Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
::::Sure thing. And I'd agree with you on creating a dab page if there were more than 2 entries, but as we have it, people looking for the Czech school can find it through the hatnote here as easily as a dab page, without sending the majority of readers looking for the Florida school to a dab page as well. I haven't noticed too many incorrect links but I'll fix them when I find them.--] ]/] 20:29, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
::::Sure thing. And I'd agree with you on creating a dab page if there were more than 2 entries, but as we have it, people looking for the Czech school can find it through the hatnote here as easily as a dab page, without sending the majority of readers looking for the Florida school to a dab page as well. I haven't noticed too many incorrect links but I'll fix them when I find them.--] ]/] 20:29, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
:::::Ok, that is true! This way is the same number of clicks anyway! ] (]) 22:15, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
:::::Ok, that is true! This way is the same number of clicks anyway! ] (]) 22:15, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
== Graduation Rate ==
{{u|Broadmoor}} has tried to remove the information on the school's graduation rate on several occasions. Thought I've asked them to start a talk page discussion, they haven't, so I've started it. I don't see why this sourced information should be removed from the article. Broadmoor stated that the information isn't included for other Florida schools, which may well be true (it wasn't included for a few I checked, like FSU and UF). Even assuming it is, though, that's not sufficient reason to remove it (per ]), as it's both relevant and sourced. ] (]) 18:09, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Florida. If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.FloridaWikipedia:WikiProject FloridaTemplate:WikiProject FloridaFlorida
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Higher education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of higher education, universities, and colleges on Misplaced Pages. Please visit the project page to join the discussion, and see the project's article guideline for useful advice.Higher educationWikipedia:WikiProject Higher educationTemplate:WikiProject Higher educationHigher education
This article is within the scope of WikiProject State University System of Florida, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.State University System of FloridaWikipedia:WikiProject State University System of FloridaTemplate:WikiProject State University System of FloridaState University System of Florida
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of African diaspora on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.African diasporaWikipedia:WikiProject African diasporaTemplate:WikiProject African diasporaAfrican diaspora
This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S. historic sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places
Another editor has begun anedit warto remove all mention of the 2011 hazing incident in which a band member was beaten to death. The incident resulted in several criminal convictions and the resignation of the university president among other significant impacts and received national and international coverage. He or she contends that the information only belongs in the article about the band despite the university-wide, long-lasting impact of this well-covered series of events. ElKevbo (talk) 07:12, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
I'm the logical editor against having the band hazing incident on the main page because it's on the band page where it belongs. Why is there a need to have it on both pages? And secondly, as I stated before ... many universities have had hazing deaths in the last 10 years but it's not on their main page. So ElKevbo and Student7 why is it staying on FAMU's main page? I have facts to prove what I'm saying so I'm needing facts from you all as to why it must stay on the main page..Broadmoor (talk) 14:05, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
It was international news and led to the resignation of the university president. If there have been similar incidents at other colleges and universities then those need to be in their articles, too. ElKevbo (talk) 15:32, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
ElKevboBubbaJoe123456Student7 Here we go again and I can't sit idly when I can prove biased and misleading editing is taking place. There is no precedent established where a university hazing death that made headlines is on the main page of any university. There's been so many hazing deaths at universities that made headlines and not one is on the main page of any university but suddenly it's OK to put it on the historically black one. Coincidence? I don't think so. And the president of the university never stated he resigned due to the hazing death of Mr. Champion (if so provide the link because I looked diligently) and he resigned almost a year later. From my thorough research, he had nothing to do with the culture of the band. It just so happened he resigned within a year of the hazing death and some poorly run media outlets falsely conflated the two with no evidence only to further sensationalize the hazing story which is poor journalistic integrity. Again, the hazing death is on the band's wiki page and that's enough. If you're going to add it to FAMU page, why have you not been adamant about adding the many high profile hazing deaths to the main page of applicable non-historically black universities around the country??? And where is the evidence the former president stated he resigned eight months after the death happened due to the hazing death??? If you can answer those questions at a satisfactory level, I will gladly not contest it on FAMU's page. Not to mention it was on the main page for years and was not too long ago removed, it's no longer as relevant. That was almost a decade ago. Broadmoor (talk) 16:13, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
