Talk:Dartmouth

Dartmouth College gets its name from somewhere altogether more significant, the town of Dartmouth, England. This article's title, whilst unwitting, is a prime example of Cultural imperialism... sjc

---

Untitled

Yes, most American's ignorance of British place names is a government inspired plan to reduce cultural dependence on the former colonial power. Not to mention to make for better crossword puzzles. --MichaelTinkler

Indeed. Perhaps, while we're at it, we should redirect Boston to Boston, Lincolnshire so to correct the injustice done this town of a bit more than 27,000. After all, being the first to be named, it's surely "altogether more significant" than the other Bostons around the world. Oh, and who would think about "marathon" as the name of a sport? The whole world wants to know every last detail about the 8,488 people who call Marathon, Greece home. Hey, let's get rid of disambiguation pages altogether! After all, it's Wikipedia's job to educate people on the proper cultural norms eminating from Europe, as nothing notable has been produced in the past 500 years -- particularly not from the uncouth savages of the New World.

London is calling. It would be "cultural imperialism" to fail to heed her call. -- SwissCelt 01:54, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

---

Dartmouth College does not get its name from the town of Dartmouth but from William Legge, the second earl of Dartmouth. The article is now titled "Dartmouth College" anyway, and a disambiguation page distinguishes it from the English town. --Edit07 17:20, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Redirect to Dartmouth College?

Dartmouth College has 6000 students. Dartmouth, Nova Scotia has a population of 65000. Dartmouth, Massachusetts has a population of 30000 and Dartmouth, Devon has a population of 5000. Why should Dartmouth redirect to Dartmouth College? --unsigned edit by Q6637p

Google "Dartmouth" for starters. The top search results represent the destination of the majority of people who search for "Dartmouth,"and all of the top search results do lead to websites about "Dartmouth College." After Googling "Dartmouth," is the top Wikipedia result an article for "Dartmouth, MA" or "Dartmouth, Nova Scotia?" No, it is for "Dartmouth College," and hence this is what the majority of readers who Google "Dartmouth" want to see. -- Comte de Chagny 15:19, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

It's a bit shortsighted to state that "Dartmouth College has 6000 students" and leave it at that. It's an Ivy League university and one of the oldest and richest universities in the United States so its influence and reputation are drastically out of proportion with its enrollment. ElKevbo (talk) 17:27, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Why does Dartmouth go to Dartmouth College? Only in the most narrow of world views is it possible to argue that this is the only meaning of the word, the only thing someone would be looking for in Wikipedia. I object to being reversed and told to participate in this talk page, when I find here that the only people supporting this situation against past objections is ElKevbo, "a scholar of U.S. higher education", and Comte de Chagny, who "attends or attended Dartmouth College." Bias much? The "influence and reputation" of Dartmouth College referred to above does not extend to sole ownership of the term throughout the English speaking world. This is after all supposedly a global encyclopaedia. And reliance on Google searches to prove this is ridiculous - they are tailored by Google to the person's location. When I search for Dartmouth for example from here in the UK, there are only 3 results about the college, 5 about the town in Devon, and 1 for the DHMC. I wonder what result someone in Australia or Canada gets, or even someone in the US closer to Massachusetts than New Hampshire. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.233.255.132 (talk) 00:58, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

I stand by my Google defense. The haphazard search results you receive are only from Google.co.uk. Querying Google.com - the flagship site with GLOBAL TRAFFIC - yields the results I mentioned. Wikipedia has a global audience, hence it shouldn't only yield to the objectors, apparently those using Google.co.uk. Comte de Chagny 03:13, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

I used .com for those results - there's no flagship, Google still tailors results for .com by location. Either that or your results aren't as comprehensive as you claim even for .com. And yes, on the country portals Dartmouth does even worse, on .co.uk, .com.au and .ca, only the official site and Wikipedia page manages to get on the front page. Wikipedia serves the global audience by not ignoring these facts, Wikipedia has no .com version, it is supposed to reflect the distribution of all English language results. It's beyond obvious to neutrals and outsiders that Dartmouth College has no legitimate claim to this page, not exclusively.

