Talk:Claremont McKenna College

Paid COI edits

An editor paid by CMC came through recently and added a bunch of content that goes against WP:BOOSTERISM and other guidance, e.g. a recentist section listing all CMCers who have won notable scholarships in recent years. I've reverted some of it and tagged the article for further review. Given some of the other elements here, like this professional photo claimed as own work, I suspect that this may not be this article's first encounter with paid editing. Sdkbtalk 03:20, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sdkb Thank you for the notice! GuardianH (talk) 15:49, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I removed the tag now that the editor has disclosed their connection above and they are engaging on this page. STEMinfo (talk) 19:42, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Revision of existing Wikipedia page

Hi there!

I was hired to edit the existing Wikipedia page for Claremont McKenna College (CMC) and disclosed this on my user page earlier this summer. Below is the reasoning for the revisions provided by CMC, and below that is the proposed copy. I had begun editing the page directly as advised on the Discord Help channel but then received conflicting advice to add the proposed changes here instead, which I've done below. The citations aren't complete because I stopped partway, but I used the citation tool on the platform. I'll finish adding the citations, formatting the table, and adding images once the proposed changes have been accepted.

Please don't hesitate to let me know if there are questions or comments. Thank you!

--

Clementine Sandoval (talk) 00:01, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Clementine Sandoval: Can you please let us know what exactly you'd like changed and why? It's very difficult to figure that out from the large mass of text you pasted below as a proposed new version of the article. ElKevbo (talk) 22:33, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@ElKevbo, sure thing. Do you mean line by line, though? The high-level changes include:
  • Shortened entry. Deletions included details such as the study abroad program and similar information that are common to higher education institutions.
  • Reordered table of contents to display information more clearly.
  • Removal of editorial language, e.g., describing a building as "ostentatious" is subjective.
Thanks for your help! Clementine Sandoval (talk) 23:46, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not done: Apologies but I am going to have to decline this request.
Large sections of what you have written are entirely unsourced and the text appears overly promotional, such as would be expected to appear on a college's own website. Please note that the article here is an encyclopaedia article and not for the purposes of promotion.
I also note that some elements of your proposed rewrite appear to be closely paraphrased from existing online sources, which is a copyright violation (see WP:COPYVIO).
If you wish to make a revised edit proposal I would suggest that you start again and concentrate on changing / adding relatively small elements of text. These can be proposed using the following format:
Change [current text] to [revised text]...
And give the reasoning behind each specific change.
And provide relevant sourcing.
A final note, your original request above was partly AI constructed. Please communicate here in future only in your own words. Axad12 (talk) 10:49, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Appealing response to decline edit

Thanks for the feedback, @Axad12 and @ElKevbo. In my sandbox, which you can find here, please find the entire revision complete with citations, which I'd mentioned last month were available but not yet added. As I told @ElKevbo, the high-level changes include:

  • Shortened entry. Deletions included details such as the study abroad program and similar information that are common to higher education institutions. For the revisions, we looked at comparable institutions, such as Pomona College, Swarthmore College, Reed College, and Smith College among others and tried to align the format with peer institutions' Wikipedia pages.
  • Reordered table of contents to display information more clearly/logically.
  • Removal of editorial language, e.g., describing a building as "ostentatious" is subjective.

Please let me know where exactly in the text you find copyright violations or where you find it to be overly promotional.

I understand what writing for an encyclopedia involves because I was an associate editor for Facts on File/Infobase Publishing, which publishes encyclopedias in addition to many educational products, for three years, and I've been a writer and editor for 15+ years, having worked for organizations such as Bloomberg Businessweek, Feminist Press, Investopedia, and Kiplinger. Indeed, I believe that the revision of the Claremont McKenna College page presents the information in a more objective, factual manner than peer institutions and invite you to thoroughly compare the existing page with the revision. Input from the Wikipedia community is more than welcome of course. Clementine Sandoval (talk) 17:30, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edit of entire page

Hello!

In my sandbox, which you can find here, please find the entire revision complete with citations. The high-level changes include:

  • Shortened entry. Deletions included details such as the study abroad program and similar information that are common to higher education institutions. For the revisions, we looked at comparable institutions, such as Pomona College, Swarthmore College, Reed College, and Smith College among others and tried to align the format with peer institutions' Wikipedia pages.
  • Reordered table of contents to display information more clearly/logically.
  • Removal of editorial language, e.g., describing a building as "ostentatious" is subjective.

You can also find a history of this request above. Thank you for your consideration!

Clementine Sandoval (talk) 17:54, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "History of the College". Claremont McKenna College. Retrieved September 5, 2024.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  2. ^ Starr, Kevin (1998). Commerce and Civilization: Claremont McKenna College, The First Fifty Years 1946–1996 (1st ed.). Claremont, CA: The President and Trustees of Claremont McKenna College. p. 1.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: date and year (link)
  3. ^ Starr, Kevin (1998). Commerce and Civilization: Claremont McKenna College, The First Fifty Years 1946–1996 (1st ed.). Claremont, CA: The President and Trustees of Claremont McKenna College. pp. 244–247.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: date and year (link)
  4. ^ Bosley, Lisa (Spring–Summer 2015). "Holding their own". CMC Magazine. Retrieved April 10, 2018.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  5. ^ "Donald McKenna Biography". cmc.edu. Retrieved June 12, 2015.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  6. ^ "Campus Life: Claremont McKenna; Striptease At Salad Bar Provokes Protest". The New York Times. November 12, 1989. p. 55. Retrieved November 21, 2018.{{cite news}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  7. ^ "Claremont McKenna Gets $200-Million Donation". The Chronicle of Higher Education. September 27, 2007. Retrieved October 6, 2007. {{cite web}}: Check |archive-url= value (help)CS1 maint: url-status (link)

