to graduate from the school. The rationale behind removing the picture is "He had a scandal, so we shouldn't include the pic in the article" is rediculous. He's a nationally prominent politician, his pic should be included. Oh, and like the OP, I am an educator who lives in Raleigh, and I have no connection to the school myself. Keep in mind that there are over 100 schools in the Wake County Public School System, as well as numerous private schools, 4 other major colleges (St. Augs, Shaw, Peace, Meredith), a few techinical colleges (including Wake Tech), it would be a HUGE leap to accuse someone of a conflict of interest in editing an article about NCSU, merely on the claim that they are an educator, and live in the same metro area! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 18:18, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Second discussion

I have again attempted to remove the image of John Edwards from the article. I agree that he is a notable political figure and arguably the best know graduate of NC State. My concern is that the infamy now associated with Edwards cast enough of a shadow on his legacy that we should reconsider his recognition as notable. Their are many politicians who have risen to positions of power and note higher than Edwards, who are not mentioned on the article for the school where the matriculated as an undergraduate. There is no picture of the current Vice President Joe Biden on the article for his college, University of Delaware. Perhaps a better comparison, Spiro Agency (certainly disgraced) does not appear on the article for Johns Hopkins. Also, note that current NC senator Richard Burr does not appear in the Wake Forest University article.

Notoriety is not a justification for inclusion on the NC State article. Accomplishment and legacy are, and both of these are in serious questions for Edwards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jk1lee (talk • contribs) 00:01, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry but I disagree. If other articles are lacking images they should have then please add them. But to argue that Edwards is not notable is silly. He is indeed notorious to some degree but still very, very notable. --ElKevbo (talk) 00:11, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

OK, so we disagree over the connotations of notable or notorious. I am making an argument about the criteria for inclusion. If we cannot use comparisons and you refuse to agree on the meaning of words such as notable, then what criteria shall we use? I also proposed we use the notions of accomplishment and legacy. John Edwards is relatively accomplished (North Carolina has had over 50 US senators), but if being a senator (i.e accomplished) is a reasonable criteria for inclusion, then why do we not see other senators listed constantly on other article about college and universities? What shall be the criteria?

I will continue to delete the image until someone makes an argument that is better than saying this deletion is "silly." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jk1lee (talk • contribs) 01:30, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Fletch81's argument above: "Failed bid or not, he is extremely notable as a politician and the recent scandal does not lessen or reverse his notoriety." His tenure in the Senate and candidacy for vice president are good reasons for his inclusion. —C.Fred (talk) 01:36, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
Then you're edit warring. I've already reverted you once and I hope that someone else will do so again. I'm sorry that we disagree but "I'm going to do what I want to do anyway" in the face of a clear consensus is unacceptable behavior. --ElKevbo (talk) 01:48, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Of course the recent scandal lessens Edwards's (positive) notoriety. Positive political notoriety is not achieved as a result of office holding or the act of running for office. It is a legacy of achievement that is earned through positive action. Negative actions (defined as doing harm) have important consequences with regard to legacy. Edwards has done considerable harm to his legacy and his family, his supporters and, in fact, the democratic process. By perpetrating a lie that had the potential to create political unrest in this country if he had been elected, Edwards put his own interests in front of that of his country. This is a cardinal sin for a politician. Edwards's disregard for, among other things, the common good of his political party and the country is no longer in question. John Edwards might be notable for his egocentric behavior, but not his positive notoriety. A good argument could be made that he is currently the best counter example that we could find for a (positively) notable NC State alumnus. (jk1lee (talk) 02:29, 5 February 2010 (UTC))

You are under some mistaken impression that his notoriety must be positive. There is no consensus here. In fact, you have several editors who all disagree with your opinion. Please stop reverting this article by deleting Edwards' picture, which you have done several times. Discuss it here, or seek other opinions through the proper channels on Wikipedia. Fletch81 (talk) 00:02, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

infobox logo removal/inclusion

A discussion regarding logo removal/inclusion that occurred during a recent edit to this article is ongoing at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Universities#Logo as identifying marks in infoboxes. CrazyPaco (talk) 20:47, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Agricultural associates degrees in lead

I disagree with the removal of the 2-year agricultural degrees from the lead of this article. An unregistered editor [152.1.78.179 removed] the content without an edit summary or discussion and C.Fred reverted my undo with an edit summary of "while interesting, focus on the major degrees (bachelor/master/doctor level); the associate degrees are covered in the text of the article." I disagree with the elitism implied by elevating the 4+ year degrees to level where they are worthy of being mentioned in the lead but the lowly 2-year degrees are not. More importantly, I think it's worth mentioning these degrees in the lead given the history of this institution and its status as a land-grant institution. --ElKevbo (talk) 21:41, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Then the questions needs to be asked whether those are the only associate degrees offered by State. I don't see why only ag degrees should be listed and not others. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any other program that would do associate degrees (though forestry would be the first program I'd check). To me, the lead she give overview information at the topmost level, and I'm not sure nine associate degrees are worth mentioning. —C.Fred (talk) 22:30, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
It looks like the Ag degrees are the only Associates degrees offered: http://www2.acs.ncsu.edu/UPA/glossary/index.htm. It's not terribly common for a 4-year institution to award 2-year degrees and these are closely related to the institution's historical mission so it seems interesting enough to mention in the lead. I'm pretty wary of us snubbing them because they're "just" 2-year degrees. --ElKevbo (talk) 21:14, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
"The institution's historical mission": now that's a good case for including it in the intro! I'm on board. —C.Fred (talk) 22:22, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