Then that was a bit short-sighted of me, thanks for setting the record straight. How should we reconcile this with the fact that the links to the college on Google are the top, most viewed links, then?Count de Chagny 16:49, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

It would be proper to have a request for "Dartmouth" go to the page with the list of possible meanings first. Despite the college's official site coming top in Google, it's clear from the rest of the results on the front page that there's no single dominant meaning, neither on .com or .co.uk etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.233.255.132 (talk) 17:26, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Instead of continuing your one-person crusade to edit this long-standing redirect without agreement on this talk page, how about opening an RFC or otherwise seeking more outside opinion? Merely continuing to make your edits isn't going to make them stick or convince anyone that you're right. ElKevbo (talk) 02:09, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Excuse me? "Crusade"? Are you intentionally trying to be offensive? I have tried to change this twice now, that is not a "crusade". The first time you objected and said 'come and talk', so I did. You never even bothered to comment. The only other person to comment appeared to admit that he does not understand Google enough to claim what he was claiming, and has not commented since after I said it should go to the list page. So after waiting 5 days, I did it. You had your chance to comment, you chose not to, and instead have just reversed me again. I have no idea what an "RFC" is, but if you tell me, I'd be happy to, because clearly no edits will stick with you reversing people for no reason. Well, no, you do claim this is a "long standing" arrangement. But if I'm reading the 'History' tab right, this page has only directed to the college since May 2010, which is just 4 months, and other people as well as me have tried to change that since then. Throughout the 2000s it always went to the list. By anyone's definition of "long standing", yours is out by at least a factor of 30. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.233.255.132 (talk) 14:48, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

First, I have already commented above. I can repeat myself if you really want me to do so but it seems unnecessary. Second, you're right about the redirection being relatively recent; that was my mistake. It doesn't change my opinion, though.

An RFC is a way to try to gather input from other editors. It may be helpful because right now this seems to be a discussion primarily between just two editors who are deadlocked. It seems most appropriate to stick with the status quo in such a situation but it would probably be better to get further input to establish a broader opinion and direction for movement. ElKevbo (talk) 16:19, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

I do not agree that this is a deadlock or an appropriate "status quo". You and Comte de Chagny are the only people trying to impose this situation, that has only existed since May, against objections. Both of you have a bias toward the subject, you as "a scholar of U.S. higher education" and he, who "attends or attended Dartmouth College." Neither of you have made a convincing argument why this should be so, you didn't bother to even contribute while reversing. And yes, I agree that you do not have to repeat yourself as long as your point was still valid, but my point has nothing to do with how many students attend the college. You have made no attempt whatsoever to show how the college's "influence and reputation" is such that it can claim sole use of the term Dartmouth throughout the English speaking world, over and above all other uses. Comte de Chagny tried to justify this using Google, but his point is completely undermined by the fact he clearly doesn't understand how Google works. The status quo is clearly to go to the list, as it did before May for over a decade. This is the true "long standing" situation that you are disturbing with your reverses. That RFC process look horrendously complex, there must be simpler ways of getting other opinions. But I suspect that's by design, as you probably hope I will just go away rather than trying to figure it out, thereby leaving it in the situation you are trying to impose. So I will return it to the list version, and I ask that you get other opinions here to show there is support for changing away from the true status quo. If you just reverse again, then I will have to report this as an obvious abuse of Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.233.255.132 (talk) 14:01, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

I'll start an RFC for you since you're too damn lazy to do it yourself and insist on edit warring about this issue without seeking input from others. ElKevbo (talk) 16:52, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Well if you had just told me how easy it was, I obviously would have done it. I'm not "lazy" (just like I'm not a "crusader"). Still, if offending me is what floats your boat, knock yourself out, as long as you aren't reversing me without a good reason while you do it, I'm fine with that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.233.255.132 (talk) 19:57, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Dartmouth: Disambiguation or Redirection?

Should "Dartmouth" redirect to "Dartmouth College" or be a disambiguation page? ElKevbo (talk) 16:54, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

• It should be a disambiguation page (I presume this means the list). This is how it was for most of the last decade until May this year. The only people who have been trying to make it go to the college since then, against objections from several people, is ElKevbo, "a scholar of U.S. higher education", and Comte de Chagny, who "attends or attended Dartmouth College.", so obviously, they have an inherent bias toward the mindset that there's only one well known meaning of the word "Dartmouth". Well, this is patently not true, there are several uses of it in the English speaking world, enough to make the list the first page you should see anyway, on Wikipedia, the supposedly global encyclopaedia. Depending on where in the world you are, when you Google "Dartmouth", you do not get a whole page of links about the college. The college's official site gets the top result in most places true, but that's understandable given how Google ranks work, and the fact none of the other contenders has an 'official site' per se. But when you look at the rest of the results that make it onto the first page, particularly for searches done on Google.com outside the US, and on all the other non-US Goggle domains such as .co.uk and .ca and .au, its clear that the other uses of the word are also prominent. It must also be common in the US due to Dartmouth, Massachusetts. Wikipedia pretending that the college is the main meaning is simply wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.233.255.132 (talk) 19:47, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Being an expert in an area does not mean one has an inherent bias and I'll thank you to stop your ridiculous accusations. ElKevbo (talk) 05:23, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

