WikiCU - User contributions [en]

King's Quest

2013-05-06T02:21:46Z

Fbv2102: I mean this is just not true at all

'''Kings Quest''' is an alleged 'challenge' of allegedly murky origin that is allegedly well known among certain segments of the [[Fraternities and sororities|fraternity]] population. The challenge is simple: have sex in each of three campus locations.

1) The [[Butler Sex|Butler stacks]]
2) The roof of [[Low]]
3) The [[tunnels]]

By one account, the pairing must be with a Barnard student, and some versions substitute the gym or swimming pool for the tunnels. Additional variations include having sex during Bacchanal weekend and completing each stage of the quest with a different companion.

[[Category:Student life]]
[[Category:Definitions]]

WikiCU talk:Notability

2013-04-29T02:07:52Z

Fbv2102: /* Renewed discussion 2013 */ also

== People ==
Recently a lot of "vanity pages" have been popping up, and WikiCU's never really established a policy on what the criteria is for people to have articles, I thought this would be a good place to discuss it. [[User:Nonsensical|Nonsensical]] 19:46, 19 May 2007 (EDT)

=== Current Students ===
*Should articles about current students be expected to bear some relevance to campus life or is anyone deserving of an article as long as someone is willing to write one?

==== [[User:Nonsensical|Nonsensical]]'s thoughts ====

:So I'm sort of torn on this, but I'm leaning toward a standard criteria for notability. Here's my pro/con

:'''Pro''' Notability Standard:
:*One of the things that initially drew me to WikiCU was looking at the [[:Category:Students|students]] section and realizing there were a lot of students that were important to campus life that I was not aware of. I feel like including people whose articles are only interesting to that person and their friends dilutes the wiki and makes it less interesting to read through. It was interesting to find out who [[Chas Carey]] was and see how much he's involved in that's important to student life on campus, whereas reading an article like [[Patrick Kerns]], who I'm sure is a nice guy and all, but I don't really know why anyone would care to find out the nicknames of someone whose claim to fame is working for [[collegeboxes]] for a few weeks.
:*More vanity pages means a lot of pages that won't be carefully watched and will likely accumulate information that is either false or outdated as time goes on.

:'''Con''' Notability Standard:
:*Allowing "vanity pages" may draw in more users who will subsequently get very involved or at the very least edit a few more articles that are a little more relevant.
:*I'm somewhat eager to write stupid articles about myself and all my friends

:'''Proposed Criteria for Notability''':
:*An article mainly about them in the [[spec]], [[bwog]], or any major publication.
:*Elected position in student government, university senate
:*Participation in one or more student groups that together play an important role in student life (e.g. writer for student publications, involvement in performing arts groups). And by important role in student life, I mean that it affects students ''outside'' the organizations in which they participate.
:*Created a book, album, or film that is widely distributed (or well known on campus)

----

=== Alumni ===
*Should alumni pages be held to different standards?
*If a person has an article as a current student, should its contents change to suit relevance to campus life several years after graduation?

==== [[User:Nonsensical|Nonsensical]]'s thoughts ====

:I feel like standards for creating a page for an alumnus should be higher than current students. If a student was borderline deserving of an article as a current student but then has [[Chris Szabla|absolutely no bearing on campus life]] whatsoever after graduating, I don't see why there needs to be an article about them unless they:
:*effected some change that is relevant after graduation
:*achieved something impressive after graduation