This certainly seems like a very significant issue in the school's history, so maybe it should be a sentence in the history section, rather than the band section. It certainly appears to have had more far-ranging implications for the school as a whole than hazing deaths at other universities (band suspended, faculty and president resign, accreditation put on probation, etc.). As for the presidential resignation issue, we have reliable sources in cited in the article saying it was due to the hazing scandal. If there are other RSes that dispute that, or link the reservation to other events, then let's get them in the article too.BubbaJoe123456 (talk) 17:03, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
The cited source explicitly says "The fallout has already led to the suspension of the famed Marching 100 band as well as the resignation of its long-time band director and FAMU's president ." This is definitely the kind of important and consequential information that needs to be included in the article. A sentence or two in the history section, as BubbaJoe123456 suggests, would be sufficient if we leave the details in the band's article. But it's not acceptable to completely excise this information from the article completely. Nor is it acceptable for you to accuse other editors of being racist. Moreover, you know better than to edit war with others. ElKevbo (talk) 17:15, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
Drive by third opinion here (this convo was mentioned in WP:UNI). But generally speaking for the university articles I've worked on (Canadian), I usually moved controversies to the history section (sorta of the opinion that smaller sections like bands should be contextual, to avoid getting overly detailed). While the controversy stems from from the band, the issue has had ramifications for the institution as a whole, making it more appropriate for the history section. That said, while I'm not opposed to rewording the proses, the idea of removing them entirely is sorta silly (like the consequences of the event are pretty notable for a university). Leventio (talk) 19:31, 13 June 2019 (UTC); edited 19:35, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
LeventioBubbaJoe123456 I never said the death did not severely impact the university. I'm saying hazing deaths severely impact every university where it happens but I don't see no one making it point to add that information to the university pages where it happened. For example, what about the case of Max Gruver at LSU, George Desdunes at Cornell University, Nolan Burch at West Virginia University, on and so forth. All headline news as with every college hazing death in the last 15 years but no mention of it on the university page. I don't like the selective outrage I'm seeing, to me that constitutes biased and unethical editing. BubbaJoe123456 Your opinion is that the hazing death impacted FAMU worse than other universities, that's not based in fact and cited sources hence the biased and unethical editing which is why I'm challenging. Secondly and ONCE AGAIN, if the president didn't publicly state he resigned due to hazing you can't say he resigned due to hazing. The article you citing is mere speculation, it never confirmed the president stated he resigned due to the hazing controversy, especially given it was 8 months of the death. It's important you truly understand what you're reading before citing something as irrefutable fact spreading misinformation. Someone needs to be a vanguard against misinformation and biased editing.Broadmoor (talk) 22:09, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
The fact that you don't see coverage of it in another university article isn't grounds for excluding it from all others (I mean, as far as I know, if those events are notable enough, there shouldn't be anyone stopping people from adding it, its just a matter of who will do it). I can't speak for the president thing (if it is just speculative that should be removed), but even if we ignored the controversy itself, the consequence of getting placed on probation is noteworthy enough for inclusion in the history section imo (its why I'm sorta highlighting the consequences, being placed on probation would be a pretty notable event with regards to institutional history). Leventio (talk) 23:52, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
Leventio Well what's more grounds for excluding it is the rampant misinformation and questionable editing practices. Clearly you all are not doing the NECESSARY due diligence to uphold the integrity and standards of Misplaced Pages. First of all, FAMU probation had nothing to do with the hazing death, it was TEMPORARILY placed on probation by an accreditation agency ONLY due to questionable financial transactions. Why would an accreditation agency put a university on probation due to a secret fraternity hazing ritual that the university knew nothing about??? FAMU (like every university) has always advocated against hazing but as a former college student I know college students engage in it anyway because it's tradition. There has been hundred of deaths linked to hazing rituals at universities across the nation and there's no record of any being in jeopardy of losing its accreditation due to it so why would they start now???? Accreditation ONLY looks at finances and operations of an institution which FAMU is now fully accredited. Also many of the people so adamant about adding it has a biased and unfair agenda against FAMU, almost everything I noticed they add was a negative smear of FAMU. As if they intentionally look for more negative things to add and conjure up which is another violation and complain I plan to file. Lot of the edits I'm seeing on this page are simply inaccurate, clearly biased with a negative slant, and just don't make any type of sense. Broadmoor (talk) 12:25, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
