Jump to content

Talk:Tulane University/Archives/2013

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


Tulane University name

What is this nonsense about changing the lead name to Tulane University of Louisiana? Who refers to it as that? Maybe 1 person out of 10,000,000? Isn't there a Wikipedia rule against such a maneuver? I have only seen this version once in my 10+ years of being affiliated with Tulane (and I think it was a typo). This "of Louisiana" part should be dropped. The common usage (i.e., 99.999% of the time) is "Tulane University." 68.96.35.14 (talk) 01:43, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

No one changed the name; that is the name, just as Columbia University is really Columbia University in the City of New York and the College of William and Mary is The College of William and Mary in Virginia, or, closer to home, Louisiana State University is the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College. See the seal and the Carnegie Foundation. It's cited in the body of the article, which is why there's no citation for the lead or the infobox. The name of the article stays Tulane University per WP:UNIGUIDE. The article text still notes the official name per WP:V. --King of the Arverni (talk) 03:37, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
I thought this was all sorted out, but seems that's not the case. Let me be clear:
1) [1], [2], [3], [4] -- These edits to the article probably should've followed discussion here, if there was an ongoing content dispute, and the status quo maintained. It's especially relevant because I've provided ample evidence, none of which has yet been addressed. Ignoring pointed questions is considered incivility.
2) There is a source, and no need for {{citation needed}} tags or anything of the sort. See Tulane_University#Founding_and_early_history_.E2.80.93_19th_century and find note #5. It's The Carnegie Foundation's profile for TU with the official name of the university. I've addressed this once already. Per WP:LEAD, the lead is an introductory summary of the article text.
3) [5], [6] -- These edits to my comments clearly violate WP:TALK. While the IP editor may be new, he/she should know that discussion is relevant and important here, and that editing another's comments is not civil behaviour. When I was new, before I was this familiar with talk guidelines, I still considered such things to be rather sneaky and rude. There's even a {{Talk header}} at the top of this talk page. I hope we can have a civil discussion from here on out. --King of the Arverni (talk) 18:18, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
I apologize for putting Wiki links on your references to other Wikipedia pages. That was entirely inappropriate and detrimental. 68.96.35.14 (talk) 18:32, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
By the way, this is not all sorted out -- so let me be clear. (1) passing off a non-primary name as THE primary name is nonsense; (2) if there is a source and someone calls for a citation, you should add the source or ignore the request, not delete the request. 68.96.35.14 (talk) 18:40, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
One more thing, your edits should have followed discussion here. 68.96.35.14 (talk) 18:44, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

OK, I think the debate is over. The University is currently formally recognized by the IRS as "Administrators of the Tulane Educational Fund"[7] -- not, "Tulane University of Louisiana." 68.96.35.14 (talk) 19:10, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

The citation directly above is to Guidestar. You may need to register with Guidestar to access it (it's a free 60-second registration process). Guidestar collects Form 990s, which are the official tax-filing forms where universities list their official names as recognized by the U.S. federal government. 68.96.35.14 (talk) 19:13, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
1) The "Tulane University of Louisiana" is the the official name, and is found on the official seal as well as with the Carnegie Foundation. "Tulane University" is the primary name and therefore the name of the article. Per UNIGUIDE, the article name should be the primary and the lead should mention both the primary and the official, as well as any acronyms, such as "TU". No one here is disputing the primary name; the anonymous editor's comments are baseless and misleading for this very reason.
2) I'm quite familiar with Guidestar (I've been registered for several years now) and 990s, which aren't relevant to this discussion. In fact, few universities' official names are the names of the managers of their endowment funds.
3) Regardless, since the anonymous editor may have an NPOV-defying conflict of interest here and I couldn't care less, I'll just let some other editor beat his/her head against a wall trying to improve this article instead. --King of the Arverni (talk) 19:46, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

(outdent)Let's look at another reliable source: the U.S. Department of Education. That agency has the name of the university as Tulane University of Louisiana. That may not be the name per the university's style guide, but it is the official name. Alanraywiki (talk) 20:05, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Another Dept. of Education website also has it as "Tulane University of Louisiana": [8] Madcoverboy (talk) 22:04, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
I've reverted it back to the previous lead with cites to Department of Education and Carnegie Foundation. happy days! Madcoverboy (talk) 22:09, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