== General thoughts ==

* I think Nonsensical has created a very well thought out set of criteria, and I would support making them the official criteria. {{User:Reaganaut/sig}} 20:04, 19 May 2007 (EDT)
* Nonsensical's standards would be fine if there were a space crunch and we really had to limit the number of articles on WikiCU by imposing a filter like notability. But is there? I don't see how extra information about any student or an alumnus hurts the site in any way, whereas Nonsensical acknowledges it could help bring in more users. [[User:Pacman|Pacman]] 00:12, 20 May 2007 (EDT)
:*How many of the users we've seen create spam-ish biographies have actually gone on to improve other articles? {{User:Reaganaut/sig}} 01:32, 21 May 2007 (EDT)
::*I agree, but in theory we could see at least a few drawn in by the prospect of creating legit ones. I mean, these users are going to have to be policed anyway, so it's not like there's going to have to be extra work if we allow a wider scope for bios. In any case. [[User:Pacman|Pacman]] 14:24, 21 May 2007 (EDT)
* While I like the relatively informal nature of this wiki, some standards are necessary for it to be taken seriously by the student body, in my opinion. I think the criteria set out above are a good metric to use for gauging notability. [[User:WhatYouKnowAboutThat|WhatYouKnowAboutThat]] 13:43, 20 May 2007 (EDT)
:*I can see it being taken less seriously if the articles have a joke-ish quality, as some certainly do. But well-written bios of recent (if non-completely-notable) alums shouldn't be deleted for this reason. I still find it useful to find out who certain people from '05 were, for example, when reference is made to them. And if someone does strike it big, we have a record of their activities at Columbia that may not exist in easily accessible form elsewhere. [[User:Pacman|Pacman]] 16:45, 20 May 2007 (EDT)
:*Some of the vanity pages are extremely ambitious. I'd like to have a criteria for keeping pages, but it's sad to see some of them get deleted; other ones, like the College Boxes guy, wow, I was ready to delete that sucker the second it went up. [[User:Stephen.wang|wang]] 00:59, 23 May 2007 (EDT)

== Renewed discussion 2013 ==

Well, this hasn't been discussed in six years, so let's renew the discussion. What are the standards of notability for current students? For alumni? Do people who hold positions (of clubs, of publication, in student government) for one year get pages, or only if they do more than just hold that position? Usually these pages just result in stubs (and there would wind up being a ton of them)—so I would love to hear people's thoughts on this. --[[User:Fbv2102|Fbv2102]] 19:54, 24 April 2013 (EDT)

CU Admirers

2013-04-25T08:03:47Z

Fbv2102:

'''Columbia Admirers''' is a Facebook group and Tumblr that started in fall 2012 as a spin-off of [[Columbia Compliments]]. It quickly rose to popularity, with over a dozen anonymous admirations published a day. Because Columbia students are widely known to be awkward as fuck, the group provided a much-needed outlet for everyone to express their desire for love in a hopeless place, not to mention everyone's sexual frustration. It's unknown how many loves blossomed or how many people got laid thanks to CU Admirers, but its effect rippled across campus for the better part of the 2012-2013 year.

The group shut down in April 2013 after getting temporarily banned from Facebook for a reported status. CU Admirer's parting message was for the Columbia community to get over its awkwardness and admire each other in person.<ref>http://bwog.com/2013/04/09/cuadmirers-says-goodbye-officially/</ref>

Some CU Admirers celebrities (i.e. people who got a ridiculous number of tagged admirations) include Keanu Ross-Cabrera and James Bennet, who narrated the Sensual Sundays videos in which the more entertaining CU Admirers posts were read aloud sensually.

==References==
<references/>

==External Links==
*[http://cuadmirers.tumblr.com/ CU Admirers's Tumblr]
*[http://bwog.com/tag/cu-admirers/ Bwog's tag]

[[Category:Student life]]

Morningsiders

2013-04-25T08:03:12Z

Fbv2102: singular

'''Morningsiders''' is a band composed of Columbia undergraduates. They feature:

Magnus Ferguson, Lead Vocals and Guitar<br>
Reid Jenkins, Violin and Vocals<br>
Rob Frech, Piano and Keyboards<br>
Vladimir Bernstein, Bass and Vocals<br>
Benjamin Kreitman, Trumpet and Vocals

==Music Videos==

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbOlehHIyVg Empress]

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N464p_q1Zk0 Lightning]

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q91ndrUNbCg First Love Song]

Sustainable development (major)

2013-04-25T00:04:49Z

Fbv2102: creation

'''Sustainable development''' is a major established in 2010 through the [[Earth Institute]]. Led by professors [[Ruth Defries]] and [[Jason Smerdon]], the program allows students to take that class with [[Jeffrey Sachs]] they always dreamed of in high school. Often abbreviated to "sus dev," the major also exists as a special concentration, which attracts people interested in being eco-friendly without assuming the full risk of a major with some wonky requirements.

