This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Higher education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of higher education, universities, and colleges on Wikipedia. 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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to University of California, its history, accomplishments and other topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.University of CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject University of CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject University of CaliforniaUniversity of California articles
Changes to the reason for starting UC Merced[edit]
An Anonymous user keeps removing this line from the introduction “ Established in 2005, UC Merced was founded to "address chronically low levels of educational attainment in the region."” This line does come with a citation and comes up though out the history and founding of the institution. I figured I would open this issue in the talk page in case anyone has strong opinions on this and wants to opine. Dr vulpes (talk) 06:23, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I am contesting this deletion on 15 May 2022 by User:Dr vulpes which appears to violate WP:NPOV by removing any mention of UC Merced's poor air quality.
The current version of the article incorrectly implies that the regents were studying the issue of a San Joaquin Valley campus for the first time in the 1980s. The deleted text indicates that the regents had already studied the issue back in the 1960s and had refrained from proceeding further because they were concerned about the developing smog issue at Riverside and how the San Joaquin Valley had similar air quality issues. For that information, I had cited to the published memoirs of Clark Kerr, the UC president who supervised the development of new campuses at Santa Cruz and Irvine and the development of general campuses at Davis, San Diego, and Santa Barbara. Kerr was in a better position than anyone else to know what future campuses were or were not on the table back in the 1960s. Coolcaesar (talk) 13:17, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I took a look at the The Kerr memoirs. They do seem to indicate that 1) there were discussions of a tenth UC Campus near the "Fresno area" but "not too close to Fresno" in the Central Valley as far back as 1957 (pages 177, 236-237, also see 371), 2) it was purposely delayed due to heat and smog based on previous experience they had in planning UC Riverside (pages 237 & 389), and, 3) interestingly enough although orthogonal to the original edit, there were discussions that it should include a medical education campus as far back as 1957 (pg 371). This could somehow be a branch of history unrelated to UC Merced's current inception, but all of this is certainly relevant for inclusion on the page. Babylon717 (talk) 05:01, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Coolcaesar, I don't see why there can't be a mention about the air quality in the region. But the source you've cited, although good, is a pretty weak case. It's one sentence and feels like an afterthought. There are much more important and interesting issues at play for the development of the campus. I'm a fan of the special issue From Rangeland to Research University: The birth of University of California-Merced. The Review of Higher Education.. They go into a lot of the racial and economic barriers that came up with the campus selection.
The WP:NPOV comment is a pretty serious accusation and I want to address it really quick. I removed this section of text because it was borderline poorly sourced not to censor or remove an unflattering view point from the article. I'm from this region of California so the idea of air pollution being anything of note is kind of amusing. That reminds me of the red flag days where we couldn't go outside because of the air quality. Kind of wild to think about that now and how that isn't normal.
Anywho, how about instead of focusing of the edit we just collaborate on that section together. Let's bring it back, find some better sources, and expand it to include some of the other issues that came up during this time period. Honestly I would rather spend our time working constructively on this issue. I've got some time and am willing to help. Sound like a plan?
Hey @Babylon717 what's up cogsci! Always nice to see another SSHA person on wiki!
