Talk:Alumni

Untitled

The OED claims that Alumn is a "slangy casualism" and recommends the use of Alum instead, also claiming that this spelling is more common. Google seems to confirm this, although I haven't checked whether the results for Alum and Alumn refer to what the article is about. If they do, we should move the article. Kokiri 21:34, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC)

"Alumnus" gets significantly more Google hits than "Alumn". "Alum" gets far more than either, but most seem to be other meanings (to do with Aluminium, for instance), and not this meaning. Proteus (Talk) 11:28, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)

For this meaning, "alum" is definitely more common than "alumn." However, there's already an article on alum. Why not move this article to "alumnus"? :) --Lukobe 21:10, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Both "alum" and "alumn" are informal. But "alumnus" and "alumna" are sex-specific. So I have moved the article to "alumnus/a". As for "alum" vs. "alumn", I get alumni newsletters from several schools and colleges, and I've never seen the term "alumn". Google searches on the phrases "college alum" and "college alumn" give 6170 vs. 134 hits, so I think it's fair to say that the usage "alumn" is rare -- which makes it bizarre that it was used as the article title. By far the most common term of all is "alumni", but (a) this is a plural (which Wikipedia articles names are not supposed to be) and (b) it is not sex-neutral. --Macrakis 21:34, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

"Alumnus" is sex-neutral. In Latin the masculine gender is used to describe a person of unknown sex (or people of unknown sex, or a group of people including both men and women). Proteus (Talk) 22:36, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I understand your point. However, it seems to me clearer and less contentious to make it explicit that the article is talking about both male and female alumni by calling it "alumnus/i". In fact, I suspect that the reason it used to be entitled "alumn" was precisely to avoid the suffixes... at the cost of using a form which is quite rare in actual usage. --Macrakis 01:14, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

"Alumni" is frequently pronounced as "alumnae," thus making no distinction to the casual listener. It's problematic.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.106.22.99 (talk) 11:24, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

We need to move it back... soon! WhisperToMe 20:57, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

Could you be more explicit? What do you propose to move this article to, and why? Macrakis 09:33 4 Aug

The page's title should be changed to alumnnus/a - one user stated that alumnus was gender neutral because the masculine form is used to refer to both men and women, and while this is true in a sense, it is a very sexist tradition. It is the same as using "man" or "men" to refer to men and women. See a standard MLA Style Manual for more information on removing sexist language from reputable publications, etc. It is not considered acceptable in many areas to use the pronoun he to refer to men and women, etc. - changing the title to alumnus/a avoids offending anyone and thus seems to me to be the most logical fix. Nadsat 22:24, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Also see my referenced inclusion on the page about using alumnus/a and alumnae/i to remove sexist language. I redirected the page to alumnus/a AND redirected alumni, alumnus, alumna, alumnae, and alumn to the new page so that there are NO double redirects. AND also on the alum page I changed the disambiguation at the top to say alumnus/a (to reflect the new page name). Please respond here on the talk page before reverting! I made sure that I edited responsibly so there are no double redirects and thus the change will not cause a problem or inconvenience for anyone, instead it merely reflects MLA guidelines etc. for removing previously accepted sexist language. It especially makes sense since the first sentence of the page references both the term alumnus and the term alumna. Thanks! Nadsat 02:38, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Link suggestions

An automated Wikipedia link suggester has some possible wiki link suggestions for the Alumn article, and they have been placed on this page for your convenience.
Tip: Some people find it helpful if these suggestions are shown on this talk page, rather than on another page. To do this, just add {{User:LinkBot/suggestions/Alumn}} to this page. — LinkBot 10:38, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Faculty

I'm noticing Alumn** being used with former faculty members who were NOT previously students. I don't think this a correct usage, is it? Before I start changing categories and articles, I thought I'd ask here. --Samuel Wantman 20:20, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

I think this case is covered by the following part of the current article:

Recently, the definition of "alum" has expanded to include people who have "matriculated at" or exited from any kind of organization or process. As such, one can potentially be a "corporate alum" of XYZ Company, or an alum of a military branch, non-profit organization, or training process.