[[Category:Majors]]

Urban studies

2013-04-25T00:00:05Z

Fbv2102: Redirected page to Urban Studies Program

#REDIRECT [[Urban Studies Program]]

Columbia Daily Spectator

2013-04-24T23:55:18Z

Fbv2102:

{{wp-also}}

[[Image:Spec1968.jpg|thumb|''Spec'' front page during the [[1968 protests]] ]]

[[Image:Spec1962.jpg|right|thumb|Copies of the Spectator being sold during the newspaper strike of 1962-1963.]]

The '''''Columbia Daily Spectator''''' is the daily newspaper of the university community and [[Morningside Heights]]. It is written by undergraduate students, who operate out of the Spectator office at 112th Street and [[Broadway (avenue)|Broadway]]. The paper is referred to simply as "'''''Spec'''''." The paper is printed in broadsheet format every weekday during the academic term. 5,000 copies are printed and delivered to over 150 locations throughout Morningside Heights, and they are read by God knows how many people.<ref>http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990s/990search/990.php?ein=131975005&yr=200712&rt=990&t9=A, see page 20, Statement 4</ref>

==History==

''Spec'' was founded in [[1877]] by [[William Barclay Parsons]] and someone else. It is the second-oldest continually operating college news daily in the nation, after ''The Harvard Crimson''. It has been financially independent of the university since [[1962]]. However, between 1964 and 1970, it received subsidies from the university of up to $20,000.<ref>"Columbia U. Agrees to a Loan In Move to Save The Spectator"
''New York Times (1857-Current file)''; Dec 17, 1972; ProQuest Historical Newspapers The New York Times (1851 - 2005)
pg. 2</ref> In addition, to this day, "in return for the free circulation, the University provides office and production space to the organization."<ref>http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990s/990search/990.php?ein=131975005&yr=200712&rt=990&t9=A, see page 20, Statement 4</ref> Spec paid $130 for occupancy expenses in 2007.<ref>http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990s/990search/990.php?ein=131975005&yr=200712&rt=990&t9=A, see page 2</ref>

===The 1972 Bailout ===

On December 6, 1972, ''The Spec'' announced that it would fold unless it received financial assistance. ''The Spec'', despite being in massive debt at the time, had spent $25,000 on a new typesetting machine. ''Spec'' wanted Columbia to give them a $25,000 loan, but Columbia said no, because the Spec still owed them $16,000 for a telephone bill.<ref>"Columbia Spectator Says It Expects to Fold Next Week"
''New York Times (1857-Current file)''; Dec 7, 1972; ProQuest Historical Newspapers The New York Times (1851 - 2005)
pg. 55</ref>. On December 17, the Spec and Columbia kissed and made up, the Spec got their $25,000 loan, Columbia got free printing services for five years, and the ''Spec'' got more time to squeeze $16,000 from their alumni.<ref>"Columbia U. Agrees to a Loan In Move to Save The Spectator"
''New York Times (1857-Current file)''; Dec 17, 1972; ProQuest Historical Newspapers The New York Times (1851 - 2005)
pg. 2</ref>

===Turn to broadsheet===

Previously printed in tabloid format, in September [[2004]] the ''Spec'' started printing in broadsheet form. The editors at the time somehow thought they deserved to "move up" in the newspaper world, taking their place next to slightly more distinguished papers like the ''[[New York Times]]''. This move was distinctly against the grain; a large and increasing number of newspapers around the world are moving or have already moved to tabloid format, which is more popular especially with readers in cities.

