Talk:Pitzer College

Is J1 actually a chartered theme hall or simply a hall of primarily science majors? I've been told by admin. that the only themed halls at the present are Sub-Free, Involvement and HUSH. Unless J1 actually has a charter as a Joint Science Hall, it shouldn't be listed as a themed hall. Also, I don't see the relevance of explaining residence hall nomenclature (last section) in an encyclopedia. Wanted to see if you had a reason for that before I delete it. Coreyander 21:35, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)

J1 as far as I know was not an official science hall athough that could have changed. When I was there it was unoficially designated as a pre-med, pre-engineering hall. In fact some Mudd students lived there, I guess for the quiet... I was K1 and J2 before moving down to Mudd-Blaisdell at Pomona (Blaisdell side, tower). Holden rocks!

Wow, this reads like a publicity department leaflet for Pitzer. zafiroblue05 | Talk 09:43, 9 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

If you have a reliable source for negative information about the college we can add it. -Will Beback 18:58, 9 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

It's not that the information presented on the page is wrong as it is meaningless.

• "Pitzer engages a student's mind, heart and spirit by integrating educational resources on campus, abroad and in the local community.
• "Pitzer College celebrates cultural diversity and intercultural understanding."
• "Intercultural and interdisciplinary learning are highly valued at Pitzer. Students are encouraged to take advantage of these programs as well as many other Claremont resources that enrich and strengthen their appreciation of global diversity."

Those statements (for example) aren't wrong, per se - they're just propganda. zafiroblue05 | Talk 04:46, 10 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Sorry for not paying attention. Someone actually did copy a few paragraphs from a publicity department leaflet. I'll never understand why college articles so often contain plagiarized material. Thanks for spotting it. Cheers, -Will Beback 06:13, 10 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Is there a way to get a better picture of the Grove House? The one currently there just show the trees and hides the Craftsman style architecture...Shirley Ku 19:12, 6 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

Sure, this unobstructed photo of the front of the Grove House and many others are available in the Claremont Colleges Photo Archive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.213.232.155 (talk) 07:44, 2 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

As a Pitzer Alum who served in student government, I'm personally saddened to see the amount of propaganda, factual errors, and utter lack of citations in this entry,

so you think the thing to do is put up a bunch of counterspin?Stormj (talk) 06:46, 20 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

I believe this entry falls victim to its own criticism and is itself biased and citationless. I was in the student guv in the 90s and I am not sure why special rules of purity have to apply to this wiki page. Propaganda? So, you're saying the college is psyoping its citizens to like the government or something? It's just a school. Stormj (talk) 06:57, 20 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

"The College is committed to recruiting and retaining a student body that is diverse; not only in the traditionally demarcated aspects (e.g. religiously, ethnically, academically, sexually), but also in terms of socioeconomic status"

This seems to be pulled directly from a PR blurb

but it's true, isn't it? Stormj (talk) 06:46, 20 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

"Pitzer recognizes that $41k is a huge burden, even for well-off families, so their staff, subsequently, makes every effort to provide students with enough financial aid to cover all 100% of their estimated"

While it's a nice idea, it's very hard to substantiate the Pitzer staff making every effort to provide students

"Although the school does not yet have to the financial resources to admit students Need Blind, the Admissions Committee makes every effort to recruit an eclectic pool of qualified, intellectual, motivated students."

Again with the every effort, this time for the admissions committee. How about "...the college states a commitment to recruiting an eclectic pool of qualified, intellectual, motivated students." Also, who's to say when a school has sufficient financial resources to accept 'need blind'

That's not even something most schools contemplate or attempt. Stormj (talk) 06:46, 20 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

"Noting the significant negative impact of standardized testing on potential applicants with limited financial and social resources — and the inherent problems associated with quantifying individuals using a single test score — Pitzer is part of the SAT optional movement for undergraduate admission."

'significant negative impact' and 'inherent problems' are bold statements in dire need of citation and should be qualified. With citations it seems more appropriate to be "Based on scientific research conducted by xxxxx that found the SAT to negatively impact applicants of limited financial and social resources, Pitzer decided in 2004 to make the SAT optional for all admission applicants."

Why does it need to be scientific? I'm sure this can be found out or not, but why does that effect the truth of their participation in sat optional? you're crying hearsay on a matter not asserted for it's truth. This isn't an article about testing, it's about the college and that is what they do.Stormj (talk) 06:46, 20 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

"The school's high regard, academic rigor, and quality of education are keenly reflected in the academically precocious achievements of its motivated student body."