--Macrakis 22:08, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Updating Google statistics

The article was recently moved back to "alumn" despite the above discussion, so I thought I'd update the Google figures to make sure they're still valid. In all cases, I searched for the phrase "college alumXX" and its plural, not just the word, e.g. [college-alumn | college-alumns]. Alumnus/i has 2700k hits; alumna/ae has 125k; alum/s has 37k; alumn/s has 0.5k. So alumn remains very rare compared to the alternatives, and the forms alumnus/i/a/ae are 83 times more common than all the other forms combined. So it seems clear that the article should be named using that form. Using alumnus alone seems inappropriate because it is masculine; hence alumnus/a. --Macrakis 17:31, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

alumni = graduate?

I'm currently in need of more info about this issue. Can anyone show any evidence that alumni now actually admit matriculated students etc? I've met resistance at my own university about this topic. --Thomasrm 21st of february, 2006

I too would like to see more evidence/etymology on alumni being a broader term that includes those that did not graduate. Even if the dictionary definition on this point is correct, it's not usually the way it's used in public, and I think this point needs much more explanation. Wl219 10:34, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

I also want to know more about this. As I look around the internet, I consistently alumni used to mean a graduate, or in a broader sense a current student, but never a drop-out. The ONLY usage of a dropout I see is a couple of dictionaries. Some other dictionaries specifically say it has to be a graduate. Rm999 08:20, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I am 'public' and always suspected 'alumni' meant 'former student'. You can be an 'alumnus' (former student) simply by signing up and appearing in the classroom. 'Graduate' is university-specific term for the hallowed gown-donning moment at the end of three consecutive years on a BA, MA and so on. If 'alumni' simply means 'graduate', then what of the 'drop-outs' you might otherwise have spent one, two, or more years at a school or other institution? Some of these 'drop-outs' may, far from having been a complete failure, actually received, on leaving, an 'exit award' for their troubles, for example of a Certificate of Higher Education' (to use UK parlance...) instead. Not all university students in the world are degree students, and a 'certificate' is a perfectly valid university award, even though 'graduate' would not technically be the term with which to describe them. Remember that (in Britain/Europe, at least), 'alma mater' has also been known to refer to primary schools, secondary schools etc... and nobody "graduates" from school. Apart from artificially airbrushing peoples' rightful educational associations out of history, what else do you consider them? MRacer 17:58, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Inded. I have a non-degree award from a university (specifically studied for, not a consolation) - am I a "graduate" of that institution. The term "graduation" was never used for any ceremony involved (which I never attended anyway) and AFAIK I'm not called a "graduate" of the institution. But the use of the term "alumni" by the institution most definitely includes me. Timrollpickering 22:52, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

At my alma mater, I don't *think* you are invited into the alumni association unless you graduated. Rm999 11:55, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

If I flunked out of the 3rd grade - does that still make me an alumni of the elementary school? Seriously, I'd prefer the definition that an alumnus actually enrolled and stayed long enough to graduate. Anything less actually disrespects the school. I think some more authoritative definitions should also be referenced. --74.107.74.39 (talk) 01:33, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

A related point: This article calls alumni “former students of a school, college, or university who have either attended or graduated in some fashion.” Note the "either ...or." It raises a question: Can one be graduated from an institution of learning without ever having attended it (at least virtually)? Like Rm999 above, I find this curiously-worded kind of definition only in a couple of dictionaries. I'll accept that an alumnus need not have graduated. But they must have checked in, for surely that criterion is part of what delimits “a former student.” For example, is the recipient of an honorary degree a “graduate”? Even if so, are they an alumnus? I suggest that this sentence’s relative clause “who have either attended or graduated in some fashion from the institution” be struck out as a tautology. If no one offers reason to object, I'll strike it out myself. Mucketymuck (talk) 04:48, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Yes, this is common for validated degrees and, historically, where the university is an examining university rather than a teaching university. The University of London, for example, was an examining board that awarded degrees but did not do any teaching until 1900. As an example of validation, students on the Common Awards are students of their theological college but will become graduates of Durham University on being awarded their degrees – the regulations are, however, quite explicit that they are not students of Durham University. Robminchin (talk) 21:06, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