Some students at Columbia agree that broadsheet newspapers are inconvenient and would like to see Spec return to tabloid format. Tabloid sized papers are conveniently hidden in notebooks if you're inclined to read in class. Other students believe that broadsheet format adds a dab of prestige to the ''Spec'' brand and allows it to stand up to its [[Ivy League]] peers.

===The Web===
''Also see: [[The 2009 Spec Website Takedown]]''

The Spectator is also available on the web. In recent years, the online staff has changed the organization of the website on an almost annual basis, and as a result, certain hyperlinks to the site are broken.
In 2010, the Spectator launched Spectrum [http://spectrum.columbiaspectator.com/], a blog updated several times per day with news, arts, sports, and opinion posts. Spectrum follows several misadventures in blogging for the Spectator, but appears to be a relative success.

===Recent spinoffs===
====Blogs====

=====Defunct=====

Spec's road to producing a successful blog was long and arduous. In February [[2006]], the paper launched a series of blogs, aptly named [http://www.Specblogs.com SpecBlogs]. These blogs soon became defunct. Another blogging effort, launched in October [[2006]] to cover the 2006 midterm elections, proved more successful. In December of [[2007]], the newspaper launched yet another blog, this time specific to the Opinion page, called "The Steps". Those blogs are now also defunct. However, SpecBlogs.com was subsequently revived again, with a repertoire that included [[Commentariat]] (the new opinion blog), Spectacle (for arts and entertainment), and The Editors Notes. These blogs were phased out upon the creation of the omnibus Spec blog Spectrum (see below).

Spec's short-lived attempts at producing successful blogs were frequently mocked by the initially much more successful [[Bwog]] as the "Splogs".

A recurring blog on ''Spec'''s website during [[housing lottery]] season, since [[2007]], has been the housing blog [[The Shaft]], which survived the carnage of Spec's other early blogging efforts, and is now incorporated as part of Spectrum.

=====Current=====
Under the tenure of the 134th Managing Board, the Spec has made a renewed effort at the Spectator blog. Rebranded the "[[Spectrum]]", a revamped daily blog was launched on 1 March [[2010]].

====The Eye====
In September [[2006]], ''Spectator'' staff launched ''[[The Eye]]'', a weekly magazine featuring investigative pieces and commentary on Columbia and [[NYC]]. The goal of starting The Eye was to provide a platform much of the feature writing that [[Speccie]]s did for [[The Blue and White]] in addition to topics that had no previous coverage. The name of ''The Eye'' relates both to the fact that one "spectates" with it and urban theorist Jane Jacobs' notion that "eyes on the street" help keep neighborhoods safe.

==Organization==
The ''Spec'' is currently run by the 136th managing board.

Writing and non-writing departments are each headed by an editor, and are overseen by the editor-in-chief. Writing departments include campus news, city news, sports, arts and entertainment, and opinion. Non-writing departments include photography, multimedia, design, copy, and business. The business department is headed by the publisher, and it has several sub-departments, each headed by a director.

First-time writers at Columbia begin their time at the paper with a 1- to 2-month training period, during which they learn the basics of writing an article and publish their first articles. When their department editor sees fit, they become staff writers. Each November and December, students run for positions at the paper, a grueling process that takes nearly a month. They begin by "shadowing," or sitting with the current editors or associate editors and learning the editing process. Next they write proposals for their desired position. The students then take an editing test made up by their department editor that tests them on the fundamentals of editing. Finally, they go through the "[[:w:Turkey Shoot|Turkey Shoot]]," an interview in which the current managing board grills the applicant on why he feels he would be a good fit for the position. The results of the application process, including the new managing board are announced in mid-December, the weekend before finals.