This is an interesting debate: it does appear that some outsiders are hoping to essentially rename the common name of this major university. As far as is discernable, their motivation is solely to aggravate others and flaunt some type of Wiki authority/power. I propose to: (1) move the department of education name to a footnote; (2) move the IRS name to a footnote; (3) move any other technical, obscure name to a footnote; and (4) remove the acronym, as "TU" is not commonly associated with the university, which is more commonly known simply as "Tulane". This is not like UCLA, UNC, SMU, etc. Rather, it's more similar to schools like Emory. Note that Emory does not provide an EU acronym, as it shouldn't. The rabid insistence on inserting "TU" makes it vividly clear how unknowledgable the editors are about this entry. As constructive criticism to these editors, perhaps it's a good idea to tread lightly when it comes to making major substantive changes to an entry to which you lack familiarity. Moveover, in regards to using some longer version of "Tulane University," we cannot look to Columbia University as a reference: the Columbia website says "Columbia University in the City of New York," whereas the Tulane website says "Tulane University." Thus, you cannot equate "Columbia University in the City of New York" with some unheard of, unused name for Tulane. The changes I delineate above should be made in the absense of a very compelling objection that is based on something more than a Wiki-power flaunt. All of the technical names that have ever been used by anyone to describe Tulane can still be included for the rare reader who might seek such informatation -- but in a footnote -- where they more appropropriately belong. Can an editor/reader who actually has familiarity with Tulane chime in? 74.255.214.226 (talk) 14:17, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

