Talk:Brown University

The ADL ranking is an attributed statement of opinion, not a statement of fact. All rankings are biased in some way and factor in different things. Attributing an opinion does not fall under the same guidelines as a statement of fact. "Most entrepreneurial university" from Forbes is also a statement of opinion. The sentence "The university received a C on the 2025 "Campus Antisemitism Report Card" of the Anti-Defamation League.^[1] is just conveying the opinion of that group, not stating it as fact. newsjunkie (talk) 03:43, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

The RfC held about 9 months ago had a lot of participation from editors and is among the largest RfCs ever held in Wikipedia. That RfC close included the statement "The ADL can roughly be taken as reliable on the topic of antisemitism when Israel and Zionism are not concerned." That necessarily implies that the ADL is not considered reliable on the topic when Israel and Zionism are concerned (which is how the the RfC close is summarized) and that is the case here. Thus the source is not reliable by our current standards and our current understanding of broad consensus among Wikipedia editors regardless of whether any particular editor believes a particular statement from the ADL is a statement of fact or opinion. ElKevbo (talk) 04:09, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

The discussion summary Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 439#RFC: The Anti-Defamation League noted though that "Many statements that the ADL makes are inherently opinion, and are thus subject to different rules as to when and how they should be cited." In my understanding that consensus is about a reliable source on facts, rather than a clearly attributed statement of opinion, which is what rankings are. newsjunkie (talk) 04:13, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

The entire relevant part to me reads "What matters is the degree to which a source can be relied upon for statements of fact. Statements of opinion are another matter, which complicates this RfC: Many statements that the ADL makes are inherently opinion, and are thus subject to different rules as to when and how they should be cited." newsjunkie (talk) 04:16, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

I'd be perfectly fine with characterizing it in some way as an advocacy group if that seems necessary, if that makes for better attribution. newsjunkie (talk) 04:22, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

I would also say that this counts as a "factual statement about the opinion" as per Wikipedia:Neutral point of view#Bias in sources newsjunkie (talk) 04:31, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

For Brandeis, the ranking was also covered last year by the student newspaper: https://www.thejustice.org/article/2024/04/brandeis-anti-defamation-league-report-card-grade-brandeis newsjunkie (talk) 04:38, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

And Brown was also covered last year by local media (the ranking has changed a bit this year): https://www.golocalprov.com/news/new-brown-gets-a-d-from-anti-defamation-league-for-anti-semitism-on-campus newsjunkie (talk) 04:40, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Coverage for this year that includes Brandeis: https://www.timesofisrael.com/adl-report-card-finds-campuses-fixing-responses-to-antisemitism/ newsjunkie (talk) 04:52, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

And one that mentions Brown from this year: https://www.algemeiner.com/2025/03/03/ivy-league-schools-score-mediocre-grades-new-adl-campus-report-card/ newsjunkie (talk) 04:56, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

And here is reporting on Columbia's ranking for this year:https://www.cnn.com/2025/03/03/us/columbia-university-federal-contracts-threatened/index.html newsjunkie (talk) 06:09, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

I've dropped a note at WT:UNI asking for other editors to please weigh in so we can see if there is a broader consensus among a larger group of editors. ElKevbo (talk) 13:20, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Additional source from CNN . I would suggest that 1) the ADL's grade is taken seriously enough by media organizations that an attributed statement might be appropriate in certain circumstances, but 2) without some broader context or reason for inclusion, it is likely WP:UNDUE. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 17:09, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

According to Hillel, Brown is one of the top 60 schools in terms of Jewish population (24 percent undergrad)https://www.hillel.org/college/brown-university/. And I added additional sources including from the Providence outlet last year. And there is the context of it being one of the schools currently facing enforcement action: https://www.browndailyherald.com/article/2025/03/education-dept-warns-brown-may-face-enforcement-actions-amid-antisemitism-concerns newsjunkie (talk) 09:11, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

I think an issue here is that rankings present as statements of fact based on research and analysis by a certain group, not as simply opinion. They occupy a middle ground between actual fact and clear opinion. Normally we only include rankings from organizations that are considered generally reliable sources, so this is not a major issue, but it becomes a problem here in the light of the recent RfC on ADL's reliability.

To compare this to the Forbes 'most entrepreneurial' ranking – that ranking is based on the fraction of alumni identifying as founders or business owners. The interpretation of this ratio as 'most entrepreneurial' is opinion, but the actual ratio is fact. If the underlying facts were not reliable, the ranking would not be reliable and would probably not be included.