The recent move

Someone just moved the article back to Alumn. Was there any discussion? --Lukobe 04:35, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

No, there was no discussion. I updated my statistics above, and will move it back. --Macrakis 17:32, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

viewpoint

• An alumnus is a person, especially a boy or man, who has attended or is a graduate of an educational institution. The plural is alumni. An alumna is a girl or woman alumnus. The plural is alumnae.

I think this is very neutral. It doesn't say alumnus is only for a boy or man. It says a person, especially a boy or man. I think it is very clear.(209.177.21.6 - Talk)

Well first of all alumnus is the "masculine form" and typically does refer to a male graduate. The sentences "the plural is alumni" and "the plural is alumnae" are sloppy, choppy, and not very clear. I would like to know the exact issues you have with this intro:

An alumnus (masculine) or alumna (feminine) is a person who has attended or is a graduate of an educational institution. The masculine plural, alumni, is often used for mixed groups and the masculine singular is sometimes used generically. The feminine plural is alumnae

That's what I am mainly curious about -- why do you not like this. I think this is more correct because it is true that in Latin, alumnus is the masculine form and alumna is the feminine form. This intro goes on to describe the words in terms of their Latin forms which makes sense. Instead, your version of the intro assumes that the masculine form must be applied to someone who qualifies as a "boy or man" and the feminine form must be applied to someone who qualifies as a "girl or woman." Also what is the difference between girl or woman and boy or man? When does one switch from a girl to a woman and a boy to a man? It seems a bit vague and arbitrary to describe it as such. Also the term especially seems favoring. It seems (moreover since these words come from Latin) that it makes more sense to discuss the words in terms of their word forms, not in terms of who the terms are used to address -- at least in the opening. The usage section of the article goes on to discuss the actual common usages of the terms. Please respond to the questions and further explain. Your above explanation was a bit vague. Thanks. Nadsat 23:15, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

It says an alumnus is a person which means it can be a man, woman, or child but it is especially for a boy or man. A girl that graduated or attended elemntary school would be an alumnus. A boy that graduated or attended elementary school would be an alumnus. A man that graduated or attended college would also be an alumnus. An alumna is strictly for a girl or woman alumnus. I'm using a school computer if you are curious why my IP address is different.(207.156.197.1) - Talk)

Still, it seems much more logical to talk about these words in terms of their forms i.e. masculine or feminine - and the USAGE should go under the usage section. See? This is only the intro of the page, the words have certain masculine or feminine forms but technically if a "man" wanted to call himself an alumna he could couldn't he? He would be using the "feminine" form but he COULD call himself an alumna. Thus, your version of the intro is very vague. Why don't you find references and add the discussion of the usage of the masculine/feminine word forms to the USAGE section. That seems more logical doesn't it? Also, as previously stated: The sentences "the plural is alumni" and "the plural is alumnae" are sloppy, choppy, and not very clear. N.B. - I relocated your response so that it is below my response and above my new response so we can keep the posts in chronological order. It makes it more clear and less confusing for everyone (including me!)Nadsat 20:44, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Page location

A user made a suggestion in the midst of an ancient thread, not even in the most recent "The Recent Move" section, and then moved the page a few hours later to Alumnus/a claiming there had been discussion. I've moved the page back and reverted the redirects.

Such a compound form is virtually never used and the use of a / in the title creates style problems. Using compound forms have been widely deplored in numerous proposed page moves and the like - can anyone cite another page that basically has two names combined in the title to produce a term never used?

