Talk:Binghamton University/Archive 1

Binghamton University vs. SUNY Binghamton

Someone keeps changing all of the instances of Binghamton University to SUNY Binghamton and it needs to stop. I'm guessing this is an alumni who is not aware of the goings on at Binghamton University. At one point in time, the institution's name was, in fact, the State University of New York at Binghamton. In 1992, as part of a major branding campaign, they adopted the name Binghamton University. It is true that Binghamton University alone is not the legal name of the institution, however, in order to facilitate the name change and legitimize the branding initiative, the name was legally changed from the State University of New York at Binghamton to Binghamton University, State University of New York. Again, Binghamton University is an officially adopted name, but not legal. The State University of New York at Binghamton is not a legal or adopted name (though because of historic presence and confusion, it frequently appears this way on non-university publications, lists, selections, etc.), while Binghamton University, State University of New York is the legal name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.226.220.42 (talk) 20:52, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

It has been noted that SUNY Binghamton still appears in the university's seal, which really means nothing. The seal has historic significance and like many other universities, Binghamton has opted to keep their historic seal despite the alteration in name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.226.220.42 (talk) 22:59, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

The State University of New York at Buffalo, Stony Brook and Albany each adopted names as well: University at Buffalo, Stony Brook University and UAlbany respectively. These changes, which also happened around 1992, did not include a legal change in their names. It is likely that this fact perpetuates the notion that Binghamton University's name change also did not accompany a legal shift, while, in fact, it did.

There is also a wide spread, though finally dieing rumor, that the change in name was a step toward an intended privatization of the institution. This is also a false notion.

Now this is interesting; a Binghamton University Computer...the same one as always...complaining about the wikipedia article? And without citing anything? Yet having as much knowledge as an insider? This is obviously NOT an individual acting on good faith AT ALL. And add your comments to the bottom of the page. And find legal instances of that being the name since NO ONE has heard of it.71.247.119.144 (talk) 20:28, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

I speculate that 128.226.220.42 is a university official. If you look at their edits, they generally are of information relating to Binghamton University that no one would know, such as alumni information, various figures and statistics. Their edits are not credible and are evidence of the corporate vandalism that's unfortunately common on wikipedia. This page and their edits deserved to be watched. Among their history includes editting Genesceo's page to knock down their ratings in contrast to Binghamton as well as editting many things related to Binghamton. I personally will be watching this page. As there is no citation for Binghamton University aside from Binghamton officials themselves, and since the article is named SUNY Binghamton, all references to Binghamton University thus should be SUNY Binghamton except in the intro paragraph.163.151.2.10 (talk) 19:34, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

I am not a Binghamton official of any kind. I am simply informed. You yourself fail to produce any citation. Whether or not you agree with the facts, even when a school officially adopts a name (in this case Binghamton University) and especially when that name is by long and far the most heavily used name, that is the appropriate way to address the institution. The contents should, hence, all use the title Binghamton University. Additionally, I have no idea where you get the title SUNY (at Binghamton) from. That is a form that isn't used anywhere other than your personal edits. IF in fact you insist on using the SUNY form, it should be written simple SUNY Binghamton (though technically Binghamton University, SUNY).

As for my edits to the Geneseo page, which are irrelevant to this, they were extremely legitimate claims, all of which I cited and was ultimately backed by wikipedia. They made many false claims, typically failing to specify a ranking as just for undergraduate colleges (purporting their rankings include universities) and using designations (such as SUNY's honors college) which SUNY itself denounced. They used the article as a marketing tool. Like most collegiate article on wikipedia, Binghamton's site does, in fact, present many positive points, however, they are from external sources and are facts (regardless of how positive the facts are). Geneseo was using internal marketing claims, slogans, etc. which is unacceptable for wikipedia.

I also have to question what your association is to Binghamton University (or perhaps a competing university) because of your particular interest in this article and determination to misrepresent and degrade the university. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.226.220.42 (talk) 20:19, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I am a student at Binghamton who recognizes that your IP comes from the same Binghamton Computer: That from that computer you've only made positive edits regarding Binghamton. You have made no other contributions to wikipedia aside from changing SUNY Binghamton to Binghamton University, or adding Binghamton into articles it doesn't belong, or outright giving us in this article what the administration wants. Frankly, there are very few students that would be using an IP that begins "128.226.xxx.xx" right now-they're almost all on break. That leaves almost certainly employees-in particular in the administration and marketting departments as NEARLY EVERYONE IS ON BREAK, ESPECIALLY THOSE WHO WOULD BE "SO INFORMED"; whom have also been known to vandalize the Lois B. DeFleur page (maybe its Dr. DeFleur herself editting the page. I'd certainly want to purge it of SOURCED information that I had committed an ethics breach that might warrant an investigation). If Pipe Dream isn't a reputable source I would add-neither are all these media outlets you use to cite unprovable claims about the quality of the university. Or in some cases, meaningless claims. The reality is this is an accredited university. All you really need is its price, and what it does. This is what separates this university from Practical Bible. That you can have a "respectable enough" education for a good price. Of course, seeing that Practical Bible is now Davis, and I believe Davis is accreditted, by reasonable standards, this no longer applies. So you have to throw in information about how Binghamton is somehow better. And its probably a far better education. As on the Geneseo talk page, a station wagon is a station wagon: It doesn't matter what brand you drive. Are some station wagons "better"? Depends what you want. Do some research for what you want in a car and get that car. Do the same for a university. Just because a magazine which depends on ad revenue says something is good doesn't make it so anymore than a magazine which is still subject to libel lawsuits that reports on the fact Lois DeFleur might've very easily violated ethics rules or LAWS.

And just as one can say that a department is good (no one's using BAD statistics) doesn't mean a controversy section's worth deleting. That's suppression of speech. There is controversy about the university. If the students knew how much people were wasting about this dumb project replacing a perfectly good building (old union) with a perfectly new building (old union) which'll probably have similar problems to all the new buildings (such as shoddy walls and construction: Mohawk and Mt. View regularly have punched in walls, among other ominous things), is it likely they'd approve? Probably not. Especially since students have consistantly voted down things such as a NEW GYM CONSTRUCTION PROJECT. No one actually wants these except a few in the SA, and everyone in the administration trying to sell the school: Adequate lighting, for instance, doesn't sell people. On tours people make big deals out of these blue light phones, but who uses them? Nearly no one. They don't make you safe, either, as demonstrated by cases of rape on campus which HAVE been reported. And there are many instances of rape on campus which do not go reported-probably most rape on campus does not go reported, in fact. How about an intercom system? You know, like the type that if there was an emergency in the school would keep us safe, such as a snow or rain emergency? This was discussed after Virginia Tech among some students, but the university apparently didn't notice it. But they did construct a multi-thousand dollar marketting sign when you drive into the university. And they did intend to put up a very large and expensive sign near the Events Center.

Nevermind, we need a reconstructed union. You can't sell a PA system to get people to come to the school anyway. By the way, the blue lights are very visable on tours, and the guides have a habit of pointing them out. I guess daddy feels safe to know his daughter will be walking home safely.

NO ONE CALLS BINGHAMTON UNIVERSITY BU. This abbriviation has appeared on large swaths of advertising materials and articles concerning Binghamton. Furthermore, nearly any local I've spoken to about the university refers to it as either "SUNY" or "The university"-no one calls it Binghamton University (for one thing, its not in Binghamton). Nearly no one identifies it by the library tower (despite the marketting claim at the intro of the page), and as far as "Located off Vestal Parkway" you never hear things like "NYU: Located just off of the Lincoln Tunnel, just make a right at the end of the ramp for a mile". These are obviously NOT STANDARD THINGS for wikipedia. Do people however call the institution "Binghamton University"? I've never heard a student formally say that. Or not say it. No one seems to call it "Binghamton University" but rather simply "Binghamton". Given the fact that the seal says "SUNY Binghamton" as well as NYS naming conventions, as well as past history, there's absolutely no citation of "Binghamton University, SUNY" ANYWHERE. Where's my source? LOOK AT THE SEAL AND LOOK AT THE LAWS. THAT IS STILL AN OFFICIAL SEAL, RIGHT? OTHERWISE, REMOVE IT. And there's my source. By the way, anyone with a brain knows that the university wasn't renamed due to an effort for privatization: That privatization is still a risk which might occur, but private or not, its a blatant marketting attempt to make the school sound less state-y and more "real" (private). I doubt the universities will privatize, personally. Removing that "SUNY" from the name makes it look less institutional, though.

Honestly, if you were editting wikipedia from that computer to include more than references to "Binghamton University", I would believe you. Heck, if you were doing edits to other pages to include good information about their schools, I would believe you. But you're only edits are referencing Binghamton University in some way, usually in comparison and contrast to something else. Maybe your Geneseo edit was honest and accurate: But the bottom line is the only group that benefits off that edit is Binghamton, and that you have only made edits for Binghamton.

