Talk:Mills College at Northeastern University/Archive 1

Archive 1

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 2 February 2021 and 6 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Vgorostiaga.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 04:11, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the recent work on this

Thanks to everyone for their recent work on this. One quick comment - the lead section needs to be entirely re-written. Please take a look at WP:LEAD for ideas. Also, at the moment, it appears to be a cut and paste of the college's "mission statement." If that is the situation (and I haven't double-checked it), that would likely be a copyright violation, and really should be removed.

Again, thanks to everyone for working hard on this, and with some tweaking on the lead section, the article is off to a great start! NorCalHistory 16:18, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

---Thanks for raising the question of copyright use and proper introduction guidelines. I have added the college's mission information (with reference link) to the article body to keep it in line with proper protocol. Glad you like the updates! --Catsmith mills 01:13, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Controversy

There's been ongoing controversy on the repeated removal of staff with alternative viewpoints. What is the policy on writing about it? --EarthSprite^∞ 05:12, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Faculty

Molissa Fenley, the dancer, is a Mills graduate and currently on the faculty in the dance department. She ought to be added to both the faculty lists and the alumni lists. - Leila, Mills MFA in English 2007 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.122.195.154 (talk) 05:24, 12 May 2007 (UTC).

Women's College

I changed "woman's college" back to "women's college". The latter is the standard term. See for example Women's College Coalition Homepage. Espertus 00:53, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Note on Bias

It has been stated by staff of Mills that the format, design, and writing of this Wiki page was created primarily by the Mills College marketing department. Keep it in mind. It could use edits. ~~ ((A wandering WikiGnome)) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.91.63.181 (talk) 19:54, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Controversies at Mills

It might be nice to add a section on controversies at Mills. The biggest one, of course, is the strike, which has already been mentioned. Others might be controversial tenure denials and lawsuits and Nalini (Gwyn) Ghuman's visa problems.

Architecture

I added a section on Julia Morgan buildings. Perhaps this should be part of a larger section on architecturally significant buildings, which would also include Mills Hall and the new Natural Sciences building. Espertus (talk) 07:23, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I have to ask why there is no mention of the alumni house Istvanasz (talk) 05:45, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Alumnae

I know and like Daisy Gonzalez '07, but I'm not sure she's prominent enough to be on the list.

Should we indicate that "alumnae" Laurie Anderson and Sofia Coppola didn't graduate from Mills? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Espertus (talk • contribs) 04:08, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

The notable alumni section should include people who have a wikipedia article or who meet the notability guidelines but have not had an article written about them yet. Other articles I have looked at indicate that people attended a school but did not graduate. BlueAzure (talk) 19:24, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for adding the link to me.

How do other pages indicate that someone attended but did not graduate? Espertus (talk) 05:14, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Almost every page I looked at indicates it in a different way. The way at List of Mount Holyoke College people looks pretty good, in parenthesis it states attended and the years attended. BlueAzure (talk) 21:25, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Universities central at Women in Red on IWD during March 2017

Info and invitation. Women in Red has a drive during March to create and improve articles on women alumnae of universities. International Women's Day is on March 8th and we invite others to mirror the event in the UK in Cambridge. Please sign up or ask for help at Women in Red. Hope you can make it. We have tools that will allow you to find missing women alumni from Mills College or any other university. We are interested in editors who want to work in any language. Victuallers (talk) 08:47, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Rankings section

This becomes wasted space without updating. It should be in prose also.--MattyMetalFan (talk) 15:48, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mills College. 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/20120119182030/http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/regional-universities-west to http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/regional-universities-west

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) 04:38, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Mills College. 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/20140921230836/http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/college_guide/rankings-2014/masters-universities-rank.php to http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/college_guide/rankings-2014/masters-universities-rank.php
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/regional-universities-west
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120102122747/http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/regional-universities-west/best-value to http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/regional-universities-west/best-value
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150626105850/http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/mills-college-118888/overall-rankings to http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/mills-college-118888/overall-rankings

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) 10:51, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

History subsection about School Closure

Not sure what exactly is going on here, but there seems to be original research or a non-neutral POV statement included on the history subsection as part of a campaign to prevent the closure. Should that be removed? There are no cited sources. Jack17212 (talk) 22:42, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this up; I've removed it.

@AmandaTrujilloHumphrey: It's highly inappropriate and unacceptable to use this article to promote the cause of the Save Mills College Coalition. If the group has been covered in independent reliable sources, it may be appropriate to mention them but dedicating a large portion of this article or prominently include them in the lede of the article is not acceptable. ElKevbo (talk) 01:13, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

• @AmandaTrujilloHumphrey: I concur with the above; what you are attempting to add is unacceptable in its current form. Events regarding the potential closure of the college as reported and supported by secondary sources would be acceptable. This diff is simply not acceptable. Please do not attempt to force this material onto the article again. Crafting prose based on sources, perhaps such as this, might be useful to the article. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:14, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

• @AmandaTrujilloHumphrey: I have added this article to my watchlist as it seems that you are a good enthusiastic editor, that has been trapped into supporting a cause. I am tempted to say that the best course of action is to report on the ongoing twist and turns on the talk page, and let an uninvolved editor transfer them to the main page. ClemRutter (talk) 16:21, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

• @ClemRutter: @Hammersoft: @ElKevbo: Hi all, I appreciate the responses. I am attempting to update this article with current events related to the school's transition. It highlights an important situation for higher ed in general and especially given the college's status as a historic women's liberal arts college, so it should be documented in the college's history section. My edits have been plainly stated, to the point, and in effort to update the college's current state of affairs, keeping the article current (last I saw, no edits were made since 2007)... That said, the subject itself is obviously charged for those involved, but that shouldn't exclude it from being documented in an open source article. Also, this discussion has turned strangely personal. I am neither a student, nor faculty. Let's maintain our professionalism and avoid inappropriate comments/assumptions regarding this editors views/motives and focus commentary on how to improve the edits made. Ultimately, this is a low impact article with low traffic (outside us four or five recently...). The motive is to update the page with meaningful and relevant information.

Alternatively, this information can be documented in it's own wikipage and hyperlinked to the primary mills page? How does that sound? I think there are multiple solutions to document this interesting event that meets wiki satisfaction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AmandaTrujilloHumphrey (talk • contribs)

• @AmandaTrujilloHumphrey: Procedural point; the {{ping}} template does not work to notify anyone unless you also sign the comment in which you are making the ping. To do so, you can add four tildes to the end of your talk page posts, like "~~~~" . To the content; adding material is fine...IF it is sourced to reliable, secondary sources. Previously, you have based the material on primary sources. We use primary sources sparingly, and usually to confirm specific facts. As a tertiary resource as opposed to a secondary resource such as a newspaper, we are not reporters of news. Publishing the demands of the various organizations opposing the board's decision is wholly inappropriate. Posting prose supported by comments a newspaper makes about the demands might be appropriate. I hope I've made clear the difference. --Hammersoft (talk) 10:57, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

@Hammersoft: I read this a few days ago and slapped my hand to my forehead. Thank you so much for clarifying. I also must have missed your original comment explaining this before - sorry about that, and mostly thank you for explaining again for this new wiki editor! Understood!AmandaTrujilloHumphrey (talk) 19:58, 27 April 2021 (UTC)