They are not ridiculous, it's simple human nature, as any behavioural scientist would confirm. To your mind, the college is so famous that it has become synonymous with the name "Dartmouth" across the English speaking world. If you were a scholar of the English language, that could probably be taken as read, but as "a scholar of U.S. higher education", where you are unlikely to ever even read a document or book where the name "Dartmouth" is used to mean anything else, people are more than entitled to consider whether there is any bias behind that view. The only "ridiculous accusations" are yours - or did you forget that you have already called me 'lazy' and a 'crusader' on this page? If you took offence at what I said, then before I care, I'll thank you to not be such a raging hypocrite first and consider your own accusations. People in glass houses.... 92.233.255.132 (talk) 15:40, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

You're entitled to "consider" whether I have a bias. You're not entitled to assert without any evidence that I have such a bias.

Now how about focusing on the topic at hand instead of continuing to take pot shots at me? ElKevbo (talk) 18:12, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

I am and I can, the evidence, such as it can be, is your own website and comments/actions here. Perception of bias is after all, always going to be subjective. I do not think Wikipedia is in such a mess that I must preface every one of my comments that might touch on issues like bias with an "in my opinion" do I? Or are you saying that I must file my "evidence" in a way that a judge could rule on it? Much as you would if accusing someone of theft for example? I hope not. As for "pot shots", yes, feel free to focus on the topic. No more mentions of a "crusade" or similar ad hominems, thank you very much. 92.233.255.132 (talk) 19:11, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm bowing out of this discussion and removing this from my watchlist. That other editors stand by while you continue to make unfounded accusations of bias and ignorance is unconscionable and the project is worse off because you are allowed to drive off editors. This is why expert editors are so difficult to recruit and retain. ElKevbo (talk) 21:41, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

So far in your capacity as an "expert", you've reversed me multiple times without cause, you've told me to come and discuss it and then not bothered to join in on the basis you'd made an irrelevant comment a month ago, you've then proceeded to open dialogue with me by calling me a crusader, then you claimed that me disagreeing with an alumnus of the college no less over how well known it is represented a fair and neutral "deadlock" (and ignored the fact that he stopped commenting ages ago after conceding a mistake on his part about Google and didn't object to my proposal to restore it to the list), then you claimed that this page pointing to the college was a "long standing" arrangement even though you were out by a factor of 30, then you threw in another insult by calling me "lazy" while you were clearly expecting me to figure out that RFC process all on my own when you obviously knew it was 100 times simpler than the page makes out and could do it in 5 minutes yourself, and then after all this, it turns out your substantive argument is that we should decide the meanings of words in the English language based on the popularity of their Wikipedia pages, while citing two examples that prove the exact opposite. And now instead of apologising for, or reflecting on, any of this behaviour, you're flouncing out of the debate implying that I'm some dumb hick dropout in your parting shot. And I'm not even clear if you are trying to argue you are an "expert" in the Wikipedia skills sense, or in the academic sense. In my field of expertise (which is not burger flipping fwiw), we don't tend to classify the people who have yet to get their PhD's as experts, but yes, I will concede your expertise on Wikipedia over me, while pointing out that this is supposedly the site "anyone can edit". I hope you don't leave on account of me, but I certainly don't think I have anything to feel guilty about if you do. 92.233.255.132 (talk) 23:41, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

• Disambiguation, not college - The WP:PRIMARYTOPIC guideline covers this. It says that the term "Dartmouth" should not go to a disambiguation page if there is a "primary topic" for that term. The guideline says: "a topic is primary for a term if it is highly likely—much more likely than any other, and more likely than all the others combined—to be the subject being sought when a reader enters that term in the Search box." In my opinion, the college is - at least in the United States - the major use of the term "Dartmouth". On the other hand, WP should not be USA-centric. Plus, there is the factor that the name of the college is "Dartmouth College", not just "Dartmouth". For those reasons, I'd lean towards a disambiguation rather than the college. --Noleander (talk) 00:52, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