And if I wanted to get vicious on the article, I could create a new controversy section, finding articles about the fact that 1/7 (or was it 1/6?) take anti-depressants at Binghamton University, and I don't know how many take other drugs (Binge Drinking is far higher than 1/7th at a regular rate: Even if studies have shown students don't binge drink too often, the same advertisement claims say that more than 1/5 DO-I think the actual number those ads point out is that 40% of the university has an alcohol problem: Which is independent of the anti-depressant figure, nor does it include illegal drugs or other psychotropic medications). There probably are rankings for this school in drug and alcohol abuse. Alcohol.edu shows there's a VERY REAL PROBLEM. The reality is a LARGE CHUNK OF THE POPULATION IS ON DRUGS-according to Pipe Dream, at least 1/7, university marketting, 40%. Now I'm not saying that drug use is bad by any means. What I am saying is there is an obvious problem with this university and behavior in any model. Is this appropriate for the wikipedia article? Well, by your standards, yes. By mine? No. Hence why I'm not inserting it, despite there being ample evidence from Pipe Dream and the University itself for being true. Because it implies while Binghamton might give you a good education, it also facilitates drug addiction. Never mind the fact that many of these binge drinkers are underage and breaking the law. Do I binge drink? Occasionally. But I'm over 21. Do I think alcohol should be illegal to 18-21 year olds? No. But by some standards one could state that 80% of the university fulfills the definition of anti-social or outright lawbreaking and criminal. Obviously, this wouldn't belong in the article by standards of good taste. But by your standards, it fits right in. And if I was intending honestly to denigrate the university, I'd put it in. And don't think I can't: There's plenty of information out there. But perhaps I've said too much; I'm not a professional in a marketting department doing this, I'm simply a private individual whom thinks that wikipedia is not a place to advertise. I'm not cynically putting anything down, unlike other people.

All I suppose I'm saying after that long tirade is that...edit wikipedia honestly. Edit other articles. Keep your obsession from Binghamton University on hold long enough to contribute to other things. I mean, if you're so informed, you know other things, right? For instance, write or contribute to those articles about the meanings of their rankings, and why we should listen to them. And then maybe cite the rankings. Maybe compare Binghamton to "better schools" to show how it needs work also: For instance, why is Binghamton under Princeton? If you can get a Princeton education at Binghamton, then it comes down to money. Either that or that the rankings are useless. I mean, 15th? Compared to what? And does that mean it should always be my 15th choice? And that I should never try to attend a school like Geneseo, which isn't on many of the same ranking system? How does Binghamton compare to Oberlin, anyway? Why should I choose Binghamton over Oberlin? Wait; there's no comparative ranks: So I guess I can't choose between the two. That's what these edits to the article mean. They don't give a picture of the university at all. I mean, why aren't social events aside from the SA's one concert a semester and athletics covered? Shouldn't this university being on Girls Gone Wild be part of the Popular Culture part? I mean...more people have probably seen her face than read Bix's Pulitzer Prize winning book and all. And speaking of that, shouldn't the fact Bix won a Pulitzer be mentioned if other ratings are? I mean the man is distinguished...despite the fact I personally don't like him. How about informing the students of the requirements of the university, such as alcohol.edu combined with the Gen-Ed requirements, and what a Binghamton Diploma means?

Oh wait, you have to sell the university. Not tell them what they'd be actually doing once they got there. My bad.163.151.2.10 (talk) 16:00, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

There are so many things wrong with this rant, I'm not sure where to begin. First and foremost, I am not a university administrator - I am a student who lives on campus (as MANY students do throughout the entire break, including by not limited to athletes, international students, many out-of-state students who cannot afford to travel home and the hundreds enrolled in Winter Session courses).

It appears that you seem to get much of your information from popular sources - unfortunately even our student association and student paper (the pipe dream) are typically such sources. One problem Binghamton University faces, in my opinion, is the amazing ability of students to believe a very poor source, namely our student paper, and rally behind an entirely misinformed cause. Because you have listed just far too many examples for me to waste my time explaining to you, I will start with a basic one that has a similar premise to most of your arguments: the East Gym renovations. If you read and believe the Pipe Dream, which you clearly do - you would also believe that the East Gym project was an unnecessary expenditure that has been voted down and will not take place. If you read credible sources and bothered to read the literature the school put out, for instance, you would know that the driving factor behind the the proposed renovations was structural needs of the outdated facility and space needs for students and programming. Some of the more elaborate additions, such as the climbing wall, were seen as great recruiting tools as well as resources for student wellbeing that while unnecessary to the structural and space needs would be most cost effective to add during the course of a mass renovation... aka: now or never. The vote was not on whether to conduct the project, rather should the school increase student activity fees to fund it. Upon the narrow vote of no (largely because of people's lack of information), the university has delayed the project but it is very much so still in the works (they are simply looking for other sources of money). You can even view the university's plan for the project at the following address: http://facilities.binghamton.edu/UpcomingProjects.htm Ironically, the university has recent had to cut some of the offerings dependent on the East Gym (primarily because of the above reasons) and now students want to university to put money into getting them back. A perfect example of if people like yourself listened in the first place, we would be in this situation.

As for the name - as a student who grew up in the Binghamton are my entire life and a student of the university in my fourth year, I can tell you that you are plain wrong about your "BU" sentiments. I can honestly say that I have never heard a current or recent student of Binghamton University refer to the institution as SUNY Binghamton... further more, it is almost always referred to as Binghamton University or BU. Many popular athletic chants, etc., also use BU (which we have found presents a problem when we play rival Boston University).

As for the locals - admittedly, many of the locals do, in fact, refer to the institution as SUNY Binghamton largely because this is a historical context for which they are used to (much like a Syracuse resident who continues to call SU's mascott the Orangemen, though they are now just the orange). That being said - I have found that increasing numbers of local are becoming used to the change (partially because of needed improving town-gown relations), and I would venture to say a narrow majority at that. I live it every day, and because I have been immersed in it for 22 years there truly is nothing you can say that will have me see the facts in this skewed way.

As for comparing institutions such as Geneseo and Binghamton: You present many valid points, many of which I have brought up in my editing of Geneseo's page. They repeated say things like the highest XYZ in SUNY or the best ABC in the Northeast. The point was that there claims were clearly marketing and actually referred to only undergraduate colleges or even public undergraduate colleges. As you point out and I have continuously argued myself, there is a big difference between a research university and an undergraduate college. That does not, however, change the fact that there are, in fact, some critical rankings that do put colleges and universities against each other - for instance value or bang for your buck rankings. The most common one is Kiplinger's who puts 2/3 emphasis on academic quality and 1/3 emphasis on the financial aspect. Even though Binghamton is slightly more costly than Geneseo, BU is ranked as a better value (number one for out-of-state and number 5 for in-state to be precise). You are criticizing my editing of such rankings with the same fire that I have argued FOR editing the articles. On a side note - as a tour guide at Binghamton University (one who actively preaches the philosophy that Binghamton sells itself, we should not), I tell visitors it is about the right fit, not getting everyone to come to Binghamton and I have even told individuals I'm not sure if BU is the right place for them. When people ask me, "who's better, BU or Geneseo?" I always tell them they are both great institutions with a vast array of difference - ultimately you need to visit both, research both, and discover which is the right fit for you. Incidentally these silly things you point to, such as concerts, etc., are proven to have a large impact on a students satisfaction and even academic growth with any particular institution... so the focus of my tours (rightfully) are my experience and not numbers (which anyone can find online). Much research has shown that people are most likely to remember stuff about housing, fun, extracurriculars, etc. and not academics. The point is, they have already singled you out based on your academic reputation, offerings, unique qualities, etc... the real question is - what else.

Some of your arguments, such as the Princeton vs. Binghamton debate, are good points and perhaps you've answered your own rhetorical question if you observe the fact that Cornell an Columbia are listed atop Binghamton's most common competitors for applicants (according to Princeton Review).

There are so many arguments here that I don't even have time to discuss with you right now - but I would encourage you to open up a dialog with me outside of wikipedia (a far more appropriate means). If you would like to accept that offer, than let me know and I will provide you with the means.

Neutrality dispute

Again, if they only listed the good things, then it would be NPOV... it appears that there are multiple prospectives present, even criticisms. Also, this article is consistent with most any other collegiate institution article and how that information is presented. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.226.220.42 (talk) 08:58, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

I have read through this article looking for things that may not fit into the NPOV policy. While there are some things that express opinions, etc., they are all cited quotes from prominent publications and individuals. It is also very consistent with the material and layout of other pages for institutes for higher education. There was also no discussion material posted in order to convey the basis for this tag... that being said I am removing the tag. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.226.220.42 (talk) 11:15, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

This point goes last, not first. And, as it says, wikipedia is not a place to advertise. Just because some prominent source says something doesn't make it true. For instance, we could use statistics in Marlboro to indicate that 9 out of 10 doctors recommend their cigarettes, that doesn't mean it should be used. Don't remove the NPOV tag without good reason, and add new comments to the bottom of the list, not the top.66.24.111.185 05:10, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Rankings and Statistics Edits

Kudos on the cleaning up of this section. I did change one thing: The four year graduation rate was noted as third highest rate for public universities in New York, but it is actually third highest for all public schools in the country: The top two are University of Virginia and The College of William and Mary, then Binghamton University. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.226.220.42 (talk) 17:47:58, August 19, 2007 (UTC)

Language Changes

19:13, 21 March 2007 (UTC) okay, two (hopefully) non-contentious points. Stony Brook looks like it was founded later -- according to the school's web site, it was founded in 1957. Doesn't this make it the youngest, not Binghamton (FWIW, it's not an honor to be the youngest!!)

