1. The SWQ is, in fact, a 1000+ bed facility. The original plans for 750+ bed were modified when demand for oncampus housing turned out to be higher than expected.
2. Unless someone can establish a clear correlation between failures of US diplomats to know foreign languages during the early part of the 20th century and the establishment of the SFS, I don't think that the comment belongs in the article -- in consultation with one of the Deans at Georgetown, as well as with the library staff, we could find no clear link between the one and the other. Please correct me if I am wrong.
3. The major divisions between available degrees are to be phased out over a period of 3 years, beginning in the Fall of 2005 and ending in the Fall of 2008. This plan will be announced at the beginning of the Spring semester in 2005.
I'm going to implement revisions in reference to 1 and 3. I also want to make the tiniest of grammatical alterations. I'll leave 2 open for discussion, but I really think that a comment like the one currently contained in the article needs to have some substantiated material that we can refer to and possibly link in the article.
Removal of Treaty of Versailles comment
I've thought more about the foundation of the SFS line, and I think that the best course of action is to remove it until some legitimate proof can be found for the inclusion of that statement. I think that this concords with the notion of an unbiased point of view and the fact that we are trying to properly inform people about the University (w./ the correlary history lesson being only a secondary function). I'm definately not adverse to including the comment about the lack of language skills post-WWI leading to the foundation of the University. In fact, I know that they are both individually true. However, I think that the onus of proof ought to lie on the other side in terms of establishing an actual causality between the two events, not the other way around. If anyone digs up anything, we can restore the statement and put in a nice link to substantiate / reference it. Otherwise, let's leave it out for now.
Please feel free to comment on what I've said
- The SWQ was built as a 784-bed facility, and housed just over 900 students in the first year due to demand . If 1000+ students were living there at any time, I suspect the DCFD will be none too happy. As far as the Versailles story, I heard it a few times as an undergrad. It had less to do, I think, with language skills and more to do with the fact that the American diplomats had little or no training relative to their European counterparts. There was clearly something going on there, since the school was founded directly after WWI and six years before the foreign service was founded - but, until something referring to thus is found, it's probably best to treat it as anecdotal and leave it out. As far as the majors, you're talking about a possible announcement for something apparently scheduled to happen in 2008. When the restrictions get dropped, the language can change, but until then, it stays. Proposals like that have been going around for years. Finally, sailing is technically co-ed, thus there are only 21 varsity sports (until softball finally gets going). Please sign your comments.--DMG413 01:59, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Okay. Let me elaborate for you on the SWQ issue. Quite frankly, I don't care what the Hoya says. My friend wrote that article. We had a good laugh about it. I was housed in SWQ, I lived on the 5th floor. The facility contains 1000+ beds. More than that, the facility was REMODELED as a 1000+ bed facility. The Hoya article was published at a time of flux - the modifications were thought to be for a 9xx bed dorm -- they didn't turn out to be. This issue was discussed at various times in GUSA (our assembly). I'm changing the article.
In terms of the major thing, thats fine, but keep your ears open in the winter of this year -- I think we should make note of it once the University releases the announcement.
I've heard similar rumors regarding the foundation of SFS, but, unfortunately, they've always been from the mouths of ... well, SFS students. If I get a chance, I talk with the library staff again and see if I can dig up anything conclusively (time permitting).
Lastly, I didn't change the varsity team thing. One of my friends is visiting me (I'm in London for the year) and he made the change from my computer. I don't claim much dominion over aggregated sports statistics -- he does ... although apparently, he shouldn't. Sorry about that.
Can't sign yet because I don't have a screen name -- but I'm planning on making one this weekend if I can rouse myself to it.
- Every single reference I can find refers to the 784-bed size or to the single year as a 900-bed facility, including some fairly recent ones (and most seem to indicate that the expansion was a one-off). 900 becomes 1000 in conversation pretty easily. In any case, the same standard holds as for the SFS story - it's apocryphal until some proof is found, and every single thing points to the smaller size. --DMG413 02:13, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)