Accreditors, especially regional accreditors, do not just look at "finances and operations of an institution." There are many other standards including some that specifically focus on student support. In this case, reliable sources explicitly document that this university was placed on probation by SACS in part because of this incident e.g., Tampa Bay Times, WFSU. ElKevbo (talk) 12:38, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
ElKevbo Operations is a big umbrella and the accreditation agency more specifically questioned FINANCIAL SPENDING habits of the band which goes into my point of it being purely financially and operation driven. The secret hazing ritual by a few members of the band may have brought more attention to the band but again it did not officially serve as a reason for the probation, the questionable spending habits and operations of the band was cited as official reasons by the accreditation agency which is the student life component referenced. The band misused traveling funds which negatively impacted students in the band. And again if hazing deaths results in accreditation probation, how come there are no records of any other university that had PROVEN hazing deaths on campus being placed on accreditation probation???? Max Gruver at LSU, George Desdunes at Cornell University, Nolan Burch at West Virginia University just to name a few. You won't find it because that isn't grounds of accreditation probation. Your rebuttal isn't well researched and a bit tone deaf.Broadmoor (talk) 13:00, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
ElKevbo where did I deny the hazing death played a role in the inquiry of the accreditation agency?? AGAIN, I SAID THE HAZING INCIDENT WAS NEVER AN OFFICIAL CITATION BY THE ACCREDITATION AGENCY! The accreditation agency looked deeper into the operations of the band as a result of the hazing death and found misuse of student funds by the leaders of the band which was the official citation in the probation notice. This isn't rocket science. You're going in circles and nothing you sharing explicitly states hazing was the reason for the probation ... playing a role and being the reason are two very different things. It seems like you're blinded by what you want to see instead of the truth right in front of you which brings me back to the integrity issues of your editing practices. Broadmoor (talk) 20:19, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
Couple of things. First: "if the president didn't publicly state he resigned due to hazing you can't say he resigned due to hazing" What matters is what RSes say, not what he said. If a CEO says he's resigning "for personal reasons," but RS press reports state that he's resigning because the company's performance has nosedived, it's entirely appropriate to say that in an article. In this case, multiple RSes state that his resignation was due to the hazing death, so it's appropriate to say that. Second: The article ElKevbo cited says "The hazing scandal played a role in Florida A&M's accrediting troubles, said Belle S. Wheelan, president of the Southern accreditor, but so did financial woes and concerns about the integrity of Florida A&M's administrative processes." So, that's the head of the accreditor saying that the hazing scandal played a role. In another article, it states " death also sparked state investigations, one which delved deep into the finances of Florida A&M University’s Marching 100 band. That investigation uncovered more than 100 non-students who were allowed to participate and travel with the band on the schools dime." So, it's clear at least that (a) the hazing death contributed to FAMU being put on probation, and (b) the investigation into the hazing death led to the discovery of other issues that were also causes of the probation. BubbaJoe123456 (talk) 20:56, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
BubbaJoe123456 It ABSOLUTELY matters what the FAMU president said if integrity and misinformation matters. And it is misinformation and irresponsible for you or anyone to say he resigned for any reason outside what he publicly stated. The press speculate and give opinions all the time and that's exactly all it is, it's not 100% factual. However, the reputable press outlets got it right and just reported the facts. And again, your argument that he resigned due to the hazing death would be a little stronger if it wasn't for the fact he left ALMOST A YEAR AFTER IT HAPPENED. FIND AN ARTICLE WHERE THE FAMU PRESIDENT STATED IN WRITING OR SPEECH HE RESIGNED DUE TO HAZING??! The problem is you all can't tell the difference between speculation and opinions versus factual information. First the argument was the university was placed on accreditation probation due to hazing which hasn't been irrefutable proven, now the argument is he resigned due to hazing which hasn't been irrefutably proven either. And in reference to ElKevbo, you repeating a lot of what I said. And it sounds like you love to argue just to argue because it doesn't seem like you're reading and trying to understand what I'm saying ... why you feel the need to reword my words? And for the 100th time ElKevbo was saying the hazing death was an official citation for the academic probation, which is not true and poor understanding of the matter ... it simply led to a closer look into the band where citable fiscal wrongdoings were eventually uncovered by the accreditation agency. AGAIN, they can't take away a school's accreditation due to a secret fraternity hazing ritual that has never been sanctioned by the university but they can take it away for gross financial mismanagement which some in the band were found guilty of.Broadmoor (talk) 12:39, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