Also, what other interesting, and hopefully distinguishing, information can we put in the opening paragraph. Something about the architecture of the school? Unique colleges within SUNY (as Buffalo and Albany have), hosting any major labs or research centers (as SB runs BNL)? Again, going for NPOV, but there has got to be some interesting tidbits, distinguishing characteristics, etc. about the school that will grab a reader of the article. I added the part about being started as part of SU (I thought that was interesting), but looking for more.

14:24, 21 March 2007 (UTC) I don't really want to belabor this, and honestly I'm pretty "SUNYed" out from researching these schools, and since none of them are land grants (excepting Cornell's SUNY colleges) they are outside my real area of interest. I do have a few points of clarification if you'll endulge me.

btw -- the so-called competition between SUNY campuses really hurts the system overall, and each of the campuses suffers in my opinion. By constantly knocking each other down, all of the campuses appear compromised at some level when viewed externally. SUNY administration would do well to promote the campuses in their own right and establish four world-class institutions. Or possibly combine UB/Binghamton and SB/Albany into two campuses and properly fund them.

If I said "weak" regarding graduate studies at Binghamton, then my mistake. This was my last stab at SUNY research (really), but I thought it worth mentioning. And please don't go jumping up & down -- I'm keeping all this to the "talk" page. Compared with the other centers in terms of research funding, number of top (US News) ranked programs, etc., Binghamton seems to lag by a bit *after* adjusting for size of the school and lack of medical school (Albany also lacks a medical school). Now don't jump up & down -- here are some data: Stony Brook boasts a Nobel winner on their faculty, Albany a Turing winner (Nobel equiv for CS). Stony Brook runs Brookhaven National Labs (a BIG deal), Albany runs Wadsworth for public health, Buffalo runs Roswell Park Cancer Research. Stony Brook hosts the SUNY-wide center for marine research, Albany the atmospheric sciences research center (these are really well known outside SUNY). Albany, Buffalo, and Stony Brook host other university-wide research centers, but these are less well known. Buffalo has SUNY's only law school. Stony Brook and Buffalo are AAU members -- Albany *may* (or may not!) be far behind in joining based on their funding profile. PLEASE NOTE -- I'm not going on an anti-Binghamton campaign posting all of this to their pages. You seem to think I have it "in" for Binghamton and "for" the other centers. I don't. I recently changed UBs to remove the "flagship" campus claim, because it's plain false. But you asked where I get my opinions from.

Maybe the Binghamton faculty are recruited more for their teaching than research, who knows? Maybe what you say about Binghamton being more focused on humanities is true. Why don't their chemistry or biology faculty attract the same funding as Albany, Buffalo, or Stony Brook? Even adjusting for size and lack of medical school, Binghamton ranks pretty low, behind all of the other centers.

I have no beef with the school. In fact I think it's a fine school. As an article though it was wanting. I think it's much improved, and thank you sincerely for your efforts. I think you are confusing my issues with the article with an issue with the school.

The "public ivy" thing is honestly pretty stupid. There's no such thing as a "public ivy league" -- anyone's list is as good as anyone else's. re: Albany, I followed the entry on their page and, sure enough, it's on a list. Do I give it, personally, any credit? No. Is Buffalo on a list somewhere somehow?? Probably. And if we're going to compare lists, then why does the Greene's list count at all after the Moll's list? Lists are lists. And, really, Arizona? Delaware? Ivy league caliber? Should we go on a wikipedia-wide campaign against schools calling themselves "public ivys"?? It's a very POV term in any case.

Anyway, best of luck with everything. And thanks again. You are rightly proud of your school, and I do think there's probably more to it than lists and "best value" college guides, so the article could be significantly extended and be really interesting.

I would not consider a school with top 20 graduate programs, ranked overall in the top 50 graduate schools in the country (according to US News and World Report) to be a week grad program. Additionally, I know many people, including myself who turned down multiple ivy schools to come to Binghamton. You simply are wrong about the reputation. Further more, recheck your facts... I just revisited the US News site, and Binghamton is in fact in the top tier. Additionally, Albany is tier III,, and Buffalo and Stony Brook appear below Binghamton in tier II.

Albany, as a matter of fact, appears nowhere as a public ivy. With claims such as this one, it is apparent to me that you just make things up. Schools like Geneseo and Albany self-promote themselves as public ivies, however, they are not. For your benefit I have included the actual list of Public Ivies below (the original and then the updated list).

Moll's list of Public Ivies (the original list):

   * College of William and Mary
   * Miami University (Ohio)
   * University of California, Berkeley
   * University of Michigan
   * University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
   * University of Texas at Austin
   * University of Vermont
   * University of Virginia

Greene's Guides added the following schools in 2001:

   * Binghamton University - State University of New York
   * Indiana University Bloomington
   * Michigan State University
   * Ohio State University
   * Pennsylvania State University
   * Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
   * University of Arizona
   * University of California Los Angeles
   * University of Colorado at Boulder
   * University of Connecticut
   * University of Delaware
   * University of Florida
   * University of Georgia
   * University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign
   * University of Iowa
   * University of Maryland College Park
   * University of Minnesota
   * University of Washington

A side note: Wikipedia is not an accepted source for research (sorry).

The Watson connection is huge: He was the head founder for the University, and also gave Binghamton its original campus. Binghamton was a private school at that time.

As far a distinguished rankings go, most people would consider any school in the top 100 of thousands of colleges to be pretty pretigious. Additionally, like I pointed out before, it depends on how you rank them. Kiplinger's, a highly regarded publication, put Binghamton above most every public school when weighing academics and cost (2/3 is academic rankings). It's when you get into endowments, etc., that Binghamton appears to fall in the rankings (though our LOWEST ranking out there puts BU in the top 85 schools in the country... again higher than any other SUNY). Sure, in terms of specifics other SUNYs may find their way ahead of Binghamton, but schools such as Stony Brook are far more focused on research and science than Binghamton which has uniquely maintained themselves as a liberal arts focused research university (many of Binghamton's NSF grants actually go to humanities and social sciences). In terms of overall evaluation of the school, there is not a single publication that puts Binghamton behind another SUNY school. (Even in Kiplinger's comparison including collges and universities together, Binghamton comes ahead of the colleges as well as universities).

20:22, 19 March 2007 (UTC)~ Why my interest in general? I'm interested in land grant schools, and was thinking about writing a book on them, or something else related to schools and colleges possibly focused on the northeast. Wikipedia is (usually) a good resource. The Binghamton entry was pretty useless -- I still don't get the Watson connection (other than there was one).

20:09, 19 March 2007 (UTC)~ nothing against or for, to be honest. Don't agree that its rank is that much distinguished is all, and the original article was a bit much to take and not "encyclopedic" in the least. I think it's better now. But here again in the discussion point, you misrepresent facts. In the US News rankings, they go from "top tier" to "tier III", so Binghamton is "Tier II" --NOT Tier I as you claim. Before a few years ago, they had a formal Tier II (I looked it up), and Albany, Binghamton, Stony Brook, and Buffalo were all listed. You claim things about Binghamton that are either flat out false or real stretches. And yes, I edited the Albany article as well moving the "Public Ivy" claim to the lower section where it belongs (and, yes Albany is on a public Ivy list or other, but also not the original list).

And I have really nothing against the school. I've edited a bunch of university and college sites. I do have a problem with self promotion. Your claims of Binghamton's superiority over its close rivals in SUNY are problematic in light of its relatively weak graduate programs. In spite of your claims to the contrary, Binghamton ranks dead last in SUNY for research -- by a long shot it seems.

But I honestly hope you are happy with your choice. It's probably a fine school, and I'm certain you will do well in life. Compared with Cornell or Columbia grads on your resume?? We'll never know (but, really...)

Yes, I do get rankled with self promotion. I'm a big fan of wikipedia, and think this is a great resource provide the NPOV standards are being applied. Thank you sincerely for improving this article. Now there's probably a *lot* of other information on the school that would be generally interesting and, if you're so inclined, I'd look forward to reading about it.

Still looking for that chemistry rank footnote. Sorry for being a pain, but the information should at least be fact checked.