==Current Management==

Spectator's 137th Managing Board:
*Editor in Chief: Sammy Roth
*Managing Editor: Finn Vigeland
*Publisher: Alex Smyk
*Campus News Editor: Jeremy Budd
*City News Editor: Casey Tolan
*Editorial Page Editors: Grace Bickers and Yasmin Gagne
*A&E Editor: Lesley Thulin
*Sports Editors: Alison Macke and Myles Simmons
*Head Copy Editor: Megan Kallstrom
*Spectrum Editor: Sara Garner
*Design Editors: Regie Mauricio and Ryan Veling
*Photo Editor: David Brann
*Multimedia Editor: Steven Lau
*Editor in Chief, The Eye: Rikki Novetsky
*Online Editors: Doug Bienstock and Isaac White
*Chief Development Officer: Robert Frech
*Chief Marketing Officer: Alan Seltzer
*Chief Revenue Officer: Wes Rodriguez
*Staff Director: Rebeka Cohan

==Google Books Archives==

*[http://books.google.com/books?id=j0dNAAAAYAAJ 1880]
*[http://books.google.com/books?id=F2NMAAAAYAAJ 1881]
*[http://books.google.com/books?id=UGlMAAAAYAAJ 1888]
*[http://books.google.com/books?id=cEdNAAAAYAAJ 1892]
*[http://books.google.com/books?id=5HFMAAAAYAAJ 1893]
*[http://books.google.com/books?id=w0dNAAAAYAAJ 1894]

==See also==

*[[Speccie]]
*[[The Eye]]

== External links ==
* [http://www.columbiaspectator.com Columbia Spectator website]
* [http://eye.columbiaspectator.com The Eye] weekly magazine
* [http://spectrum.columbiaspectator.com Spectrum]
* [http://twitter.com/CU_Spectator Spec's Twitter feed]

== References ==
<references/>

[[Category:Student publications]]

WikiCU talk:Notability

2013-04-24T23:54:56Z

Fbv2102: /* Renewed discussion 2013 */ new section

== People ==
Recently a lot of "vanity pages" have been popping up, and WikiCU's never really established a policy on what the criteria is for people to have articles, I thought this would be a good place to discuss it. [[User:Nonsensical|Nonsensical]] 19:46, 19 May 2007 (EDT)

=== Current Students ===
*Should articles about current students be expected to bear some relevance to campus life or is anyone deserving of an article as long as someone is willing to write one?

==== [[User:Nonsensical|Nonsensical]]'s thoughts ====

:So I'm sort of torn on this, but I'm leaning toward a standard criteria for notability. Here's my pro/con

:'''Pro''' Notability Standard:
:*One of the things that initially drew me to WikiCU was looking at the [[:Category:Students|students]] section and realizing there were a lot of students that were important to campus life that I was not aware of. I feel like including people whose articles are only interesting to that person and their friends dilutes the wiki and makes it less interesting to read through. It was interesting to find out who [[Chas Carey]] was and see how much he's involved in that's important to student life on campus, whereas reading an article like [[Patrick Kerns]], who I'm sure is a nice guy and all, but I don't really know why anyone would care to find out the nicknames of someone whose claim to fame is working for [[collegeboxes]] for a few weeks.
:*More vanity pages means a lot of pages that won't be carefully watched and will likely accumulate information that is either false or outdated as time goes on.

:'''Con''' Notability Standard:
:*Allowing "vanity pages" may draw in more users who will subsequently get very involved or at the very least edit a few more articles that are a little more relevant.
:*I'm somewhat eager to write stupid articles about myself and all my friends

:'''Proposed Criteria for Notability''':
:*An article mainly about them in the [[spec]], [[bwog]], or any major publication.
:*Elected position in student government, university senate
:*Participation in one or more student groups that together play an important role in student life (e.g. writer for student publications, involvement in performing arts groups). And by important role in student life, I mean that it affects students ''outside'' the organizations in which they participate.
:*Created a book, album, or film that is widely distributed (or well known on campus)

----

=== Alumni ===
*Should alumni pages be held to different standards?
*If a person has an article as a current student, should its contents change to suit relevance to campus life several years after graduation?