Wow, what does this even mean? Filled with PR speak and seems to be ripped from an Admissions Office pamphlet.

"As consequence of the building project, the college is in the grips of a severe housing shortage."

The housing shortage is not due to the building project as none of the existing dorms are affected by the construction. The housing shortage is due to an increased enrollment. Pitzer computes budgets with a guideline of 750 enrolled students but the enrollment has increased over the past 15 years to be consistently over 900 while the number of beds has remained constant (unfortunately the Budget & Audit Committee doesn't have their financial documents online or I'd provide a citation link).

you obviously have an axe to grind, so what if it's higher enrollment? None of the existing dorms is affected? Well, didn't they knock down old ones? Your claim is conspiratorial and needs just as much if not more backup.Stormj (talk) 06:51, 20 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

"Pitzer prides itself upon being the most "flexible" of the Claremont Colleges, most notably in its policy for allowing self-designed majors and encouraging study abroad."

All of the Claremont Colleges encourage study abroad.

maybe, but all of the degree and major requirements are less flexible at the other places and the study abroad percentages are in fact lower especially at Mudd. Stormj (talk) 06:51, 20 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

"Each tower sports suites architecturally distinct from those located in Holden or Sanborn."

Architecturally, Mead is of the exact same cinder-block architecture. What is different is the layout. Architecturally different implies a distinction like craftsman vs. Spanish Adobe

Mead isn't my idea of art either, but it's not merely just a block. Stormj (talk) 06:51, 20 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

"Due to a steady, unexpected increase in student enrollment, construction of new residence halls has become the hallmark of the Project."

How can it be both steady and unexpected?

"Over fifty percent of Pitzer students do receive financial assistance in some form; whether it be in loans, work study, scholarships, and/or institutional grants."

"The vast majority of Pitzer students live on campus"

should be quantified

"Pitzer describes its academic approach as linking "intellectual inquiry with interdisciplinary studies, cultural immersion, social responsibility and community connectivity.""

Quotes should be cited with a link

"According to the school's web site, in the most recent data reported by the National Science Foundation, Pitzer College ranked 8th in the number of alumni who pursued a Ph.D. in psychology, 29th in the number of alumni who pursued a Ph.D. in anthropology, and 38th in the number of alumni who pursued a Ph.D. in sociology, compared with 153 other private colleges and universities."

link needed

"Pitzer College grants admission to less than 39% of the student applicant pool (now, less than 37% for the incoming class of 2010)."

http://www.pitzer.edu/admission/firstyearprofile.asp

--You123go 09:01, 14 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

I bet the Dean combs this entry and spices it up every couple of days. 68.101.130.214 20:25, 14 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

The POV tag shouldn't be on an article unless there's an active discussion about fixing the POV problems. Tags don't fix problems - if you see somethig that needs fixing the best thing is just to fix it yourself. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 20:31, 14 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Every effort will be made to update this page to reflect current facts and figures, as well as mediate with the above users to provide a more meaningful Pitzer Wikipedia entry. Rory Reiff 18:12, 28 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

If citations are not provided, the claims must be removed.Pupluv 08:38, 31 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

I removed the section on the Masculinists coalition again. Pitzer has over 150 student organizations, the coalition is only one of the most recent ones with relatively few members. Unless all of the organizations are included, I see no reason to include this coalition.

Here is the removed text: The Masculinists Coalition, an official student organization, was established to celebrate a positive male identity and is open to members of all races, religions, sexual orientations and genders. Before its official recognition in Spring of 2008, the group generated an ongoing discussion on campus, which attracted media coverage.^{[citation needed]}

Dapoloplayer (talk) 00:41, 7 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

I agree. While this group did generate some attention, it's undue weight to mention it without first mentioning the other groups that are larger or older. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 04:06, 7 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Just because the section is incomplete and does not have other clubs listed, does not mean that we should edit out information about clubs that someone has chosen to include. That would completely invalidate the idea of a constantly changing and growing resource of information. Rory Reiff (talk) 22:22, 7 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

An encyclopedia article should endeavor to summarize all significant viewpoints about a topic with due proportion given to their relative importance. Frankly, I don't think students clubs are terribly important. But it would give readers a false impression of the subject if we discuss a small, new club at length without mentioning larger and older groups. WP:WEIGHT. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 05:56, 8 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