My personal preference would be for the plural "alumni", although in my experience "alumnus" is often used regardless of gender - many seem willing to abandon the rules of Latin when using words in English. (And why not? That is how a language evolves and absorbs other words.) "Alumnus/a" is frankly one of the worst forms imaginable. Timrollpickering 20:39, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

The following was posted on Timrollpickering and directed towards this particular user (and thus uses the pronoun "you" to refer to said user). Yet, since Timrollpickering decided to post on the alumnus talk page about this issue, I will paste my response to him/her here as well for whomever it may concern. Thanks.

Okay. I didn't realize I should make a new discussion about it, apologies for that. YET, if you were thorough, you would have seen on my explanation of my edit I wrote "m (moved Alumnus to Alumnus/a: removing sexist language - see my comment on the talk page about it)" - So I instructed you to look on the talk page for my comments. Also, I am not sure if the "compound form" is used on any other pages, I will research that but it may take me awhile to gather a list, but this is almost a moot point anyway (*explanation in following sentences for this conclusion). Also typically the masculine forms and feminine forms have their own pages. "Man" has a page that refers to people with male gonads and "woman" refers to people with female gonads. Etc. Also, just because the majority of wikipedia has uncited material and material with no sources doesn't mean we should follow that trend. I think there is a strong case to be made that the use of the term "alumnus" for a page that talks about alumna and alumnae is illogical and not a good idea, just like uncited information. I believe this analogy makes sense because it illustrates that just because one circumstance is more prevalent, does not mean this circumstance is the right circumstance, that it should occur, or that we should be assume culpability for making it reoccur. Also, please see the alumnus article and the ONLY REFERENCE on the page which I added when I added the information and follow the link for the dicussion on the usage of alumnae/i and alumnus/a. Feel free to visit these links I found within seconds of using Google. For uses of alumnus/a: [1], [2], [3], [4] AND for uses of alumni/ae: [5], [6], [7],[8]. These are just a few. Many of these links are from presitgious Ivy League colleges, instituations and nationally acclaimed boarding schools. Look, it's a compromise anyway - and a valid one at that. I could say use "alumna" as the title but that would be "counterproductive, counterintuitive, and illogical" as well. Even the a is just a "/a" here. Really, "alumnus/a" and "alumni/ae" are well established and respected. As I urged you before pick up a MLA Style Manual and check out what they deem "removing sexist language." I see no need to call it sexist (personally) or point fingers, language has faults, and they have been fixed. In the academic world and grammatical circles this usage is really preferred. Hope to hear from you soon. PS. (I don't want my tone to sound mean, I don't mean to be rude for the sake of being rude - just passionately logical, please read it as such). Nadsat 21:48, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Also, in case I didn't make it clear in my previous post - the above links should illustrate that the forms alumnus/a and alumni/ae (or alumna/us and alumnae/i) are not only used, but used quite frequently, since in your explanation of your revert of my edit, you stated that the form I used (alumnus/a) is not used, which is obviously incorrect. Nadsat 01:48, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

graduate redirects here

I'm not sure about the usage internationally, but I'm a bit concerned that graduate directs here. I think the two words have slightly distinctive meanings. In the UK, alumnus refers to people who have formerly been students at a particular institution. However, graduate as a general noun refers to any person who has qualified at any institution with an award at bachelors level or higher Tafkam 00:46, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Don't tell the foundation degrees that! ;-) "Graduate" is one of those words with subtle differences in meaning including:

"Person who graduated" in anything.

"Person with a university qualification", although it's not always clear which non degrees are included.

"Person who completed university" - as well as people starting "graduate jobs" before the actual ceremony itself, there are stories of people who don't actually take their degree in the end - a common involves refusing to pay debts to the university who in turn refuse to confer the degree.