==== [[User:Nonsensical|Nonsensical]]'s thoughts ====

:I feel like standards for creating a page for an alumnus should be higher than current students. If a student was borderline deserving of an article as a current student but then has [[Chris Szabla|absolutely no bearing on campus life]] whatsoever after graduating, I don't see why there needs to be an article about them unless they:
:*effected some change that is relevant after graduation
:*achieved something impressive after graduation

== General thoughts ==

* I think Nonsensical has created a very well thought out set of criteria, and I would support making them the official criteria. {{User:Reaganaut/sig}} 20:04, 19 May 2007 (EDT)
* Nonsensical's standards would be fine if there were a space crunch and we really had to limit the number of articles on WikiCU by imposing a filter like notability. But is there? I don't see how extra information about any student or an alumnus hurts the site in any way, whereas Nonsensical acknowledges it could help bring in more users. [[User:Pacman|Pacman]] 00:12, 20 May 2007 (EDT)
:*How many of the users we've seen create spam-ish biographies have actually gone on to improve other articles? {{User:Reaganaut/sig}} 01:32, 21 May 2007 (EDT)
::*I agree, but in theory we could see at least a few drawn in by the prospect of creating legit ones. I mean, these users are going to have to be policed anyway, so it's not like there's going to have to be extra work if we allow a wider scope for bios. In any case. [[User:Pacman|Pacman]] 14:24, 21 May 2007 (EDT)
* While I like the relatively informal nature of this wiki, some standards are necessary for it to be taken seriously by the student body, in my opinion. I think the criteria set out above are a good metric to use for gauging notability. [[User:WhatYouKnowAboutThat|WhatYouKnowAboutThat]] 13:43, 20 May 2007 (EDT)
:*I can see it being taken less seriously if the articles have a joke-ish quality, as some certainly do. But well-written bios of recent (if non-completely-notable) alums shouldn't be deleted for this reason. I still find it useful to find out who certain people from '05 were, for example, when reference is made to them. And if someone does strike it big, we have a record of their activities at Columbia that may not exist in easily accessible form elsewhere. [[User:Pacman|Pacman]] 16:45, 20 May 2007 (EDT)
:*Some of the vanity pages are extremely ambitious. I'd like to have a criteria for keeping pages, but it's sad to see some of them get deleted; other ones, like the College Boxes guy, wow, I was ready to delete that sucker the second it went up. [[User:Stephen.wang|wang]] 00:59, 23 May 2007 (EDT)

== Renewed discussion 2013 ==

Well, this hasn't been discussed in six years, so let's renew the discussion. What are the standards of notability for current students? For alumni? Do people who hold positions (of clubs, of publication, in student government) for one year get pages, or only if they do more than just hold that position? Usually these pages just result in stubs—so I would love to hear people's thoughts on this. --[[User:Fbv2102|Fbv2102]] 19:54, 24 April 2013 (EDT)

Horace Mann School

2013-04-24T23:46:51Z

Fbv2102: Nicholas Murray Butler

The '''Horace Mann School''' is among the elite private schools of [[New York City]]. It is located in [[Riverdale]], an affluent neighborhood of the [[Bronx]] just north of [[Baker Field]]. Many Columbia students are graduates of Horace Mann.

[[Nicholas Murray Butler]] founded the school in [[1887]] as the experimental teaching laboratory of [[Teachers College]]. It moved to [[Morningside Heights]] with TC in 1901. The building on [[120th Street]] and [[Broadway (avenue)|Broadway]] is called [[Horace Mann Hall]], from the time when it housed the school. By [[1912]] the school grew independent of TC and moved to its current day Riverdale campus. Many Horace Mann student at Columbia do not immediately draw the connection between their alma mater and the similarly named building.

[[Category:The Bronx]]
[[Category:High schools]]