  • While I don't choose to draw the same conclusions about the motivations of other editors, I can offer that the header on my diploma reads "Tulane University" while the gold seal bears the full name "The Tulane University of Louisiana". Thus I would agree that "Tulane University" is an official name as well as the common one, but that "The Tulane University of Louisiana" is the full name and also official. Maybe that helps? --Dystopos (talk) 15:09, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Because Alanraywiki, Arverniking, and I are so hopelessly fixated on solely aggravating Tulane affiliates instead of patrolling several hundred other college and university articles, we have formed a secret cabal complete with a handshake and meetings with pointy hat robes at 9pm in my treehouse to force Tulane's Wikipedia page to state the official name of the university above all else. Seriously though, stop impugning the good faith of other contributors here. There will be no moving of the official name of the university when multiple reliable and authoritative sources state that this is exactly the name of the university (as Dystopos points out). As for the "rapid insistence on inserting 'TU'", perhaps that's because the logo of the university prominently features the letters T and U. Thanks for playing! Madcoverboy (talk) 15:14, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Oops, edit conflict. Well, anyway, I lied; I'm totally getting back into this one more time.
1) It is totally baseless and non-NPOV to assume that none of these other editors "actually has familiarity with Tulane".
a) Is there any evidence, other than subjective and unverifiable opinion that I, for example, do not have any personal association with the university? No, there's no evidence on way or the other, and it's not civil to comment on the contributor anyway unless there is some clear evidence for a personal conflict here.
b) The article certainly doesn't belong to any of us, either, which seems to be the idea behind the very notion that only Tulane students, staff, and alumni should have a say in the article's content.
2) The notion of a "wiki-power flaunt" also implies an assumption of bad faith, and defies Wikipedia policy in favour of some conspiracy theory, as if it were even possible for any editor here to have such "power". The claim that every single registered editor in this discussion is here "solely to aggravate others" is a dead giveaway to the lack of assumption of good faith.
3) The current information meets WP:UNIGUIDE, WP:VERIFY and WP:NPOV.
a) For example, "TU" is a registered trademark per Tulane's own website.
b) The official seal says "The Tulane University of Louisiana". [9] If these anonymous editors are "familiar" with Tulane then they might see that same seal emblazoned on their diplomas, as well.
c) The name of the article is still the common "Tulane University" per WP:NAME and clearly makes reference to the nature of its use in the lead.
I suppose I could smypathize more if it weren't for WP:UNIGUIDE, WP:VERIFY, WP:NPOV, WP:NAME, et cetera. If we're looking for suggestions, I'd suggest the anonymous editors familiarize themselves with policies (another good read would be WP:TALK, for formatting advice) before claiming that this is all a power play and that no one else here could possibly be familiar with anything Tulane-related. This isn't supposed to be personal; it's about writing a good encyclopedia. --King of the Arverni (talk) 15:35, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Thank you Dystopos for actually contributing to determining what the official name is. I would also like to add that Dystopos's comment shows that the answer remains unclear. This debate over what the official name is is far from over. 74.255.214.226 (talk) 17:41, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
The seal has been cited as evidence that the offical current name is "Tulane University of Louisiana", yet the two logos directly above the ciation you provide refer to Tulane University as "Tulane University" and "Tulane". Not to mention that the associated paragraphs all say "Tulane University." Moveover, the "of Louisiana" component of the seal you cite is set off from the words "Tulane University"; they do not directly flow together as "Tulane University of Louisiana". Shall we start including latin phrases used in seals as part of the offical names of universities? 74.255.214.226 (talk) 17:41, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
I will not delve into an analysis of motivations, but I will suggests that everyone steps back and takes a deep breath and thinks objectively about his/her edits, without entrenching youself towards one viewpoint or another solely because you don't want to "lose" or be questioned. This is an encyclopedia, and the goal is to provide accurate, informed information. 74.255.214.226 (talk) 17:41, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
As far as the WP:NPOV references go, I will say that I agree that it's good to be vigilant of insider edits. Nonetheless, as Wikipedia rules also suggest, insider edits are often the most valuable because they come from people who know the most about the entry. Non-insiders should contribute too, as needed. Because the name of the university is in question, insider edits can be particularly useful here. 74.255.214.226 (talk) 17:41, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Like the original poster of this debate, I am an insider. I can tell you that all checks (e.g., for tuition) to the University are made out to "Tulane University," and that the University sends out payroll checks using the name "Tulane University"; I have never seen the wording "Tulane University of Louisiana" used for these purposes. I can also tell you that the University recently created a 60-foot-long stone sign/sculpture at the entrance of the campus that reads "TULANE UNIVERSITY," not "TULANE UNIVERSITY OF LOUISIANA." I should also add that over the last decade or so the University has set up campuses in Texas and Mississippi (read: not Louisiana). 74.255.214.226 (talk) 17:41, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Finally, I also want to call into question the Carnegie Foundation citation as being dispositive on this issue. First, a university determines its name, not the Carnegie Foundation. We should turn to the University itself to determine what the name is. Second, the Carnegie Foundation may rely on an older usage. Third, I can probably dig up a bazillion citations of equivalent authority that use "Tulane University" as the full construction. 74.255.214.226 (talk) 17:41, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Can anyone supply a citation for the "Tulane University of Louisiana" construction as THE sole offical name, or even an official name? I am talking about a citation that is unambiguous, verifiable, current, and Tulane-provided. No such citation has been provided yet. If such a citation is not provided soon I plan to relegate the "of Louisiana" construction to a footnote. Of course, the "of Louisiana" construction can be reintroduced if such a citation is provided. Thank you for helping to create an accurate, informative entry. 74.255.214.226 (talk) 18:15, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Well, since there are threats to make more disruptive edits and this editor seems to have missed a few things.... A source has been provided and it's fairly incontrovertible ([10]). It's from the U.S. Department of Education: [11]. If I'm not mistaken, all of the sources that the anonymous editor considers unreliable (the federal government and the Carnegie Foundation) use information provided by the institution in question. At the very least, they satisfy both the "third-party" and "reliable" criteria of WP:RS, while most of the previous IP editor comments appear to constitute WP:OR. And please stop with the spelling fixes. It's causing edit conflicts. --King of the Arverni (talk) 18:30, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. But I'm still waiting for that current, Tulane-provided source indicating that "Tulane University of Louisiana" is the offical name. Apparently this source is a bit more difficult to track down than simply going to columbia.edu to see the "in the City of New York" construction, which was provided as the original justification for why the Tulane name should be changed (only after the Tulane name change was questioned). I'm sorry if you find it disruptive and threatening for me to improve the accuracy of the entry. Anyhow, the original poster's Form 990 posting is the closest thing I've seen to a current, Tulane-provided name. As far as my "original research" goes, here's the new sign I mentioned (I think it dates from May 2004). 74.255.214.226 (talk) 19:08, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
The alumni association refers to it as such, and that's just the first internal google hit: [12]. Phi Beta Kappa also references it as "Tulane University of Louisiana" [13]. History section states: "1884 The Louisiana Legislature passes a bill transferring the University of Louisiana at New Orleans to the control of the Administrators of the Tulane Educational Fund, thus creating the Tulane University of Louisiana, a private, nonsectarian university." [14] So much huffing and puffing when there are so many facts to the contrary! Madcoverboy (talk) 19:13, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Haha, another edit conflict! You're welcome, IP editor. Just for kicks, check this out, too: [15]. And note that per WP:V, because original research is not to be used, and due to the fact that the colloquial name is already used as the article title according to WP:NAME, there's no reasonable content dispute here any longer. Editors cannot simply refuse to accept WP:RS and submit only original research. --King of the Arverni (talk) 19:31, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Although I think it's generally not useful to question motivations, I cannot help but point out the tone of some of the editors here. For example, the tone and content of the directly above Madcoverboy post displays a great desire to "win" the debate, with relatively little interest towards objectively determining what the offical name of Tulane is. For example, the 1884 reference is used, when later, more-current entries in the very same timeline use the "Tulane University" construction (but Madcoverboy doesn't mentionn this). Or, an alumni reference that Madcoverboy fails to mention refers to the class of 1962. I'm not sure whether the bias displayed stems from a reluctance to divert from one's previously stated postions, or a discrimination against anonymous posters; but, there seems to be bias here, and I have to mention it for the record. 74.255.214.226 (talk) 20:02, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
I simply selected one of several dozen class pages (here's 2008 for example [16]), all of which are clearly dated April 22, 2009 which fulfills the IP editor's clear insistence that there be a " current, Tulane-provided source indicating that "Tulane University of Louisiana" is the offical name" for it to be included. I have provided a 2 month-old citation from the Alumni Association listing the alumni by class of the "Tulane University of Louisiana". Please stop shifting the goal posts. The name of the article reflects the common name of the university, the lead sentence merely makes mention of its official and historical name. To assert otherwise or that such a name is either wrong or does not exist is false. Madcoverboy (talk) 20:36, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Nobody here has contested that the "Tulane University of Louisiana" construction was ever used; and now, thanks to King of the Arverni, we know that it has been used as recently as 2008 or later. Nonetheless, it their haste for a Wikipedia victory, Madcoverboy and King of the Arverni continue to fail to recognize that the the "Tulane University of Louisiana" construction has still not been established here as the offical name (as portrayed by the lead sentence of Tulane's main entry), as opposed to a name that is used. 74.255.214.226 (talk) 20:02, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
  • May I suggest that we stop talking about each other and focus on the name of the university? The school was originally the private "Medical College of Louisiana" and when it became public prior to 1847 it was called "The University of Louisiana". Paul Tulane's gift in 1884 prompted the school's reorganization as a private institution and his name was added, giving the full official name "The Tulane University of Louisiana". This has naturally been shortened in common usage to "Tulane University" (much as "Rhode Island and Providence Plantations" is commonly called "Rhode Island"). I am not aware of any formal decision to nix the extra words (as Rhode Island is considering), and so I believe the status quo in the article is appropriate. --Dystopos (talk) 20:56, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
  • According to Wikipedia, when the University of Southwestern Louisiana began efforts to adopt the name "University of Louisiana" in 1984, it sought and received permission from Tulane University to use the name. The legislature ultimately determined that no single campus would be "The University of Louisiana" and created the present "University of Louisiana System" in 1995. USL has since been renamed "University of Louisiana-Lafayette" but unofficially fosters its identification as "The University of Louisiana" (akin to Cal-Berkeley or UT-Austin being identified as their primary state institutions despite having longer official names) --Dystopos (talk) 21:12, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