Simple it is not! Timrollpickering 11:29, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Alums

Are there any sources for this word being used for the non-gendered plural? I know I've heard the word alums used. -- trlkly 09:13, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Is a citation necessary? Is it worth mentioning? Since "alum" is a singular, people will sometimes add "s" to make it a plural without even thinking about it... and "alumni" is gender-neutral as well as number-neutral for all but the sticklers (when used unmarked in English, after all, it's an English word, not a Latin-ruled one, and that's all most people know) —Isaac Dupree^(talk) 14:10, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I must totally disagree with Mr. Dupree. Alumnus may be an english word, but it definitely comes directectly from latin, and the forms adopted (such as plural alumni, or feminine plural alumnae) show that the latin rules continue to apply as they to for other words directly taken from latin. And latin does not use gender-neuter words. Alum is an invented word, which might be used in slang instead of alumnus.Afil (talk) 21:02, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Alumni more and more often used in non academic context

In many places the word alumni is being used as "former members of a company" and not former member of an educational institution. It would be interesting to add this to the main article. The article could also mention, whether this is 'common and wrong usage' or whether the meaning of alumni has been enhanced.

I'm no English speaker and can't comment further. Surfing the internet alumni can often be seen as 'ex-members of a company' (for example in LinkedIn) --192.88.172.35 (talk) 10:56, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Merriam-Webster concurs with you, stranger. Maikel (talk) 17:54, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Citations

... are great, but please don't mention them directly in the text, as in "The 1856 edition of Rev. Worbely's Companion To Good English For the Lower Classes states that ..." as this makes the article a PITA to read. That information belongs to the ref-tag. Ta, Maikel (talk) 17:53, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

"Alumnus" is not rare

Two of the last few edits to the article claim that usage of the words "Alumnus", "Alumni" etc is rare. Even if this were true, verifiable sources would be needed to make such a claim in the article. See WP:OR and WP:VERIFY. Here and here are the edits in question. Perhaps the editor insisting the word is rare just has no need to encounter it. I come across the word far too often to call it rare. I've removed the dubious claim. (WP Editor 2011 (talk) 01:25, 9 March 2012 (UTC))

Hi, I think you might have reverted the most recent version without reading it fully. It said "Alumnus and its variants were chiefly used in US English, but since the 1980s they have become common in British English too." You're right that the word isn't rare now, but the OED and other dictionaries say that the word is "chiefly US". I made the mistake of thinking that it was still rare, but User:Cj1430 pointed out that it has come into use in the last 25 years or so, and he and you are of course correct. However I didn't think that the final version was incorrect. Of course, I'm not sure whether I can find a reference for it, so you can always object on OR grounds. Regards, Dingo1729 (talk) 03:40, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I did read the most recent version and I doubt it just as much as the others because one user's recollections from 30 years ago aren't trustworthy and don't deserve to be mentioned in an encyclopaedia. Even if few people used the word 30 years ago, so what? It's not as if the word didn't exist. It comes all the way back from Latin. (WP Editor 2011 (talk) 04:59, 9 March 2012 (UTC))

This seems to have got twisted around. The fact that alumnus is "chiefly US" is verifiable to the OED, a reliable, authoritative source. I was trying to modify that by what is probably OR to say that it has come into greater use in British English. Would you prefer that we just go with the OED statement or shall we modify it with something like your OR that it is now in common use (which I'm not disputing)? Dingo1729 (talk) 14:56, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

It wasn't original research when I said alumnus isn't rare; it's in every dictionary and used by probably every university. The Oxford Dictionary's claim that alumnus is "chiefly US" adds no value to the article and is not necessarily true anyway; I've seen plenty of mistakes in the Oxford Dictionary. For example, the OED says invite can be a noun, façade can have a c instead of ç and one can wait on something to happen. There is no need to make any comment along these lines in the article. (WP Editor 2011 (talk) 01:19, 10 March 2012 (UTC))

OK, I have restored a rephrased version of what I wrote.