The difference is that individual research centers receive this distinction, but there are only four institutions in New York State (including Binghamton University) that are designated a Center of Excellence as an institution (very different than say the small-systems packaging center at Binghamton which is a program designated center of excellence).

I'm not sure what it is you have against Binghamton or so "for" other SUNY universities, but it has been ranked time and again as a very prestigious institution where many students opt to attend over many top 20 universities. Additionally, it is ranked higher than any other SUNY institution, and its graduates are viewed in that respective light (granted each school has its own strengths and weaknesses). Binghamton, for instance is a tier I (top 75 out of 3,00o+ schools) school according to US News and World Report... Albany is not even ranked and is listed as a tier III school (this means they aren't even considered in school rankings). Additionally, Binghamton's selectivity, graduation rates, retention rates, and admission criteria are well above the other four university centers, which is a direct reflection of the student body.

Part of my personal decision to attend Binghamton was via input from potential employers who expressed a preference of a Binghamton student over a Cornell, or Columbia students, for example. Not to put other schools down, but it appears you are trying to bring Binghamton down through the masking and/or eradication of facts. There is a reason that Fisk guide calls Binghamton the Premier Public University in the Northeast every year... it is not just PR stunt. His publications (mind you he was the former admission director for Harvard, and education editor for the Times) outline explicitly why the said distinction was given.

I think this needs to be the end of the qualms... I have gone to extensive measure to pursue diplomacy on the matter, of which I think was done fairly and sufficiently.

18:21, 19 March 2007 (UTC)~please post link to ACS. I'm an ACS member and don't put a whole lot of stock in their opinion of programs (prefer to look at publications and funding), but still it's worth footnoting.

Also other university centers have centers of excellence. UB in Bioinformatics, Albany in nanoscience and engineering, Stony Brook in wireless. Binghamton's may be the newest, but it is by no means unique within SUNY (you have got to stop reading the schools PR!!). Check out https://portal.rfsuny.org/portal/page?_pageid=1307,1623613&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL.

Also, Albany and Stony Brook host university-wide research centers -- Albany in atmospheric science, and stony brook in marine biology. Binghamton also lags, by far, the other three in terms of research funding. My read is that SB and Albany are the best for grad programs and research, Binghamton is the best for undergrad, and Buffalo is somewhere in between for both but by far the largest center. Lastly, Buffalo hosts Roswell Park Cancer Center, Albany runs Wadsworth Labs, and Stony Brook runs Brookhaven National Labs -- again, I don't believe Binghamton has this distinction, but please post if I am incorrect. I've learned a lot about SUNY through this research, and it looks like a pretty good system overall. The university centers are all probably a bit better than their national profile, and hopefully they'll catch up. I really believe, from the reading I've done, that you can get as good an education at Binghamton (or Buffalo, SB, Albany) as you can at Penn St, Wisconsin, UC-x. And I suppose if you read the footnotes of the guidebooks, they all basically say the same thing. Of course I'm not happy that Princeton is currently #1.

American Chemical Society beginning in 2004. In general, Binghamton's sciences are some of the top in country. Binghamton is the only SUNY school designated as a center of excellence in research. Binghamton's placement into grad schools, especially medical fields is the highest in SUNY. Placement into vet and optometry school is 100%, and med school is more than 20% above the national average.

16:05, 19 March 2007 (UTC)~ thanks for making the changes. I really think the article is improved. Not to nitpick, but where is Binghamton's chemistry dept ranked #19? I tried to follow the source and couldn't find it. I recruit from top-20 science departments, and Binghamton isn't on my list (Buffalo, Albany, Stony Brook are though).

In the interest of diplomacy, I am systematically going through this article to check for facts, but mostly to address the language to ensure a NPOV stance. I will say that I evidentally dissagree with some definitions of NPOV (for instance, I believe that if it is a cited fact, then it isn't biased, hence NPOV).

• I tried to alter definative statements like, "Binghamton is the number 1..." to "According to XYZ, Binghamton is the number 1..."
• I attempted removing unecessary comparison language, such as, "higher than any other SUNY." - just giving the fact.
• I moved around some of the sentences to make a more appropriate NPOV flow.

Highest ranked ?? Cornell??

15:30, 19 March 2007 (UTC)~ But shouldn't this be under the "rankings and stats" section rather in the opening paragraph (if at all)? Seems like boosterism to me -- most other schools, including schools much more highly regarded than Binghamton, maybe have a sentence about a ranking or otherwise. Take a look at UC-Berkeley, arguably the best public university in the U.S. There's no mention of ranking or otherwise in the opening paragraph (apart from it being the flagship campus of UC, which is true). In the rankings section there are three total paragraphs, only mention US News, etc. To look at a "real ivy", I checked Yale's, and again in the opening paragraph there's only a mention that the College is "particularly well known". Whatever, right now the article looks like a hack job and does Wikipedia users no real service. Binghamton has its own home on the web where they can self promote all they want.

15:30, 19 March 2007 (UTC)~ In terms of so-called rankings, I think again you're specifically talking about undergraduate education. From what I've read, Binghamton ranks at the bottom of the research universities for graduate education -- in terms of research funding, US News ranking of departments, caliber of faculty research, etc. So, again, this claim that it's the best is suspect -- particularly given that it is designated primarily as a *research* unversity by SUNY. If I pick up the US News graduate guides, Binghamton is last, and probably last in the Northeast (considering UConn, the other SUNYs, UVM, Massachusetts).

This entire page reflects those of most colleges and universities in the country (in terms of numbers of facts, etc.) I have systematically gone through to add refrences. It is not Binghamton's claim to be the highest ranked, it is a cited fact (and it IS in fact cited on the article). Additionally Cornell DOES NOT count in public school rankings. This is not an opinion, no matter what a rep from the school may say... If they were considered a public school, they would ranked and compared with such institutions, however publications like US News, Kiplinger's, Fisk, etc., do not include Cornell or any land-grant institutions for that matter. You should not delete information on this page... especially cited information. There are some pages, such as Geneseo's who have flirted with breaking Wikipedia rules by including language that is not fact, rather acknowledge promotional language of their admissions office. For instance, they also claim to be a public ivy, however, they do not appear on the actual list of public ivies. Binghamton however, is actually listed in the publication as a public ivy... (Follow the public ivy link. You will find that Binghamton is there, and the only mention of Geneseo is that they are not actually a public ivy, but self-promote themselves as such). The Binghamton article isn't using promotional language, it is, whether you like it or not, citing facts. 14:12, 19 March 2007 (UTC)~ Doesn't seem to matter. This still violates Wikipedia's academic grandstanding in letter and spirit. Cornell is a public/private school according to sources including a Cornell rep I spoke with. I don't see how Binghamton can offer an "ivy-league caliber education" without ivy-league students in the peer group. Looking at graduate programs, it appears to me that Binghamton is by far the *lowest* ranked of the SUNY schools -- if, for example, I were to go by the # US News graduate programs ranked. Seems Buffalo, Albany, and Stony Brook far outpace Binghamton for the caliber of graduate studies. But, again, none of these are "ivy league".

But regardles. The claims have to go. You can pull them, or I will. Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Avoid_academic_boosterism. This guideline specifically says to avoid "burying the reader in facts" -- i.e., replacing vague claims of prestige with a bunch of facts, etc. And, more to the point, avoiding them in the opening paragraph. If you want to re-write this to better comply, that's fine. Honestly it will reflect better on your school, because right now, "The lady doth protest too much, methinks".

Binghamton University actually the highest ranked public school within NYS (even the northeast according to some publications). Cornell is not a public school, they are a landgrant school with components that are public... that is in fact rather different than a public school. They are not ranked with public schools. Additionally, US News and World report is one source, incidentally the source that ranks Binghamton the lowest. Other Publications, such as the Fisk Guide to College, written by Edward Fisk, former admissions director for Harvard and education editor for the New York Times, call Binghamton the, "Premier Public University in the Northeast." They rank Binghamton the highest in all of the Northeast. Additionally, Binghamton appears in Greene's Guide of Public Ivies being cited as a public school that offers an Ivy League caliber education. Also, Kiplinger's Personal Finance ranks Binghamton the number 1 and 5 best value school in the country for out-of-state and in-state students repectively, based approximately 2/3 on academics and just 1/3 on financials.

Nothing should be deleted from the site. All of the information is in fact backed up, and many of those claims you mention are cited. I also looked into, and Binghamton has many programs ranked top twenty in the county: Political Science, Sociology, Chemistry, Psychology, etc.

I believe you may be getting caught up over language. For example: SUNY Geneseo is a college, while Binghamton University is a University. These schools are not ranked against each other, except in unique area, such as best values. Harvard and Syracuse, for instance, are not ranked against schools like Geneseo, Swathmore, or Bowdoin.