In the spirit of complying with the majority opinion as formed here, I do not plan to alter the lead sentence in the absense of either: (1) the introduction of new information; or (2) a shift in the majority opinion formed here. Nonetheless, for the record, in light of all the information that has been presented, I want to state that I think the lead sentence is inappropriate; as I do not believe it has been sufficiently established that the "Tulane University of Louisiana" construction is the sole, current, official, and full name of this institution (which is the way the lead sentence discribes it). While sources have been provided that seemingly use "Tulane University of Louisiana" in this manner, there is a much much greater number of sources to support the "Tulane University" construction as also being applied in this manner. To provide a sampling of such sources (in addition to the numerous sources already provided above): (1) Tulane's 2005 renewal plan uses the "Tulane University" construction without mentioning "Tulane University of Louisiana" anywhere on the document; (2) Tulane currently uses the name "Tulane University" [17] for its mailing address (while Columbia uses the name "Columbia University in the City of New York" [18] for its mailing address); (3) Tulane's current "About Tulane" webpage uses the "Tulane University" construction, without mentioning the "Tulane University of Louisiana" construction; (4) Tulane's '06-'07 financial statements use "Tulane University" throughout (including an introduction sentence that reads "Tulane University, a private research university founded in 1834..."), while the "Tulane University of Louisiana" construction is never mentioned; and (5) many more, but I don't want to write a book here. 74.255.214.226 (talk) 14:06, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