• The first sentence is true and clearly sourced to the OED.
• The second sentence is true and, though probably unsourceable, clear from google searches.

If you still don't like it, it would be helpful if you would state your objections here clearly and I'll take it to some form of dispute resolution. Dingo1729 (talk) 03:31, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Will you also tell the administrators about how you just ignored the talk page and changed the article anyway? Don't ask me to state my objections; I already did. The word is not rare, it probably never has been and to declare in the article that it's uncommon not only adds no value to the article, but it would also discourage people from using the word. Just because you don't like hearing what I said doesn't give you permission to ignore the proper process and change the article to whatever you want. (WP Editor 2011 (talk) 06:15, 10 March 2012 (UTC))

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just modified one external link on Alumnus. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060815124724/http://www.ed.gov/offices/OERI/PLLI/webreprt.html to http://www.ed.gov/offices/OERI/PLLI/webreprt.html

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 01:59, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Notable Alumni

My name is Glenn Lott. ‘75 graduate of Drake University’s School of Journalism and Mass Communication. I was captain of Drake University’s 1974 and 1975 Football teams. I was All-Missouri Valley conference my junior and senior years. I was a college football All-American my senior year, and I played in post season All-American football games. I was drafted in the 2nd round of the 1975 NFL College Football draft out of tiny Drake University by the Buffalo Bills. I played for Buffalo and the Detroit Lions. I am considered a veteran of the NFL. I was the 50th player drafted of more than 350 college athletes. I also played in the CFL for the Montreal Allouettes in the 1976 Grey Cup. You might ask why do I tell you these facts ( dates may be off)? I tell you this because I continue to get mail from Drake’s athletic department, alumni department and it’s “gofundme” department. But when my family members and friends read Drake’s notable alumni they fail to see my name. Yet there are other names for CFL and NFL play. I was under contract in Buffalo, Detroit and Montreal. The other Drake athletes listed performed no better than I did on the professional level. WHY ISNT MY NAME LISTED. Glenn346 (talk) 02:52, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Sir, this is a Wendy's 194.83.163.215 (talk) 15:33, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Pseudoetymology

I just undid revision 991643435 by 2600:1700:5C2:3410:ED1F:5F5A:2F32:E45B. The reverted edit had added added the following section:

• an alternate and possibly more accurate etymology of the word: Alumni/alumnus comes from the Arabic word "alim" meaning "a knowledgeable person" which is evidently more relevant to the meaning to "alumni" but hey what do I know? Obviously I'm not as knowledgeable as the white men who rewrite history to make themselves seem superior

This explanation is uncited, clearly violates NPOV, and is extremely implausible. The word is well established in Roman Law, predating contact between Latin and Arabic. The original sense of the word is also a "fosterling", not related to the Arabic, but naturally following from the PIE etymology (which consists of two morphemes that are both well established in Latin and elsewhere in the exact sense we see them here) Tristanjlroberts (talk) 21:43, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 27 September 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved. As per discussion, the ngram provided by Vpab15 indicates a higher usage for Alumni than that of Alumnus. The discussion also mentioned that the word "alumni" has also been used with "Alumni of women's universities and colleges", as well as "more common usage". Per WP:COMMONNAME, "Sometimes that common name includes non-neutral words that Wikipedia normally avoids (e.g. Alexander the Great, or the Teapot Dome scandal). In such cases, the prevalence of the name, or the fact that a given description has effectively become a proper name (and that proper name has become the common name), generally overrides concern that Wikipedia might appear as endorsing one side of an issue." Thus, I find consensus for the move. (non-admin closure) Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 21:16, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

---

Alumnus → Alumni – "Alumnus" is the male version of alumni, making the decision to locate the article here rather than at "Alumna" a clear instance of the male as norm phenomenon, and one that could potentially confuse readers about whether the article's scope (i.e. whether it also covers female alumnae). Per WP:Manual of Style#Gender-neutral language, a guideline, we should be avoiding the generic 'he' and generic 'she'" wherever "this can be done with clarity and precision." Therefore, it's desirable to move this article away from its current title if possible.