The phrase "highly selective" has no place in the article, least of all in the opening sentence of the lead, which is why I have removed it. It is a weasel phrase and peacock term that conveys no actual meaning than to serve as boosterism for the institution. Furthermore, no institution or publication classifies colleges as "highly" selective, so it's not even verifiable. Assert facts, not opinions and just describe the admissions numbers (number of applicants, number admitted, number matriculated, and freshmen retention) in the body of article and don't tell the reader what to think. Madcoverboy (talk) 18:30, 27 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

I agree. While the term is used by colleges about themselves, and is even used sometimes by college rating agencies, it is still an opinion and does not belong in the lead. There may be justification for adding it to the section about how the school is ranked, so long as it can be sourced and attributed.   Will Beback  talk  20:56, 27 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Someone deleted the photo I had of the Grove House. I took the photo, and while I didn't know how to tag it properly (obviously) it seems a shame to remove it. Please let me know how we can get photos back into the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.173.243.160 (talk) 02:50, 24 April 2013 (UTC) 134.173.113.36:Reply

I can sort of get the advertisement issue but when you are writing about a college or university, this one is not too far removed from all the others that exist.--MattyMetalFan (talk) 20:50, 26 September 2016 (UTC)Reply

I propose that John R. Rodman Arboretum be merged into this article, Pitzer College. I'm not sure the arboretum on Pitzer's campus is notable by itself, and in any case, it'd be more properly discussed within the article on the college as a whole. - Sdkb (talk) 07:32, 13 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

@ElKevbo: I've noticed you patrolling this page, so I was wondering what you think of this proposal, since no one else seems to have noticed it yet. - Sdkb (talk) 02:56, 26 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

I have no strong opinion on this proposal - sorry! I have no particular expertise with arboretums (not even enough to know if that's the correct plural) or articles about them. This is already a rather long article so I don't think that the arboretum article could be merged into this article without trimming it down considerably so the question may hinge on whether that could be done while still presenting all of the necessary information about the arboretum. The arboretum article does seem to be missing some basic information (e.g., history) so it may be a better idea to expand that article so it's clear that it stands on its own. ElKevbo (talk) 03:01, 26 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Klbrain: You've twice tried to close this proposal, most recently as "on balance, better to improve than merge". We're talking here about an article created in 2005 that has zero sources. A Google News search for the arboretum returns three results, the top one of which mentions the arboretum only in a photo caption. If you want to close the merger as you propose, the next step is to take the page to AfD where it'll undoubtedly be deleted, but it'd be better to at least transfer any material of interest to the main Pitzer page before that happens. Sdkb (talk) 19:00, 27 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the feedback, Sdkb. I have attempted to close this on the grounds that there is no support for your proposal and one objection. Category:Arboreta in California shows that there is at least some interest in having distinct pages about arboreta in the region, and the text suggests that it has a pre-1988 history independent of the college (although it seems that this is only back to 1984). For institutions starting in the 80s, online news searches might not be the best way of establishing notability. Having said this, I agree that the case is likely to be tenuous, even if only because sources are harder to find. I've added one news article, but agree that online content is thin on the ground. Klbrain (talk) 13:14, 28 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

The list of buildings takes up a lot of space, but much of this text is unreferenced and it is unclear whether some of the buildings have any historical or cultural significance. Simply listing names upon names of buildings is inappropriate for an encyclopedia. I propose deleting these sections if nothing changes. Melchior2006 (talk) 09:57, 13 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

Since nobody has chimed in on this, I will delete. --Melchior2006 (talk) 19:32, 17 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

I agree that much of the info was promotional, @Melchior2006; thanks for removing! I'm not sure all the removals were justified — Pitzer is a very small college, so if we are envisioning what would be needed to make it a FA someday, a robust campus section would probably mention important facilities like the dining hall. But if they are to be mentioned, they should be concisely and without promotionalism. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 08:18, 18 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

I'm trying to set up Pomona-Pitzer Sagehens#Notable athletes to transclude. Getting List of Pomona College people#Athletes has been straightforward enough, but List of Pitzer College people doesn't currently have any athletes, and a PetScan query seems to indicate Wikipedia may not currently have any articles on notable athletes who went to Pitzer. It'd be helpful to have at least one, just to set up the transclusion system. Any possibilities that'd meet WP:NATHLETE? {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 22:32, 12 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

This is boosterism, a charming description of a grassy spot on campus. But it isn't relevant for an encyclopedia. I propose deleting it. -- Melchior2006 (talk) 09:08, 18 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

I saw a draft for Draft:John R. Rodman. He was affiliated with the college for over three decades. Thriley (talk) 20:48, 2 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

I found and added refs to establish Rodman's notability. That's as much as I have time for at the moment. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 22:48, 2 February 2024 (UTC)Reply