  • As a final note (for now), I think the current wording of the lead setence, along with the wording above the logo, violate Wikipedia's undue weight WP:UNDUE policy (as was implied by the orginal poster of this discussion). 74.255.214.226 (talk) 14:31, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a democracy and this isn't about voting or majorities. It's about a (now) single editor's insistence on defying WP:VERIFY. The current wording is based on WP:RS: third-party, reliable, published sources. WP:UNDUE isn't the issue here -- note that it refers to the importance of RS. An equally irrational argument using UNDUE would be to say that, because MIT gets so many more hits than Massachusetts Institute of Technology and is the focus of http://www.mit.edu , the latter shouldn't be used in the Massachusetts Institute of Technology article at all (since that's the only argument left here). Anonymous editor: 1) please respect the sources and 2) stop changing the criteria for resolution each time a request that is satisfied or an objection is overcome. --King of the Arverni (talk) 21:08, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Arverniking, (1) you ask me to respect the sources you have provided. I do respect these sources; and I don't recall stating otherwise. I have fully explained in great detail why the sources do not sufficiently support the notion that "Tulane University of Louisiana" is the sole-current-official-full name used by this university. Conversely, you do not even address my sources. Next, (2) you allege a changing of the criteria. In trying to determine the official name(s) of the university, various concepts were tossed about, but, the benchmark never changed; the underlying question (obviously) was always whether the sources supported the wording of the sentence in the article. Finally, (3) your MIT analysis is clearly not analagous to the Tulane situation. I have made an entirely reasonable assertion that the wording of this Tulane article has raised WP:UNDUE concerns based on the ambiguity here and the fact that one name is used in the official capacity at a rate of many multiples compared to the name in the entry. Further, I believe the TU acronym may violate WP:UNDUE policies as well, because it misleads the reader by putting disproprotionate weight on a term that simply is not used (sure, there is a logo with the school's initials; but, in all my years at Tulane I have never heard someone say this acronym). Anyhow, I'm not going to exert much energy over the acronym because I don't think it's as misleading as the way "Tulane University of Louisiana" has been portrayed. 74.255.214.226 (talk) 14:46, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
There is potentially a COI here, since the IP editor consistently refers to his/her relationship with the institution and regularly thanks others who disclose their affiliation. It's a valid concern, especially since it's been pointed out more than once. One's own personal experience with an institution is not the be-all-and-end-all of its existence, and can often serve to harm NPOV, especially when it's been implied that such a relationship is somehow superior . As for the "changing of goalposts," as I think Madcoverboy put it, it's simply that we have one anonymous editor fighting anything other than one specific designation, despite numerous sources to the contrary. All that aside, one thing I can certainly agree on is that it would be nice to reference "Administrators of the Tulane Educational Fund" somehow. The best place seems to be under "Organization". The http://tulane.edu/about/history.cfm history provides some great info. re: the name of the university and its governing body. Now the fund is an endowment, just as other colleges have, and it has a board. It seems quite clear from the history that the Tulane University of Louisiana (as the history says) is managed by a board know as the Administrators of the Tulane Educational Fund. So I'll go ahead and stick it in there. --King of the Arverni (talk) 15:30, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
  • For the record, I didn't thank Dystopos for disclosing his affiliation. I thanked him for working to objectively improve the accuracy of the article. Also, I stand by my viewpoint (which also happens to be supported by Wikipedia rules) that an insider's perspective can be superior to an outsider's view in some circumstances (as I think it is in the case of the acronym issue here). Nobody is an expert on every topic, and sometimes it's best to rely on an insider's view, especially over what would seemingly be a non-controversial issue (e.g., a university acronym). 74.255.214.226 (talk) 15:51, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
  • I checked out your most recent citation (http://tulane.edu/about/history.cfm) supporting your belief that "Tulane University of Louisiana" is the sole-current-official-full name used by this university. This is a repeat of the timeline that someone already mentioned above; a timeline that refers to this title as the 1884 usage, yet later uses the "Tulane University" construction (within the very same timeline you are citing). You say that there are "numerous sources to the contrary" of my assertion that it has not been sufficiently established that "Tulane University of Louisiana" is the sole-current-official-full name, yet I am still waiting to see those numerous sources. 74.255.214.226 (talk) 16:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
  • You continue to fail to address my sources, which suggest that "Tulane University of Louisiana" is not the sole-current-official-full name. 74.255.214.226 (talk) 16:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
  • While I agree with Dystopos that it is not a good idea to bring up motivations, etc., since I am being questioned for COI concerns, I think it is only fair that I mention that I think others here have COI concerns. First, some of the editors here take on a tone that is anti-anonymous users. Second, some of the editors here seem to have become entrenched in a particular "side," which has resulted in a loss of objectivity. As evidence of this I point to: (1) the consistent selective use of references; (2) the apparent failure to even look at my references; (3) the odd pursuit of pushing through this acronym despite having someone at the university mention that this acronym is not commonly used. Personally, I could not imagine trying to insert an acronym to another university's Wikipedia page despite being told by someone at the university that this acronym is not used. I find this behavior to be downright strange -- but more importantly -- indicative of non-objectivity. 74.255.214.226 (talk) 16:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