R. K. Pachauri Photo Caption

The photo caption on R. K. Pachauri's photos puts him as Nobel Prize Winner. The 1997 Nobel Peace Prize was given to Al Gore and IPCC. Pachauri received the prize on behalf of IPCC as its chairman. S|O|Y (talk) 17:32, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Flagship status

I believe there is enough evidence from internal memos and publications from NCSU and other news outlets that we can add the Flagship designation status to the page. Just last year the Daily Tar Heel (http://www.dailytarheel.com/index.php/article/2011/10/4e9cdd0b0371e) reported that both UNC and NCSU share the Flagship status within the state. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.1.222.212 (talk • contribs) 12:32, March 31, 2012‎

Sorry but a single article from a student newspaper doesn't cut it. We mustered some pretty convincing sources for the UNC-CH article; can you provide sources of similar quality and quantity for NCSU? ElKevbo (talk) 17:34, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Here is an internal memo from NCSU on their position as the STEM flagship of the system, http://www.ncsu.edu/unctomorrow/response.html, which I think you will agree is justified given that smaller state schools in the system have pre-engineering programs which students complete at NCSU, much in the same way many pre-med or pre-law students at smaller schools can complete their degrees at UNC. Also, in relation to the UNC-CH article's debate over the term, I don't think U.S. News & World Report is a credible source in academic discourse, they are mostly respected by the parents of high school seniors. If the System designated either one in an internal memo I would concede to it, yet it hasn't and both claim this term and I think both have the programs to justify their claim. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.182.22.207 (talk) 21:13, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

So far you've provided (a) a student newspaper article and (b) an NCSU-authored document. Do you have any other evidence? Those are insufficient to support your claim that NCSU is widely considered by others to be a flagship university. ElKevbo (talk) 04:38, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

http://catalog.ncsu.edu/undergraduate/aboutus/ http://pulse.ncpolicywatch.org/2014/01/10/talk-of-tuition-freezes-at-unc-schools-while-one-campus-increases-slots-for-non-nc-students/ http://www.nccollegefinder.org/school/detail/34/north-carolina-state-university — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.15.231.195 (talk) 23:11, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

The first is self-authored so it's not a terribly strong piece of evidence. The third is also probably taken from an NCSU-authored description but it's not completely clear where it came from. The second link is somewhat useful as it does appear to be independent of the subject. ElKevbo (talk) 23:52, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

I'd like to revisit this topic with a few additional sources. Consider this article by the Pope Center for Higher Education Policy, which clearly cites NC State as "another North Carolina Flagship University." This is consistent across all publication from the Pope Center, which is an independent organization. Additionally, the biography of James L. Oblinger once again refers to NC State as "the flagship university for science, engineering, and technology." This is authored by the National Research Council, though I understand that the biography is probably written by Oblinger or at least in such a way as to portray him in the most impressive light possible. I have a third source that speaks to public perception nearly thirty years ago in the form of an article in The Fayetteville Observer titled "Flagship Schools Question UNC System" referring to both UNC-Chapel Hill and NC State University. In fact, then-chairman of the UNC System Board of Governors Phillip Carson refers to the "flagship institutions" in the article.

http://www.popecenter.org/news/article.html?id=3011

https://books.google.com/books?id=-OmcxfWp96oC&pg=PT208&lpg=PT208&dq=nc+state+%22flagship+university%22&source=bl&ots=wQnKwDsXW7&sig=H8eGUHUmVye2rzLDc7hyaYmunnc&hl=en&sa=X&ei=d3aLVdTFDIm1-QHcv4H4Aw&ved=0CEoQ6AEwBzgK#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://www.fayobserver.com/news/local/flagship-schools-question-unc-system/article_7762e3cc-62c0-51e7-b99f-91d8b4428037.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:8052:8B80:6CC9:35C2:B11B:9BDF (talk) 04:18, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on North Carolina State University. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:26, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on North Carolina State University. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:58, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on North Carolina State University. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:28, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on North Carolina State University. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:55, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Sources?

I'm not sure, but it looks like an editor has been switching info around without first making sure the sources cited actually back up the changes. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 03:35, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

"NC State Wolfpack" -- when did that usage become common?

See discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football#"NC State Wolfpack" -- when did that usage become common?. Cbl62 (talk) 15:52, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:North_Carolina_State_University/Archive_1&oldid=1177244105"