Talk:Massachusetts Institute of Technology
 | Template:FACfailed is deprecated, and is preserved only for historical reasons. Please see Template:Article history instead. |
 | This article (or a previous version) is a former featured article candidate. Please view its sub-page to see why the nomination did not succeed. For older candidates, please check the Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Archived nominations. |
Because of their length, the previous discussions on this page have been archived. If further archiving is needed, see Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page. Anville 18:12, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
Previous discussions:
- Archive 1 (20 Oct 2001 to 10 Nov 2004): MIT alumni who died in September 11, 2001 terrorist attack, MIT's suicide rate, "Boston Tech", "parking garage" simile, Accuracy, "Psycho-cybernetics", Generalizations, Building 20: stick with cleaned-up quotation?, "Rivalry" with Harvard, Alleged school cheer, Affirmative Action against asian students, "coed"?, MIT v. the Humanities, Maxwell Griffith, The Gadget Maker, Peacock words, vanity, POV, Brass rats, taking a drink from a firehose, Nabokov, MIT in popular culture, "Tech is Hell", Grading system and hours, Material buttressing claims of academic excellence, Tempted, but resisting..., Songs that mention MIT
- Archive 2 (November 2004 to December 2005): Many discussions on rankings and boosterism
- Archive 3 (January to March 2006): Mostly more discussions of boosterism
Excessively "numerous" other fields
I think it's good enough to say
- MIT is one of the world's leading research institutions in science and technology.
I don't think it's reasonable to say
- MIT is one of the world's leading research institutions in science and technology, as well as in numerous other fields, including management, engineering systems, economics, mathematics, linguistics, political science, limnology and philosophy.
But if we must enumerate these other fields, the opening paragraph should highlight those things that truly characterize MIT, things that illustrate its MIT-ness. If we must have that phrase at all, I think we should
- limit the list to say, three items;
- provide references for each; not just rankings that show that MIT is highly regarded in the field, but a citation that illustrates that MIT is practically a household word in that field.
BTW... does "MIT is one of the world's leading research institutions" suggest that it is not regarded as having comparable excellence in teaching? I personally thought the teaching at MIT was excellent, the barrier between teaching and research low, and I had the impression that researchers' participation in teaching was valued and encouraged by the Institute. Dpbsmith (talk) 14:21, 6 April 2006 (UTC)