I also found out that approximately 1/3 of the student body addmitted to Binghamton is also admitted to Cornell, but chooses Binghamton (I cannnot cite that source, it was in print text). As someone who turned down Cornell, I would have to say that you are overly edifying their institution. As far as comparing them academically, the fact that Binghamton is considered a public ivy automatically impolies a comperable education. Often schools like Binghamton are unfairly hurt in rankings (like US News) that include endowments in their calculations. Binghamton is a young institution, founded in 1946, and hence still has a relatively small endowment. Those public schools that tend to be found higher in the rankings are frequently among the oldest, formerly private, sector of schools. Other factors that are included in the ranking calculations would imply that Binghamton measures up: Retention rates near Ivy League standards, the 3 highest graduatation rate among public schools (according the national education trust) behind UVA and the College of William and Mary, it is a center of excellence for important research, etc. Additionally, those publications that do not include things like endowments and focus more on the academic integrity of a school rank Binghamton much higher. Not to be redundant, but Kiplinger's is one such publication. Based 2/3 on academics, they are ranked the 1st best value for out-of-state students, and the 5th best for in-state. That ranking also puts universities and colleges together (Geneseo, who actually costs slightly less than Binghamton is ranked below Binghamton in value for both categories, is hence not ranked as highly academically).

03:02, 19 March 2007 (UTC)~ that's how I'm leaning, but let a bit of time before making the edits (only fair to allow for responses). Also the "rankings" section is a bit of a joke; much of it is uncited, and there are no rankings in the typical sense. Also, they mention Binghamton is #38 of national state schools, but not that it's tier #2 overall, which is hardly distinguished. Very little of this article contains interesting information about the school, and it's one of the more dull reads on wikipedia. I suppose my so-called 'proof' that it's misleading is that when I check the actual sources I find Binghamton to be a relatively high-decent state university -- decent for certain, but not outstanding. But from the article you would think this is was SUNY Yale or something.

The edits to the University Centers and Geneseo seem to be largely the work of one individual intent on asserting the "superiority" of his alma mater over the rest of the SUNY system. I agree with you wholeheartedly that this is like asserting that a Subaru Outback is the best station wagon among all station wagons. It's still a station wagon: functional, reliable, but nobody cares that you own one. If you ask me, we should remove the claim. -- DanielPenfield 22:01, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

19:43, 18 March 2007 (UTC)~ okay, never mind. I see the qualification, although it doesn't really seem noteworthy to be the "highest ranked public" in NYS, does it??? Looks like grasping at straws to promote the school to me. Not exactly NPOV. I looked as the US News rank, and Binghamton isn't even a top-50 university, with most good publics well into the list (e.g., Michigan, UNC, several UC, Indiana, etc., etc.) Still interested in comments re: Cornell. Public, private, hybrid? How do we factor this? Posted anonymously by User:71.232.55.30

19:40, 18 March 2007 (UTC)~~ okay -- I'm pulling it unless there's something more compelling. Turns out University of Connecticut is ranked a good bit higher at #67. Cornell aside -- it doesn't matter. Please respond here, as I don't want to go back and forth on the edits (plus it's rude to edit without some consensus, even if, as in this case, it's just factually incorrect). Posted anonymously by User:71.232.55.30

19:31, 18 March 2007 (UTC)~ yes, I get that. But it seems wrong somehow with Cornell down the road, publically funded, etc. and Geneseo #1 in another category (I think). Misleading at best. Posted anonymously by User:71.232.55.30

highest-ranked public university in New York State, according to U.S. News & World Report.[1] 

This is confusing, and I'm looking for input here. Cornell is in a different league than Binghamton, I think we'll all agree. A good chunk of the Cornell is public, and part of SUNY. In fact, Cornell is New York State's land-grant school -- along the lines of Michigan, UC-Berkeley, etc. But Cornell is technically a mixed public and private university. Posted anonymously by User:71.232.55.30

comments? Should we (a) pull the claim as non-factual, (b) qualify the claim, (c) leave it "as is" since Binghamton is a fully public University? This somehow seems wrong though. Currently I'd vote for "a" since it's a misleading claim at best, and the US News lists Geneseo fairly high as well, but in another category. Can we say one campus is better than the other? Posted anonymously by User:71.232.55.30

For the record, I'm not an alum of either school (attended SU, Columbia, and Harvard). Thought it worth mentioning because this college site in particular seems loaded with editorial. Posted anonymously by User:71.232.55.30

Advertisement Claim

I'm not sure I agree with the advertisement claim regarding this article content. After review the article two things were clear: All information provided about Binghamton is fact, there are no opinions other than those of cited college guide books. Secondly, comparing this article to other college articles, the material and language is comperable.

Binghamton/Geneseo

• • ALL SUNY University centers (Stony Brook, Albany, Buffalo), have PBK chapters.

As a matter of fact, Geneseo is the only UNDERGRADUATE COLLEGE in SUNY with a Phi Betta Kappa chapter. Binghamton also has a chapter (I'm in it), and I believe atleast one other University Center has it.

>>While this was true for some time, in recent years SUNY Geneseo has eclipsed Binghamton in its admission standards and caliber of teaching.

Is this true? Can anyone source this opinion? -- Wikipedian Alumni * User:SeanO

Both viewpoints seem like opinion. Perhaps redact to "[BU]...is considered one of the foremost universities in the SUNY system or something." -- Metahacker 01:55, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

>> Geneseo, for instance, is the only one of the SUNY schools to receive a Phi Beta Kappa chapter. See article on SUNY Geneseo for details.

I looked at the Geneseo article. Apparently they're the first _undergraduate_ school with a PBK chapter. Binghamton has had one for years. I don't mean to denigrate Geneseo, I just wonder if the statement "SUNY Geneseo has eclipsed Binghamton in its admission standards and caliber of teaching" is an objective statement. -- SeanO 12:05, August 27, 2005 (UTC)

I couldn't care less about getting into a pissing contest about who is best. More facts, less comparison; this is a page about SUNY-B, not Geneseo, so why bother cross-referencing and opening up a can of worms? (If we include Geneseo, why not include Stony Brook? Buffalo? Albany? etc.) If you felt "best" was too strong, that's understandable; let's tone it down to something more objectively agreeable as suggested above. (Also, CunningLinguist14, sign your edits; it makes it easier to have a discussion.) -- Metahacker 17:27, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Metahacker, I like your comment above re: Geneseo. I've changed article to 'one of the best' and have removed comparison to Geneseo. -- SeanO 23:21, August 27, 2005 (UTC)

BU is by far the highest-rated university in the SUNY system by US News and World Report and others. Colleges like Geneseo are rated in a different category. -newkai | talk | contribs 14:12, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Why hasn't anyone mentioned the fact that New York State itself (far more reliable than the crap rag US News & World Report) compares its own colleges? Please read and compare: [[1]] , [[2]]

for lazy people: yes, geneseo is "better" and is progressing steadily when it comes to selectivity (high school scores and sat scores are an ambiguous way of judging talent as it is I should say!), but comparing geneseo and binghamton is naive, because their roles as academic institutions are completely different. One is a multi-disciplinary research center and the other is essentially a liberal arts college that's trying to diversify its mostly white midde-class student population by recruiting downstate and funding international exchange programs.

Another thing to consider is that universities like Binghamton have some programs that might account for lower average high school GPA scores and test scores. The theater department there, for example, considers talent-based applications that allow, for example, a student who had all C's and D's in high school to get in because while the student fails geometry and P.E., they write plays or act with incredible talent as a hobby or extra-curric. Geneseo doesn't have a program like that because you only apply to undergraduate admissions there, you don't apply to specific schools or departments (except for education, but getting into that is a rubber stamp sadly).

Stop fighting about which place is the best, they're both invaluable parts of an excellent public university system. Even if I had gotten into Harvard/Yale/whatever I would have much preferred my SUNY education (I was a Geneseo undergrad, and I'm Albany grad now) because its funded by all of us together as new yorkers and its a great cause compared to helping the private universities line their pockets! Hail SUNY! lol 169.226.100.28 16:36, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Avoid weasel words

Wikipedia:Avoid weasel words

Suspiscious edits FROM Binghamton University

This edit, removing the "controversy" section, was reverted by me as that IP WHOIS's to "State University of New York at Binghamton", which owns the entire range "128.226.x.x". I found someone FROM this institution removing criticism from the page on it too much to take, especially with no edit summary or justification that I could see from them. 68.39.174.238 09:19, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Recent Edits

This edit was done by a student at Binghamton University who was upset that the University is being portrayed in somewhat a negative light on Wikipedia. The edit was not done or condoned by any University official. A number of students at Binghamton are upset over the controversy section of the article and question its objectivity. -- Bialek 03:41, 28 February 2006 (Coordinated Universal Time)

Controversy Section Deleted

The Controversy section of the article has been deleted due to several inaccuracies and a blatant bias. Please contact me with any questions. -- Bialek 07:08, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Colleges and Schools

I removed the flavor text underneath each school because they seem to be undocumented. Opinions about the selectivity of each school within the University are usually biased and do not add to the strength of the entire article.

