Talk:Washburn University
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Kansas, an effort to create, expand, organize, and improve Kansas-related articles to a feature-quality standard. |
Contents |
[edit] The final word on Last municipally chartered
According to the Washburn Web site, Washburn is funded by local sales tax, a state operating grant and student tuition. In 1941, the citizens of Topeka endorsed Washburn by voting to establish a municipal university, supported in part by the city and governed by a local board of regents. In 1999, the university’s primary funding was moved from city property tax to county sales tax sources, with the school retaining status as a municipal subdivision of the state. In addition to local financial support, Washburn has received state funds since 1961, which have been coordinated by the Kansas Board of Regents since 1991. Washburn is governed by its own nine-member Board of Regents.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by WUrelations (talk • contribs) 21:15, 11 October 2006.
[edit] Last municipally chartered…
What disqualifies CUNY as municipally chartered? (Or similarly, why is New York City not "in the country"?) Conversely, CUNY and Washburn University both are state-supported universities. I fail to see the finer-point difference that is being claimed here. —Optikos 03:24, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] RE:Last municipally chartered…
Washburn University is NOT State supported. It is funded by the CITY of Topeka through a sales tax and through tuition and gifts. Funding is a HUGE difference and despite it's name, City University of New York, if it's state funded then it's more accurate name would be the University of New York at New York City.
Actually, Washburn does receive state funding; the Washburn Board of Regents does have a Kansas Board of Regents representative (who is currently Franklin D. Gaines), and we do fall under some jurisdiction (at least in trends) of the Kansas Board of Regents. OPIchabod 15:25, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
There are several serial killers that are graduates of major universities. I'd guess that they aren't claimed as "notable alumni" either. Fred falls in this category. Sorry Fred, no offence intended.
[edit] Fred Phelps
Okay, so there has been some debate on whether Fred Phelps should be listed as a notable alumni for Washburn University. While he is an alumni and is definitely notable, would KU or K-State list him if he had graduated from there? Probably not. Sorry Fred, you're gone again in my book.
- The question should be whether this is a PR article for Washburn or not. Bobak 17:33, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
- The page is, not unlike other university Web pages, somewhat of a PR article. Regardless, I don't think its appropriate to acknowledge the efforts of a person (Phelps) who causes pain and frustration for so many people. OPIchabod 15:23, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
- It should definitely be added. I agree with Bobak. I think that Fred Phelps is one of the most horrible, despicable human beings alive, but I still think he should be added. Wikipedia articles are places for information, not just positive information. The fact that Fred Phelps should testify as to the University's character as much as the graduation of anyone else on that list. --LakeHMM 09:48, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
It's not even an issue of PR. Fred Phelps is a disgrace to anything he is realted to. It's already noted on the page of Fred Phelps that he graduated from WU. To futher promote his name, and even more the message his name conveys, is as bad as what he does himself. WallStGolfer31 10:45, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
I disagree, Phelps is notable and there is no debate about whether or not he is an alumni. It seems to me that if the Phelps article links to Washburn, Washburn should link to Phelps. Debates over promotion of Phelps' views with regards to including him in a list of notable alumni seems POV to me. Caladil 22:36, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