So just commenting ont he probation again, to reiterate my point (feel like that you may have misunderstood it). I was really trying to stress the fact that even if we ignore the controversy and just focus on the alleged consequential content (being placed on probation... also don't know why your stressing it was a temporary probation earlier... probations are inherently temporary), that is an event that is inherently notable for a university. Now how everyone else here decides to contextualize the rationale for the probation is one thing, but my point was, the probation itself is a notable event that it warrants inclusion in the article (and I've yet to hear a good reason for the exclusion of the probation itself). The probation prose can easily be reworded to reflect whichever rationale we decide upon. Also, the CNN link you provided up there is turning up as a broken link on my end just fyi. Leventio (talk) 20:42, 15 June 2019 (UTC); edited 20:55, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
Leventio oh my gosh, the controversy isn't being ignored! I've said multiple times it's on the band's specific wikipedia page where it belongs. The was more of a band controversy, than a university one.Broadmoor (talk) 13:15, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
No dude, thats not what I'm saying at all... I'm asking you (not accusing you, like honestly I feel like your taking my statements as antagonistic... like I'm trying to push both of y'all to amicable solution) to purposely ignore the controversy, and then tell me if the statement "FUMU was placed on probation between 20## to 20##," is a statement you have a problem with.
And I ask that cause I feel that everyone thats involved here is in agreement with the fact the school was placed on probation (and given this is a fact were all in agreement with here, that portion of the contested content would therefore warrants inclusion). Now I know you just said the reason for probation (whether its financial misuse, or band related hazing) originates from a smaller group, and the related information can be placed in that article too. But the probation itself affected the entire institution, so I'd argue it at least warrants a mention in its institutional history section. As for why the school was on probation, I'll leave that to you guys to decide. Leventio (talk) 23:14, 16 June 2019 (UTC); edited 23:15, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
Disambiguation of "FAMU"
Hi, does anyone have any objection if I make a disambiguation page at FAMU between this university and the Film and TV School of the Academy of Performing Arts in Prague, also known as FAMU? This article currently has more incoming links than the other FAMU due to greater coverage of US topics than Czech ones generally, but FAMU is an internationally-known film school that has been ranked on occasion as the best film school in Europe, so it's not clear to me that this article is the primary topic, especially taking into account WP:GLOBAL. I will do it in the next couple of days if no-one objects? Jdcooper (talk) 02:04, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
User:Cuchullain, I would appreciate if you would explain your rationale here rather than just reverting, thanks. Please explain in particular how redirecting FAMU to this page doesn't violate WP:GLOBAL. There are wikipedia users outside the United States. Jdcooper (talk) 08:58, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Sorry, I missed your post. As I said, this school would appear to be the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC of the term FAMU. It dominates the page views by a wide margin, and most Google Books and News results for FAMU intend this school. Given that it’s a WP:TWODABS situation, a hate note is better than a dab page when it’s clear most readers intend one topic over the other.—Cúchullain/c11:43, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Hmm, I'll defer to you per the page usage stats, but I'm still not convinced this isn't an example of our systemic bias. If you are one of the watchers of this page, would you mind periodically checking the "what links here" page for articles linking directly to FAMU which actually mean the Czech one? As I found several when I was creating the disambiguation page. Jdcooper (talk) 18:30, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Sure thing. And I'd agree with you on creating a dab page if there were more than 2 entries, but as we have it, people looking for the Czech school can find it through the hatnote here as easily as a dab page, without sending the majority of readers looking for the Florida school to a dab page as well. I haven't noticed too many incorrect links but I'll fix them when I find them.--Cúchullain/c20:29, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Broadmoor has tried to remove the information on the school's graduation rate on several occasions. Thought I've asked them to start a talk page discussion, they haven't, so I've started it. I don't see why this sourced information should be removed from the article. Broadmoor stated that the information isn't included for other Florida schools, which may well be true (it wasn't included for a few I checked, like FSU and UF). Even assuming it is, though, that's not sufficient reason to remove it (per WP:OTHERCONTENT), as it's both relevant and sourced. BubbaJoe123456 (talk) 18:09, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