• College A quick glance at page views clearly shows that it is the primary topic:

Article	Views in July, 2011	Current ranking in en.wikipedia
Dartmouth College	50,019	8963
Dartmouth, Devon	5,840	Unranked
Dartmouth, Victoria	121	Unranked
Dartmouth, Nova Scotia	5,803	Unranked
Dartmouth, Massachusetts	2,699	Unranked
Dartmouth High School (Nova Scotia)	175	Unranked
Dartmouth Academy	0	Unranked
Earl of Dartmouth	798	Unranked
Port of Dartmouth Royal Regatta	201	Unranked
The Dartmouth	328	Unranked
Dartmouth	2,871	Unranked

These stats were gathered using this tool. July 2011 was the last full month before this page was redirected to the college.

The college article was visited over three times more frequently than all other articles on this disambiguation page combined. This shouldn't be a surprise to anyone given the fact that this is an Ivy League school and a Colonial College. Its 3 billion dollar endowment is larger than the GDP of many (small) countries. I know it seems a bit weird that this college is more well-known than its namesake but it is. ElKevbo (talk) 05:22, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes, those are some pretty compelling statistics. It confirms that, in the English world, the college is a lot more significant that the other uses. I'm still having problems with the "College" suffix, though. I guess I could go either way on this one. Let's see what other editors think. --Noleander (talk) 13:30, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

The same statistical method could be used to make "Jackson" go to Michael Jackson rather than a list, because that page gets more views than all the other 'Jackson' pages combined, which includes a state capital! As such, it's not convincing. I'm from the UK and even I know that there's a state capital called Jackson. But I really don't see why the fact that I've probably viewed the Wikipedia Michael Jackson page more times than the state capital page (never) should be used to argue that in the English speaking world the word "Jackson" means Michael Jackson. 92.233.255.132 (talk) 15:40, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

That's a ridiculous assertion because no one actually says "Jackson" in reference to Michael Jackson. A much better comparison would be to artists who are known by one only name e.g. Madonna, Sting. I don't know the stats but it would be a legitimate (but likely losing) proposition to discuss whether those words should be dabs or redirects. ElKevbo (talk) 18:12, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Madonna and Sting go to lists, so I don't see what your point is. Sure they both have well known meanings, but are not exclusive by any means, hence they go to lists first. Just like Dartmouth. In the proper context, people will refer to Michael Jackson as simply Jackson as often as anyone would use just Dartmouth to refer to Dartmouth College. Examples:

"I'm going to see a Jackson concert tomorrow" - easily understood around the world

"I'm going to Jackson tomorrow" - not so much

"I got accepted to Dartmouth" - easily understood around the world

"I'm going to Dartmouth" - not so much, even in the US

In standard English language usage free of presumptions, "Dartmouth" is not solely a college, not by any stretch of the imagination. The assumption you want to hard wire into Wikipedia, is invalid. This is the English language Wikipedia, and it should reflect standard English usage. 92.233.255.132 (talk) 19:27, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

By the way, Dartmouth was visited 2871 times that month. TimBentley (talk) 16:33, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! I added it to the table. ElKevbo (talk) 18:12, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

• Disambiguation although Dartmouth College receives a lot more views, someone searching for it is likely to type "Dartmouth College" surely? Whereas with the settlements, someone would typicaly only type "Dartmouth". Jolly Ω Janner 05:35, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

No, probably not. Some universities are widely known and referred to without the "University" bit, especially the most well-known ones (e.g. Harvard, Princeton, Stanford). This particular instance is also a bit funny because despite being a research university Dartmouth has kept its name as "Dartmouth College" although it's typical practice to change to "university" at the first possible opportunity (many people - including higher ed administrators - seem to believe that a "university" is more prestigious than a "college"). ElKevbo (talk) 05:55, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

• Someone called JaJa has now changed it to go to the college again. Perhaps they would like to explain why here? Or is this only something ElKevbo demands of people who try to restore the page to how it was for nearly a decade? 92.233.255.132 (talk) 15:40, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
• College per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC supported by the ElKevbo's stats. Also, I reverted your change because you redirected it in the middle of a discussion, which is a no-no. Wait for an uninvolved admin to close this RfC; they should decide the target, not you or ElKevbo. --JaGa^talk 16:30, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