I removed the section discussing each school, as the facts did not seem accurate. There was also a great deal of bias.

Grad school admissions

Actually, this is not entirely true. While they cannot forbit a student from applying, they can refuse the student the use of that institution's recommendation, hence disqualifying the individual from candidacy into most any grad program. So, no, a school can't actually stop the student, but they can take drastic strides in assuring the school's image through statistics. Binghamton University has made the decision to stand against such practices and while giving students practical guidance will allow, without any implimented restraints, an individual to apply where ever he or she wishes.

Applicants to graduate school do not need the permission of their undergraduate institution to do so. Undergrad institutions may limit access to certain "pre-" programs (pre-med, pre-law) but this does not forbid them making an application to any graduate program.

This is the sentence in question, correct? "Important Note: Unlike MOST schools, Binghamton allows (with guidance) any student who truly wishes to apply to a graduate school the opportunity. Most programs below have their own advising program." Besides being, in my eyes, in violation of WP:NPOV, it is obviously not true. I deleted it. Tcatts 18:50, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Pictures

They were poorly formatted, and cluttered up the article, especially the Mountainview one that was way, way too wide.

I'm not sure why, but there was also a picture of a Blondie album there as well.--Toffile 13:12, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Thomas J Watson

How come there is no mention of Thomas J. Watson? He helped found the University and the Engineering school bares his namesake. From TJW Wiki article:

"Watson worked with other local leaders to create a college in the Binghamton area, where IBM had major plants. In 1946 IBM provided land and funding for Triple Cities College, an extension of Syracuse University. Eventually it became part of Binghamton University. Its School of Engineering and Applied Sciences is named the Thomas J. Watson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences."

See this article: Thomas J. Watson

Pipe Dream

Please stop inserting unreferenced and NPOV comments regarding Pipe Dream, Binghamton University's main student newspaper. It's fine to include a short sentence citing legitimate criticisms, but it had better be referenced. If it's not, I'll delete it again. Tcatts 21:38, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

References desperately needed

This article is in dire need of references. Almost all the factual claims regarding programs, facilities, rankings, etc. are uncited. I've tagged some of these; if you could kindly not remove the tags until I've had a couple days to try to fix them, I'd appreciate it. However, since this page gets a lot of traffic from editors who are apparently connected to the schools, it might be easier for them to add the needed sources. --Tcatts 14:22, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I took a hack at the first paragraph, adding cites and improving readability. Feel free to pick up where I left off. --Tcatts 20:56, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Dorms

I condensed the information on residential communities. Can anyone point to another example of a college or university article with an equally extensive treatment of dorms with no apparent claim to notability? If not, they might have to go. --Tcatts 04:47, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Highest Ranked Public?

Fiske Guide to colleges has ranked Binghamton University, "The Premier Public University in the Northeast."

Bighamton University is not the highest ranked public University in the Northeastern United States. Both Penn State (#13) and Rutgers (#21) beat BU at #30. Even the source of the false claim demonstrates this: http://www.usnews.com/usnews/edu/college/rankings/brief/natudoc/natudoc_pub_brief.php

That was probably vandalism... It should read "in New York State". -newkai t-c 00:21, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

I like how you confuse a proper citation to Fiske's with an entirely different baseline, i.e. US News. I doubt you're a journalist (or a scholar for that matter.) As long as Fiske is cited and they said it, then who's to say US News carries any more weight? Riddle me that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.90.18.240 (talk) 14:35, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

What's up with the vandalism?

Anyone have any idea why this page is attracting so much random vandalism lately? Has it been in the news or something? I just reverted some weird nonsense vandalism by an anon editor. If I ran over anyone's substantive edits in the process, I apologize. --Tcatts 16:09, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Public Ivy?

[[Media:]]

19:30, 18 March 2007 (UTC)~ Someone qualified this as the "Greene's guide", but again, this is a bit suspect. Not sure what credibility Greene's guide has, and, honestly, there's no such thing as the "public ivy league". There's no list of member universities, no council, etc. It doesn't exist. If anything, in other college articles they seem to insist it appear on the originial 1985 list -- the entry for UConn for example, makes no mention of being a so-called public ivy. Binghamton was not on the original list (nor was ANY SUNY school).

On another note, this is hardly an NPOV article -- seems like a lot of promotional material posted by a Binghamton student or alum.

Left it in for now, but SUNY Binghamton is *not* a public Ivy. this is a very specific list, and was published in 1985. The schools are William and Mary, Virignia, Michigan, Berkeley, UNC, Miami (OH), UT Austin, and Vermont. Greene's Guides added Binghamton to a new list in 2001 that has nothing to do with the original or original term (they also added Michigan State, Indiana, Ohio State, Arizona, UConn, Deleware, etc.) -- not sure how much credit is given the new list, since several tier3/tier4 schools are on it.

I've never heard Binghamton called, "The Public Ivy". Has anyone NOT affiliated with the university used this term, other than that one Greene's Guide which called numerous other public institutions, "Public Ivies"? I also thought of "Suny-Bing" as being the unofficial nickname for the school. We should probably pull this claim, or at least have it better qualified.

Who knows... It's a very POV term... The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education lists SUNY Albany as a public ivy, but not Binghamton... There's no official list. Regarding "SUNY-Bing"... "BU" has been prevailing as a nickname since the name was changed around 1995. It took awhile to catch on, but it has. -newkai t-c 00:29, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

SUNY Albany is a "public ivy"? Principessa 21:18, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

According to The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, it is See: [3]. -newkai t-c 00:30, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject proposal (Withdrawn)

I have made a proposal for a WikiProject for articles relating to Binghamton/Greater Binghamton/Triple Cities. If you are interested you can view it at: WikiPedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals#Binghamton

Cheesebox 08:54, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

I have withdrawn the proposal due to lack of interest. Cheesebox 03:50, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Userbox

BUThis user attends or attended Binghamton University.

A userbox exists for Wikipedians who are students or alumni of Binghamton University:
Just put {{User Binghamton}} on your user page.

Pipe Bomb Issue has to stay

Link to most recent version: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Binghamton_University&oldid=116102567

Notice: "State University of New York at Binghamton" owns the entire range "128.226.x.x". 141.155.144.95

Alma Mater

looks vandalized, don't know what it should be

Title must be changed to State University of New York at Binghamton

The name of this article must be changed to the complete, official name: "State University of New York at Binghamton". This would be in agreement with the main article titles of the WP articles for the 3 other SUNY university centers. Based on http://computing.binghamton.edu/web/styleguide The State University of New York at Binghamton remains the official and legal name of the University. - 141.155.119.235 03:54, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

No. See WP:NC(S), which reads reads School article titles should use the full official name of the school as provided by the school itself, unless the most common name for the school is significantly more well known than the official name. All of the university's communications and marketing use the name "Binghamton University", even the letterhead, and the school has used that name for over a decade. This article needs to be moved back to Binghamton University. 128.226.240.76 19:10, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Binghamton's marketting doesn't have the final say; legally, its SUNY Binghamton, and frankly, I've never heard anyone outside of the University call it Binghamton University or BU...sorry, those names simply aren't the common.66.24.110.127 17:06, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Adding to that, I could put the name "Max Power" on all my letterhead and my friends can call me Max. That doesn't mean that's my legal name. In many instances on wiki, most are known by their proper name, not by their character name. Such with structures. 66.24.110.127 17:08, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Article titles are not determined based on "legal names." Stevie Wonder's legal name is Stevland Hardaway Morris, but he is not known by that name, and hence it is not the article title. The same idea applies to this article (WP:NC(S)). SUNY Binghamton has been known as Binghamton University for the past decade, and the article name should be in agreement with that. 128.226.240.76 05:51, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

The seal says "SUNY Binghamton". There is no basis for calling Binghamton University Binghamton University aside from that's what the school (and really, only the school) want.66.24.111.185 05:12, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

TDX is not a BU Fraternity

Theta Delta Chi is not a campus recognized fraternity by the IFC in Binghamton. I removed the reference to their "up and coming" status because although they are chartered by the national fraternity itself, they are not considered a legitimate group on campus.