Reply 26-NOV-2024

  • While the draft version is much appreciated, reasons need to be provided for each change, in particular, for the portions of text which are to be deleted.[1] A diff which easily displays the portions of text which are requested to be deleted can be found here. Accordingly, please provide succinct reasons for each portion of text which is requested to be deleted. Those may be placed below, in a numbered section. What I'm interested in mostly are reasons for the sections of text which are requested to be deleted but for where no replacement text is to be put in its place (e.g., the section under Campus life which describes "lenient alcohol use", among others). Regards,  Spintendo  13:20, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Template:Edit COI". Wikipedia. 30 August 2023. Instructions for Submitters: If the rationale for a change is not obvious (particularly for proposed deletions), explain.

Explanation of edits to entire page

Hi there,

Per the request above, we prepared a couple of tables, which you can find here, that explain the proposed revisions to the entire page. Composed of approximately 55 rows, the first one displays every line in the existing version of the article, if there were any changes to the line(s), where those changes were relocated in the proposed revision to article, and our rationale for the change(s).

The second and shorter table of approximately 7 rows lists new text that doesn't correspond to any lines or sections in the current version of the article.

We sought to be as thorough and transparent as possible with this work and are open to any other recommendations or requests that seek to strengthen the article. Thanks for considering our efforts! Clementine Sandoval (talk) 17:35, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

While this is not required and someone may review this as written, I strongly recommend separating this out into much smaller edit requests (perhaps one section at a time?). Rusalkii (talk) 19:55, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the suggestion, @Rusalkii! Your careful attention is truly appreciated.
We created the tables as suggested by other editors; see replies on 6 Sept. 2024 and 26 Nov. 2024. The tables are broken out into sections to simplify the review process.
We envision editors pulling up the organized tables and the full page of revised content in separate browser windows or monitors to review the changes in context.
If we submit each section as separate edits, the page will become disjointed, and the outcome will ultimately confuse everyone. Clementine Sandoval (talk) 23:44, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think this might be the biggest edit request I've ever seen! I've done as much as I can for now, I'll pop back soon to try and get some more done (if you don't hear from me in a few days, please feel free to ping me!) - I also hope you don't mind me adding the extra column to keep track of what's been done, will hopefully help to ensure nothing gets missed. Thank you for formatting it like this, it is very helpful with requests this big!
With the table at the end, I'm not sure if the references provided are existing in the article or need adding. Encoded  Talk 💬 22:48, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Encoded, thanks for taking a stab at implementing this mammoth COI request. I'm unfortunately seeing many elements of academic boosterism and other deleterious changes in the implemented version, though. I've reverted some of the changes to the lead here to start. Explanations:
  • California is globally recognizable, so no need for "United States" after, and certainly not linked.
  • The college's curricular emphasis and Claremont Colleges membership are both defining features, and thus belong in the first paragraph. Removing the word "consortium" was unhelpful, since many readers may need that context.
  • There's no good reason to remove the link to men's college (beyond trying to minimize the less inclusive aspects of the college's past).
  • Noting that it was incorporated "by the State of California" is unneeded when we've already mentioned the college's location. It's just an attempt to sound fancy/official but it doesn't add meaningful info.
  • A single sentence on a college's athletics is standard and due for the lead section; there's no good reason to remove it.
In articles like this with a history of undisclosed paid editing, it's important to be cautious before implementing COI changes. The explanations of the requested changes, although thorough, read to me as vague (and very possibly AI-written, as Axad12 said above) and mask non-neutral language. Sdkbtalk 01:09, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Additional reverts/adjustments:
  • The motto existing in the infobox isn't a reason to remove it from the body per our infobox guidance, which states that an article should remain complete with its infobox ignored
  • Remove list of other schools that also became coeducational at the same time (this is just the college trying to name-drop elite schools as its peers)
  • Restore wording for the protests — per the source, it's far from clear that all students protested.
  • Restore link to Forbes — again, it's unclear why we'd want to remove it (and, looking at Clementine Sandoval's request, it doesn't appear that removing it was part of the request)
  • A "comprehensive liberal arts education" is by definition broad, which contradicts the focuses mentioned in the second half of the sentence. The college has been criticized by William Deresiewicz (among others) for calling itself a liberal arts school while not following a liberal arts curriculum, so we'd need better sourcing/balance to have this here.
  • The change to the athletics section made it sound like the NCAA was part of SCIAC rather than the reality (which is the reverse). Again, not sure why there was any need to change this; it was fine as it was.
Best, Sdkbtalk 01:32, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Sdkb, apologies for the reverted changes (the Forbes link was very likely my accident), I'm going to leave this request open for another editor to review. Encoded  Talk 💬 07:26, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Clementine Sandoval I'm having trouble following this request. I went to User:Clementine_Sandoval/sandbox/CMC_changes and went down the list and the first one not marked done was already done. My recommendation is to close all the confusing requests and put any open requests in a new request. Here's a format guide for you. User:STEMinfo/COI_edit_requests. STEMinfo (talk) 19:54, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not done for now: Please re-open all requests that haven't been done, this one shall be closed as stated above. Valorrr (lets chat) 02:26, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]