I think the most accurate lead sentence would read:

74.255.214.226 (talk) 15:51, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
The "Tulane Educational Fund" absolutely should not be included in the lead as this is simply either an organizational proxy what is commonly known as the board of trustees or an investment vehicle for the same and is not an accredited, degree-granting, institution of higher education. Madcoverboy (talk) 18:00, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
I agree. To suggest that the name of the body of trustees is equivalent to the name of the institution would be foolish. --Dystopos (talk) 03:46, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Thank you both for your input. I see your logic. Nonetheless, I do continue to contest the "Tulane University of Louisiana" construction as it is currently being applied. I do not think the current wording is the most accurate wording or portrayal, as I believe the university has made a clear and concerted effort to use the "Tulane University" construction predominantly as the official name. My reasoning is all outlined above, but I think the timeline may be particularly relevant, as it indicates a shift towards "Tulane University", where the timeline wording could have just said "the University" if there was no change in the predominant official name. 74.255.214.226 (talk) 23:00, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Is anyone contesting this last contestation? 129.171.233.79 (talk) 00:51, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
It appears that, having found some consensus, we've merely stopped indulging in argument. There is no need to construct a hypothesis to make one version "correct". Both versions of the name are clearly correct and in current use, the longer one in some official contexts and the shorter one for most general uses. --Dystopos (talk) 02:30, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