Wikipedia is not a place to advertise

I put the NPOV tag up until this article stops sounding like an advertisement. First, its too long: There's no reason for a page to be over 42 kb like this, and compared to other better ranked schools-this is an objective term but I don't think Binghamton is as respected as say Harvard-though maybe not this on-there's no reason for the Binghamton page to be longer. So this tag stays until someone outside of Binghamton's marketting, or its extreme critics, edit it to normal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.24.39.246 (talk) 15:33, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

To clarify, this article shouldn't be greatly advertised than the other SUNYs, nor should it contain more pictures. I've cut it down. Would Binghamton University marketting please stay away from wikipedia in the future, and no, we don't care about your little student group. It shouldn't be on this page. Feel free to create a page on your group and a page of a list of Binghamton University groups, but do not place your group on this page. Besides, if Binghamton University spent the money on classes, rather than marketting and constantly having the school under construction, ratings might improve and we might be able to be in the top 50. Is that a low blow and a cheap shot? You bet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.24.111.185 (talk) 05:19, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

SUNY Binghamton vs. Binghamton University

Someone has gone through and edited all of the instances of "Binghamton University," into SUNY Binghamton... I'm guessing an alumni behind the times. I would like to clarify that while, in fact, Binghamton University is not the official name, neither is SUNY Binghamton. The official name is "Binghamton University, State University of New York." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.226.220.42 (talk) 01:57, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Someone has edited from a Binghamton University range this, which is fictional if one looks at the seal. There is no apparent reference to Binghamton University anywhere such as present anywhere. None is given. Thus that edit must be taken as vandalism. Please leave your posts as they come in order at the bottom, not the top. Furthermore, please keep the marketing department off this page. The interference, while understandable, is not appropriate as wikipedia is not a place to advertise. Numerous edits from the range 128.226.xxx.xx are owned by Binghamton University and are highly suspicious.66.24.35.55 18:15, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

And who are you to say anyone is "Behind the times?" Is it "behind the times" to reject your marketing? Cite if you are going to change it the origin of this title NO ONE has heard of. As I said...right there on the seal, SUNY at Binghamton.66.24.35.55 18:17, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Page Clean-up

I have cleaned up the headings and general organization of this article. It looks like through various editing many of the headings, order, etc., because inappropriate. I have barely changed any actual content with the exception of cleaning up the introduction, which many contributors seemed to agree was somewhat irrelevant (for instance, mentioning the library tower, etc.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.226.220.42 (talk) 03:02, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Name Standard

I propose all instances of Binghamton University and SUNY Binghamton be only used in the introduction and history and that the school be known in the article as "Binghamton"-the reasoning being first, Binghamton is a compromise between the two, and secondly, its easy to read and say, and third, its what most people seem to call the university in my experience. Fourth, this article is not about the city. Fifth, it carries no political overtones that either Binghamton University or SUNY Binghamton carry. Sixth, after the history and introduction, it is not necessary to call it by either name, and simplicity is best. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.151.2.10 (talk) 20:05, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Binghamton Crosbys

I see no reason this organization is notable for this article, as there are many acappella groups on campus. I think appropriately there should be a subarticle created of student groups at Binghamton. Thus no direct reference should be made to them on this page aside from the fact numerous acappella groups exist, and information should be more generalized on this page, with a page listing groups at Binghamton University. I do not see why this is not acceptable. By this standard I think that most groups with the exception of OCCT and WHRW should be removed since they tend not to serve the public at large. This page also in my view should list the fraternities and Greek life, which the current Binghamton page does not do at all.163.151.2.10 (talk) 20:14, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

I think that the Crosbys are important to mention... they were the first a cappella group on campus and led to the formation of the others (the Pegs, which were the second split directly off of the Crosbys). Additionally, the university even recognizes them are particularly notable as they are setting up a display case to recognize their important history with the university. Further more, in terms of a cappella groups, they are the most award winning in the world (for collegiate groups), including holding the record for 4 appearances at the national championships. No other group on campus has even come close to this... and part of my thinking for why the Crosbys should be mentioned and the other not. In terms of popularity, for instance, the other groups use the lecture hall while the crosbys pack the Anderson Center Concert Hall. (Added by Greynol1 at 21:42, 22 January 2008)

I still think the appropriate route is an activities page, even if they are the biggest acappella group on campus, there are other groups. Besides, this page can certainly afford the cleanup, and I'm sure a lot of groups believe they should be mentioned here, and furthermore, its an excuse to highlight more groups while summaring on this page the types of groups at Binghamton without labelling any by name.163.151.2.10 (talk) 21:46, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree that it may be better to have a student association organizations page, however... should notable groups remain on the main article, then I think they should be included. It was for the same reasons that I created the athletics page.

I think the only groups that should be in the main article are those that serve the community and receive attention outside the university, such as WHRW, athletics, etc.; all other groups I think should be linked. What is adequate for this definition? I'm not sure. OCCT I think should stay. Food Co-Op I think should go. Harper's Ferry is debatable. Etc.163.151.2.10 (talk) 19:46, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Archiving

I have archived previous discussions as they made the page cumbersome and difficult to read. They are in archive 1.163.151.2.10 (talk) 20:14, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

I've moved the archive to the proper name, and added an auto archiver to handle it in the future. AnmaFinotera (talk) 16:44, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Photo

No offense to Mr.Reynolds, but there must be a better image for this article.--Wiki11790 (talk) 07:22, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

External Links

Hi,

Over the last week or two, there seems to have been a clean up of all external links - linking to various student groups on campus.

Although i understand that Wikipedia is NOT a place to advertise for any organization, I DO think that there should be some information and links - at least external - to different student, ethnic, or religious groups on campus, so that someone seeking to obtain information on any of the above matters should be able to do so.

I think that all of the ethnic, religious and social student groups on campus are a very important component to student life at Binghamton University and therefore I think that they should be presented to someone seeking info on BU.

Therefore, I ask that the external links be allowed back on to this site and that the ones heading this webpage allow them back on. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lubavitch (talk • contribs) 17:17, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia is NOT a directory of links for the university. That is what the university's web site is for, and other web directories. As per the MOS and the WP:EL guideline, the only link that is needed for a university article is the one for the official university site. The official school media outlets have also been allowed, for now, as they can provide additional, current information about the school not available in the article. So no, the links do not belong. AnmaFinotera (talk)

Co-op

The Binghamton University Food Co-Op provides a valuable service to the community, to both students and Binghamton residents. I don't understand how whoever suggested removing it from the BInghamton University wiki doesn't see this- we provide organic foods, and essentially all health food to people who don't want to support corporations and want to support local growers. You have to be very ignorant to think it doesn't provide a valuable service. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tkamins1 (talk • contribs) 16:21, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Just because it is important or valuable does not mean it is notable. Wikipedia has specific guidelines about what is considered notable, and the food co-op doesn't really fall on it. Don't take it as a personal attack. The entire student group listing needs to be reviewed and cleaned up; this article is a bit of a mess. 149.125.220.205 (talk) 05:14, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Student groups

I removed several student groups because they don't really seem to be notable; beyond the group's own web page there's little information for most of them. With 160 student groups on campus, we can't really include many groups unless they have significant third party sources per WP:NOTE Wsanders (talk) 05:57, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

On this I, and the University MOS, agree. Unfortunately, the group members tend to like to come back and readd their groups, so be prepared to have it turn up on your watchlist regularly. :P AnmaFinotera (talk) 06:16, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Notable Alumni

Is there someone who would like to change around the notable alumni section so that it is prose? See [[4]] for a good example of an alumni section. Also, we should probably consider whether all of the alumni listed pass WP:NOTE Wsanders (talk) 18:23, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Events Center Merger

I don't think the Events center page should be merged. All other America East Basketball facilities have their own page. 13:10, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

And they are all being deleted, slowly but surely, where they can not establish individual notability. SUNY's can not and needs to be merged. AnmaFinotera (talk) 14:25, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I've closed the request after 9 or 10 months of no discussion. Anyways, in my opinion, all Division 1 football stadiums and basketball arenas are notable. There is no official notability guideline for buildings. --Michael Greiner 20:03, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Binghamton Review

"In this issue tuition hikes, a steadfast approach towards promoting multiculturalism and employing professors with leftist ideologies are all cited as devastating attacks on Binghamton University's reputation"

This definitely doesn't strike me a NPOV. Stating that a campus paper's view greatly deviates from the local norm is one thing; and saying it frequently attacks preconceptions about the university or tries to diminish its reputation is another. This reads more like praise.

In addition, I don't believe an individual edition of this newspaper meets notability guidelines; this particular issue was consistent in tone with all of their other releases. This isn't even one of the larger or more notable papers on campus. Wikipedia exists to be an encyclopedia, not an arbitrary collection of facts, or an amalgamation of as much information as possible on a topic.

Summary: 1) Above quote lacks NPOV. 2) Binghamton Review and its articles are not notable; nor do they really contribute an article about a university which is already bloated.

Ktemkin (talk) 22:10, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Mid-importance in WP New York?