So it's just a coincidence then that your reversal means the situation is now at your later stated preference? ElKevbo didn't even bother to get involved in the discussion until he had changed it twice. If the rule is 'no changes once a discussion starts', then it should have been left at the list. If someone uninvolved really is going to close this, then I see no reason for you to have changed it in the mean time, if it's not an attempt to win by default, should the closure somehow get lost in the post. Assuming they do though, then what do you say to the fact that ElKevbo's stats argument means "Jackson" should probably point to the pop star. Does that sound like a sensible argument to you? 92.233.255.132 (talk) 17:49, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

• Regardless of the outcome, the cut and paste move from Dartmouth to Dartmouth (disambiguation) needs to be fixed. TimBentley (talk) 16:33, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I didn't even notice that. I'm very confused about the current mess of redirects and moves so if someone with the right tools and understand can fix things it would be much appreciated. ElKevbo (talk) 18:16, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

• I think the statistics for page views are incomplete. The page Earl of Dartmouth is about the Peerage title but is not a biography of any of its holders, any of whom might be referred to as 'Lord Dartmouth' and might be searched for under 'Dartmouth'. (The college was named after the 2nd Earl.) So really they need to be added to the mix. The July 2011 views were 254 for the 1st Baron, 167 for the 1st Earl, 562 for the 2nd, 186 for the 3rd, 147 for the 4th, 130 for the 5th, 165 for the 6th, 188 for the 7th, 137 for the 8th, 439 for the 9th, and 848 for the 10th for a total of 3,223 page views. That being said, page views are only one way of determining the primary topic; I still hold to the view that the fact that the College was named after the Earl, and the Earl was named after the town in Devon, means that the town in Devon must be the primary topic even if it is eclipsed in page views. Sam Blacketer (talk) 14:59, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

I concede that the page view stats could be expanded by adding additional articles. But the idea that etymology or history should determine the primary topic of articles is ridiculous and unworkable. Should sandwich redirect to the Earl of Sandwich or, more in line with your reasoning, Sandwich, Kent? ElKevbo (talk) 21:38, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Almost any proposal can be countered by suggesting that, taken to extremes, it would be ridiculous. The response is that it should not be taken to extremes. Incidentally I notice in the obituary of Sir Hilary Synnott in this morning's Times, page 62, that Sir Hilary was "educated at Beaumont and as a scholar at Dartmouth". That apparently refers not to Dartmouth College but to this institution. Sam Blacketer (talk) 11:48, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

• Disambiguation. Whilst it seems clear that Dartmouth College must be the primary topic for "Dartmouth College", the same has not been shown in the case of "Dartmouth". WP:WORLDVIEW also applies. It probably isn't the primary topic amongst people who don't live in the US/don't attend it. --FormerIP (talk) 23:43, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
• Disambiguation - A redirect to Dartmouth College means an innocent search for an article for a place that is actually named Dartmouth is successful only after we get over our surprise at being taken to a page completely unrelated to our intended destination, then discovering the link to the disambiguation page, going to the disambiguation page, finding the link to the page we really want, and selecting it. No thanks. Jojalozzo 05:27, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
• Disambiguation - A college in the United States is not top of the list of the things I would expect by searching for Dartmouth. MilborneOne (talk) 21:22, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
• Disambiguation - WP:WORLDVIEW. Dartmouth is far less known internationally than other US Ivy League institutions. In the UK, the number of people who would have heard of the college at all would not form a large majority, and the number of people who would think of the college rather than the town in Devon when hearing the word would be pretty close to zero. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr Marcus Hill (talk • contribs) 11:27, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
• Disambiguation as per Dr Marcus Hill. In the UK people use the word to refer to Britannia_Royal_Naval_College in Dartmouth. Martin Hogbin (talk) 22:17, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
• Disambiguation. There is no clear WP:PRIMARYTOPIC (certainly not by the statistics provided) for Dartmouth, and a disambiguation should take precedence over a redirect to another article. Also, this college is not well known outside the U.S. so redirecting a shortening of the name when that phrase is used for other places is not constructive. Zarcadia (talk) 10:37, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
• Disambiguation: Dartmouth College means a completely seperate thing in the non-US world, and certainly, I thought of Dartmouth Community College, followed by Dartmouth Academy, followed by BRNC... I didn't even know there was a Dartmouth college in the US. Disambiguation is an obvious choice here, especially given that the college tkaes its name (via the Earl), from the original Dartmouth. The Cavalry (Message me) 01:43, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

The RFC was closed by a bot over a week ago. I think we're ready for a sysop to close out the discussion. Jojalozzo 02:18, 20 October 2011 (UTC)