The University is not "officially The Tulane University of Louisiana". This is wrong. The entity is officially "The Administrators of the Tulane Educational Fund," and "Tulane University". In addition to all of the facts already listed in this discussion (including the University's own timeline posted on its website), I encourage you to look at the University's liability release forms (these are used for off-campus student trips, etc.). The release forms read "I hereby release The Administrators of the Tulane Educational Fund, Tulane University, and their employees . . . ". Tulane's own lawyers don't bother to release "Tulane University of Louisiana," because no such entity with this "official" title currently exists. Any assertion otherwise is incorrect and certainly does not belong as a factual statement to be broadcast erroneously on Wikipedia. This statement--that "The Tulane University of Louisiana" is the official name--must be omitted. 129.81.164.165 (talk) 22:10, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Just out of curiosity, what then is Tulane's reasoning for continuing to make use of a seal that bears the name "Tulane University of Louisiana", if that is no longer its name? As a counterexample, Rice University used to be "The Rice Institute", but does not continue to make use of a seal that bears that name.AniRaptor2001 (talk) 01:42, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
AniRaptor2001: Thank you for asking critical questions about the name. 129.81.90.125 (talk) 01:49, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
To the general discussion: There is ample evidence to show that "Tulane University of Louisiana" is not the official name; or, at the very least, that the official name may not be clear. The same couple of users like to point to the same sources that they suggests indicate otherwise, but none of these sources definitively supports their assertion. Moreover, these users have demonstrated a reluctance to even address citations suggesting the opposite of their assertion. In any event, if the fact being asserted is in question, here is my suggestion to you: Why not just leave it out? Or, in the alternative, you can mention that the official name is in dispute (although I think this would be unecessary clutter for the top of the entry). 129.81.90.125 (talk) 01:49, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
The long name is used by reliable sources. There's no need to leave it out and little remaining need to question its use, since it's been discussed at length and the WP:BURDEN met. The fiercest opposition seems to be anonymous and incorrigible, despite support from the affiliated, the unaffiliated, and the initially skeptical. --inquietudeofcharacter (talk) 03:27, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
Yet again, point out the fact that this is a struggle between "anonymous" users versus named editors, rather than addressing the very specific points that have been made about the issue at hand (just one example: the University provided timeline showing that the University now officially goes by "Tulane University"). The "anonymous editor argument" is not very convincing, and it does not meet the WP:BURDEN; not be a long shot. 129.81.90.125 (talk) 03:38, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
I would also like to add that I find it amusing that the fact that the name has "been discussed at length" supposedly somehow supports the proposition that the University's official name is without question "The Tulane University of Louisiana." 129.81.90.125 (talk) 03:43, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

(outdent)The official name of the Tulane University of Louisiana is stated here from the U.S. Department of Education, here from the university seal, here from the Carnegie Foundation, and here from the Alumni Association. While Tulane University is the common name and one used by the university's style guide, the full name appears to be official. These are reliable sources. Alanraywiki (talk) 03:59, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

The official name of the University is listed on its Form 990, filed to the U.S. Treasury Department. The official name is The Administrators of Tulane Educational Fund," and it does business as "Tulane University." http://www.guidestar.org/FinDocuments//2010/720/423/2010-720423889-073bd7fe-9.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.219.88.140 (talk) 20:20, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
It appears that the pedants who are trying to win some non-existent technical point have returned to ruin the article's lead. As has been covered before, the administrative board is never referenced as Tulane's name, even in the most technical and minutia heavy settings. The DOE, Carnegie foundation and others make reference to either Tulane University or Tulane University of Louisiana. Yes, we get it, you've dug into the 990, and get a pat on the back. But if no one, outside of accountants or people with way too much spare time on their hands know the institution as that, then that is not it's name, as certainly no one will reference it as that. For example, in real estate parlance, a home is referenced by lots and metes, but in real life it's location is known by it's address. More experienced wiki users, please help. These trolls are going to keep reverting this page, and I just don't have the time to prevent it from happening. They obviously do. Spare time should not triumph over common sense and facts. Azaru (talk) 23:57, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
I've simply omitted the paranthetical about the name. It's not necessary, especially when it's in dispute. 67.86.180.234 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:47, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Tulane_University/Archives/2013&oldid=716779650"