I'm assigning this level of importance to any large or mid-sized NY State university with extensive research activity. Gave same level of importance to Columbia University and SUNY Stony Brook. --AFriedman (talk) 23:07, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Controversy

This section pertains directly to a quickly evolving subject related to an ongoing investigation that is the subject of some debate. For obvious reasons, there is going to be a substantial amount of disagreement as to the actual facts underlying this topic. As such, entries within this section should strive to be brief, comprehensive, and general in nature in order to remain fair and neutral. Maintaining a NPOV is important so as to promote a balanced understanding of the topic, and thus the use of emotional terms and loaded phrases and constructs ought to be avoided. Carefully considered phrasing is key in creating a neutral and useful article in this instance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.226.35.67 (talk) 17:41, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Right now there is a long "Controversy" section which deals with some incidents where sensitive information (such as Social Security Numbers) was improperly secured. This is nothing unique to Binghamton and doesn't seem to worth mentioning at all in this article, let alone at great length. But maybe someone out there actually believes (and maybe even believes with good reason) that this university in particular has a history of especially poor information security--- so I will mention this on the Talk page before I go ahead and whack the whole section. Timothy Horrigan (talk) 22:45, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Seeing no opposition three months later, I'm going to go ahead and "whack" the entire controversy section. The SS issue is not specific to BU, and the Antoun murder, although tragic, is not controversial and is also not indicative of any systemic issue within the university. --Dale316 (talk) 16:57, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Athletics

This section does not rise above Binghamton University PR if the basketball scandal is not discussed with athletics. According to Phil Muschnick of hte New York Post (Sept 27, 2009), " Over the last five years, the college repeatedly demonstrated that its primary mission is to win basketball games, even if it meant recruiting from Serbia Miladin Kovacevic, who beat a Binghamton student, half his size, into a coma." The scandal, clearly described in "the Kaye report" (http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/sports/20100210_BING_DOC.pdf )revealed what those familar with the university already knew. The university president had spearheaded a decade of corruption, the worst of which is still being revealed. According to Pete Thamel in a 2/29/2012 article in the NY Times "Lois DeFleur, the university president, retired. Mary Ann Swain, the provost, stepped down to return to teaching. Athletic Director Joel Thirer resigned soon after Mayben’s arrest and returned to teaching. Coach Kevin Broadus was suspended with pay and his contract was eventually bought out. The contract of the senior associate athletic director, Jason Siegel, was not renewed. (Siegel and another athletic department official were accused of sexual harassment by a department fund-raiser and the university settled for $280,000.)". Even more recently, it was revealed that even the investigation was conducted in an inappropriate manner contibuting. "The Times Union of Albany reports today that a draft of a state audit on the Research Foundation of the State University of New York found that millions of dollars were “mishandled, misspent or misused.” and "—The Research Foundation paid a total of $3 million for 10 contracts for which there was a potential conflict of interest and policy violations. That includes a $913,000 investigation of Binghamton University’s basketball program for the SUNY Board of Trustees. Judith Kaye, New York’s former chief judge, led the probe for the law firm Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP and Affiliates."

Above section moved from article space as it seems to be a discussion.--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(talk) 16:45, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Binghamton University a Land-Grant University?

There seems to be disagreement between AlaskanNativeRU and myself about whether Binghamton is a land-grant university. Would anyone be able to help us reach consensus? It is my belief that Binghamton is not a land-grant university, as it has not been designated under the Morrill Acts and related extensions by the government. However, AlaskanNativeRU claims that the APLU has somehow superseded the government-run land-grant act. I'd like to note that in AlaskanNativeRU's provided citation, the APLU itself states that Binghamton is not a state-designated land-grant university. Any opinions on this? (We are having a similar discussion at Talk:University at Buffalo.) Vmanjr (talk) 02:53, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Membership in APLU is automatically granted to land-grant institutions per the Morrill Land-Grant Acts of 1862,1890 and 1994. Association of Public and Land-Grant Universities (APLU) Membership Criteria AlaskanNativeRU (talk) 02:58, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, but that is not the only condition of admission for the APLU:

B. Institution Membership
1. Automatic Membership
Accredited universities that meet at least one of the following three criteria are qualified for APLU membership without formal action by the APLU Board of Directors.
a. Institution is a Land-Grant institution (1862, 1890, 1994)
b. A public institution classified in one of two Basic Classification categories from the 2010 Carnegie Classification of Instructional Programs (Source: http://carnegieclassifications.iu.edu/)
i. Research (Very High)
ii. Research (High)
c. Institution is a current APLU member in good standing.

There can also be discretionary membership, even if none of those criteria are met. That said, from the text above, being a member of the APLU does not mean that you are a land-grant institution. In fact, this cites the three Morrill Acts in its definition, which as we discussed before are only the institutions shown on this map from the federal government. Vmanjr (talk) 03:21, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Would like to also note the space grant type. http://www.nasa.gov/offices/education/programs/national/spacegrant/home/Space_Grant_Directors.html#.VU10_nPD_qA is the official list. Showing Cornell as the master and the rest as affiliates in NY. But in the space grants wiki and on other universities (other than the mains) it includes expansions and affiliates , so I believe we should either follow through or stay consistent. AlaskanNativeRU (talk) 03:46, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

As I noted earlier, the space-grant consortiums are very different from the APLU. Let's go with NY, since that's where I'm from. Unlike the land-grant universities, which are single-university designations, the space-grant program was designed by the government to use state-wide consortiums]. If you go to the New York Consortium page, you can see that there is a list of affiliated institutions. No such institution affiliation exists for the land-grant program in the Morrill Act, though it does exist for the space-grant, sea-grant, and sun-grant programs. The APLU is not any sort of land-grant consortium, but is instead a tangentially-associated private association that advocates for both high-research public universities and land-grant universities. Vmanjr (talk) 04:00, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

There needs a source to establish that Binghamton is a Land Grant University. It is clear that it is is a member of the APLU but those are not the same thing. (You become eligible to join the American Association of Retired Persons when you're 50 - you don't have to be retired. You can join the NAACP whether or not you are a "colored person", and the National Organization for Women without being a woman. Cats are mammals but not all mammals are cats!) JohnInDC (talk) 10:15, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

BU (SUNY-B) is a public university. As such is belongs to APLU as a "P" (public) not "L" (land-grant) institution. The website provided shows a listing of all member universities without designation. For details: use the Map function, uncheck "All", then select only the land-grant institutions. Binghamton will not be listed.--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 11:30, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Its called the Association of Public and Land grant univetsities, uses "and" not "or". Furthermore the website seems to imply that if your listed you are a land grant institution, as the name would imply to begin with. AlaskanNativeRU (talk) 17:37, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

That would be a good argument to make to APLU, suggesting a name change. Whether "and" or "or", BU is still not a land-grant uni.--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 18:11, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Binghamton University. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060902133800/http://ccpa.binghamton.edu/aboutus/facts.htm to http://ccpa.binghamton.edu/aboutus/facts.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060903113557/http://alumni.binghamton.edu/AC/march04/feature01.htm to http://alumni.binghamton.edu/AC/march04/feature01.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20051118222936/http://watson.binghamton.edu/WatsonStudentServices/GeneralEducation/gened-fl.htm to http://watson.binghamton.edu/WatsonStudentServices/GeneralEducation/gened-fl.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100204202422/http://bwnt.businessweek.com:80/interactive_reports/undergrad_bschool/index.asp?sortCol=job_placement_grade&sortOrder=DESC&pageNum=1&resultNum=100 to http://bwnt.businessweek.com/interactive_reports/undergrad_bschool/index.asp?sortCol=job_placement_grade&sortOrder=DESC&pageNum=1&resultNum=100

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:28, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Binghamton University. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070114125839/http://www.teac.org:80/members/members.asp to http://www.teac.org/members/members.asp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080914061030/http://reslife.binghamton.edu:80/communities.shtml to http://reslife.binghamton.edu/communities.shtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130115190520/http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities/spp%2B50/page+2 to http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities/spp%2B50/page+2
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20131007063529/http://www.binghamton.edu/admissions/class-profile.html to http://www2.binghamton.edu/admissions/class-profile.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:37, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Binghamton University. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080627082000/http://reslife.binghamton.edu/content/ECH_newsletter1.pdf to http://reslife.binghamton.edu/content/ECH_newsletter1.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070615190210/http://admissions.binghamton.edu/SUNYBinghamton.pdf to http://admissions.binghamton.edu/SUNYBinghamton.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:21, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Why is the seal not being used?

I see the notice on the top of this page. But why does it matter what Binghamton employees say on the matter? WP:UNI guidelines specifies that we use the seal in the infobox. As {{non-free school logo}} says, "This image of a university's logo, seal, or crest may be subject to internal institutional restrictions, including a prohibition on use without permission from the administration or public relations department. These restrictions are not binding on anyone outside of the university."

On top of this talk page the note states "Issues identified are: According to the university, the logo should be used and not the seal, as the seal should only be used for official documents."

This argument does not apply to a wikipedia article however, because the use in this instance is considered fair use under the policies of Wikipedia and ultimately under United States Copyright Law. As fair use, the use of this image does not require special permission or license from the copyright holder, and thus can be used in a manner which might be contrary to the copyright holder's established policies regarding use of the copyrighted work.

I suggest bringing the seal back, every other college page has a seal in the infobox. I have seen this exact argument over at another SUNY talk page, and the seal was put back in the article. AlaskanNativeRU (talk) 19:07, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

References

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Binghamton 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141006093652/http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities/up-and-coming to http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities/up-and-coming
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities/spp%2B50/page%2B2

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) 16:29, 20 July 2017 (UTC)