Wikipedia talk:Ivies

Comments

I like this proposal very much as an apparently fair compromise on a way of adjudicating the endless disputes about "Ivy" articles of various sorts. (This is honestly far more inclusive than I think Wikipedia should be of the sort of boosterish creeping Ivyism which seeks to append meaningless compliments to every possible university, but the constant re-creation of such articles probably means Wikipedia needs to say something about the phenomenon.) So: my full support, and I hope other editors will feel likewise. -- Rbellin|Talk 04:36, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I add my full support. My only qualm has to do with the Little Ivies. Whereas the Public Ivies and Jesuit Ivy are clearly defined, the Little Ivies are more ambiguous and not just synonymous with the New England Small College Athletic Conference. Nonetheless, the use of the term is well documented and widespread enough to merit an article in my opinion. The same is not true of "Southern Ivies" or other regional "Ivy League of the XYZ" claims. 129.105.104.169 18:17, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have never before actually seen someone propose a policy page with the sole purpose of trying to overturn a deletion debate they don't like the imminent outcome of. Wow. Phil Sandifer 17:40, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In general, proposing a policy as a consequence of a single bad event is a really bad practice and leads to instruction creep run rampant. And leads to the sort of thicket of red tape that makes people ignore all rules. And in this case the event hasn't even happened yet.

Dpbsmith: What actually makes adding this new policy necessary? - David Gerard 18:24, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Why is this necessary as a "policy"? Kelly Martin (talk) 02:39, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Joining the doubters here. Boosterism on articles about colleges and universities is the same phenomenon as fanboy writing on articles about Linux distributions, or what have you. It can be dealt with by applying our basic policies on an article-by-article basis, but I don't see the point of this. --Michael Snow 02:46, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I can't believe that we need another policy to deal with an incredibly small subset of US educational institutions. Burninate this page, quickly. Alphax ^τεχ 03:40, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Instruction creep. — Dan | Talk 08:13, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Historically, the term "Little Ivies" applies to the colleges comprising the historic Little Three, i.e, Amherst, Wesleyan and Williams. Other than being smaller in size, these three schools are seen as having the same essential qualities (e.g., academic excellence, long traditions, exclusivity, social prestige) as the larger Ivy League schools. Anthropologique 12:38, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]