There are two main alternatives. The first, "alum," is unfortunately still considered informal and appears to be popular mainly in the U.S. and Canada. For the second, the plural form "alumni," we need to consider WP:Naming conventions (plurals). That guideline advises normally using singular titles. However, it allows an exception for Articles on groups or classes of specific things, and alumni arguably fall into this category because the former students of any given institution are almost always considered as a group. It also notes the option to ignore the rules here in order to make the encyclopedia better, which I think is relevant if one disagrees with my interpretations of WP:PLURALS. If we end up having to choose between adhering to WP:PLURALS and MOS:GNL, I think it's more important to adhere to MOS:GNL given the factors above. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 05:46, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

But alumni is still male, even if (according to the male-normative rules of Latin grammar) it takes in mixed groups; the female plural is alumnae (which is used by women's colleges). I'm all for finding a gender-neutral alternative, but swapping in a plural male noun for a singular male noun doesn't really help with MOS:GNL. Alum is certainly better from the gender pov, but suffers from only being a word in North American English (and from Alum already being taken by the chemical term). Robminchin (talk) 06:00, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Irrespective of its Latin roots, as a loan word in English, "alumni" has substantially fewer gendered connotations than "alumnus". For instance, note that we have Category:Alumni of women's universities and colleges. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 08:48, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose. Since were are discussing loanwords from Latin, Latin is not a language encumbered by progressive gender expectations. As was the case with English for hundreds of years, and is also the case for Romance languages with gender, speakers of Latin are comfortable with the implicitly inclusive usage of masculine declensions. It is unnecessary to impose arbitrary rules like this. Alumnus is the best name for this article. Elizium23 (talk) 06:39, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support. I think our article titling guidelines generally support this move. In addition to what the nominator laid out, WP:PLURAL also says that with irregular plurals [such as this one] whose usage far exceeds the usage of the singular, the plural form can be used for the title, and then gives examples of other Latin words such as Bacteria and Data where the plural form is used for the title. "Alumni" certainly is more common than "Alumnus", and "Alumni" has become the most common term to the point where sometimes I will see and hear it being used in the singular. "Alumni" is the most common term and the gender-inclusive term here. I don't see this being any different that titling our article on cows and bulls as Cattle. Rreagan007 (talk) 06:41, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose move. "Alumnus" has been the gender-neutral term for long enough that most people are unaware it was originally gendered. O.N.R. ^(talk) 08:16, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support per nomination and Rreagan007. Since "Alumna" redirects to "Alumnus", "Alumnus" thus becomes by default the putative primary term. "Alumni", on the other hand, serves as the all-inclusive plural for alumni and alumnae as a unit. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 04:37, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support - I watch University Challenge where the host says "notable alumni include", making that a more common usage of this group of words relating to University graduates. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 07:28, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support that's generally the definition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robby the Rabbit (talk • contribs) 09:30, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. WP:PLURAL does create an exception for classes or groups of specific things, but the article subject doesn't really neatly fit in as a class or group of specific things. As such, the naming convention would command that we use some singular form here, so moving to the plural form seems dubious. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 16:28, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support per nom. Unforgivable in this day and age to have a gendered title when a gender-neutral one is available and probably more common. Vpab15 (talk) 14:57, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

  "Alumni" is clearly the WP:COMMONNAME per google ngrams ([9]). Vpab15 (talk) 15:01, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

• Support per nomination. Alumni is indeed far more common. Google ngram is an excellet proof. Benjamin1995a (talk) 15:28, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. There is no getting away from the genderedness of ancient Latin terminology. Using the masculine plural would seem to reinforce the "male as norm" as much as the current title, just more subtly. I don't think alumni constitute a class (per the MOS). Srnec (talk) 20:07, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.