With that in mind, simple inclusion as a ranking is unlikely to be appropriate for the ADL ranking as it is based on facts that ADL is not considered reliable for, per the recent RfC. However, it could potentially be included in a manner that make it clear that it is opinion. This would require that it is not WP:UNDUE, i.e. that there is discussion if it in sources (probably news media) independent of the university and ADL demonstrating that the ranking is material to the university's reputation. Robminchin (talk) 17:19, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

I concur with Newsjunkie and others that rankings of this sort are opinions, and can be included so long as that fact is made clear. However, I also concur with Russ Woodroofe that this particular ranking is likely undue for articles like Brown. I'd be more open to inclusion at Brandeis, where the high portion of Jewish students means that the ranking's primary intended is larger, something reflected in the RS coverage. Sdkb ^talk 17:53, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

I would concur. I don't think that the ADL ranking has any relevance to this article about Brown. Okieblokewil (talk) 20:34, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

I would say it's more relevant now given what was cited in the larger context of the dispute with the federal government. https://www.jta.org/2025/07/31/united-states/brown-university-strikes-50m-deal-with-trump-administration-over-allegations-of-campus-antisemitism newsjunkie (talk) 20:49, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

I do not disagree that the conversation around the status of Jewish students is relevant to the dispute with the federal government. I simply do not think that the ADL is an appropriate source for an observation outside of the conversation. As it is, the ADL is a participant in the conversation, frequently on the "side" of the federal government. Citing the ADL as if it is an independent organization which presents unbiased, evidence-based, findings, is disingenuous.  𝕆𝕜𝕚𝕖𝕓𝕝𝕠𝕜𝕖𝕨𝕚𝕝𝕝 ➢✧ 21:10, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

If it's being cited for its opinion, I don't think it's being cited as an unbiased source, it's being cited as a attributed prominent advocacy group with a clear point of view, though it is still a separate entity from the government. newsjunkie (talk) 21:17, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

I would refer again to Robminchin's comment. I agree that it is not relevant, and is to be considered unreliable, as Israel and Zionism are the primary topics of conversation here. Just don't think it is pertinent.  𝕆𝕜𝕚𝕖𝕓𝕝𝕠𝕜𝕖𝕨𝕚𝕝𝕝 ➢✧ 14:42, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

It's about reflecting an attributed prominent point of view from an outside group, not making judgements about its reliability or not -- the relevance is is given by the context of the wider debate. newsjunkie (talk) 15:43, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Are other prominent news media sources discussing the ADL ranking in any significant capacity though?  𝕆𝕜𝕚𝕖𝕓𝕝𝕠𝕜𝕖𝕨𝕚𝕝𝕝 ➢✧ 17:48, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

https://www.cnn.com/2025/03/03/business/antisemitism-grades-colleges newsjunkie (talk) 17:52, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

I reiterate my question. One CNN Business article doesn't seem to indicate relevance. https://www.cnn.com/2025/10/16/us/trump-universities-compact-funding?iid=cnn_buildContentRecirc_end_recirc&recs_exp=more-from-cnn-right-rail&tenant_id=related.en this article does not discuss the ADL rankings at all, which is more relevant to the specific place where it would be inserted. But, I think I've made my point, so I'll refrain from commenting further. Unless other editors weigh in, it seems prudent to leave it out.  𝕆𝕜𝕚𝕖𝕓𝕝𝕠𝕜𝕖𝕨𝕚𝕝𝕝 ➢✧ 18:05, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

From 2024, also Axios: https://www.axios.com/2024/04/11/antisemitism-college-campuses-adl-harvard

USA Today: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2024/04/11/adl-antisemitism-report-card-gives-top-schools-failing-grades/73294604007/

JTA from 2025:https://www.jta.org/2025/03/03/united-states/colleges-fare-better-on-average-as-adl-grades-them-on-antisemitism-for-a-second-time

2024 from Providence Journal linked in 2025 update: https://www.golocalprov.com/news/brown-receives-250m-in-federal-funds-it-is-now-at-risk newsjunkie (talk) 18:41, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Also critical/indepth analysis published by Time: https://time.com/7258274/colleges-challenge-low-tolerance-grades/ newsjunkie (talk) 18:45, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

I'll reiterate that I do not think this discussion is going to lead to any changes in the article. The only article which discusses the relationship between the ADL grades and the actions by the federal government is the one from GoLocalProv; however, GoLocalProv is well known among Providence residents to be a sensationalist tabloid that appears to regularly publish articles written by LLMs. It just doesn't seem like there exists relevant media which proves that the ranking is significant to the University's reputation. Seems to be WP:UNDUE. Let's just drop it until other folks weigh in?  𝕆𝕜𝕚𝕖𝕓𝕝𝕠𝕜𝕖𝕨𝕚𝕝𝕝 ➢✧ 18:36, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

The Time piece above touches on the connection as well as did a Reuters piece comparing the investigations and the rankings in general: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/these-universities-are-trumps-crosshairs-many-dont-know-why-2025-03-27/, the Wall Street Journal:https://www.wsj.com/us-news/education/trump-college-university-fight-ae69a3e1 USA Today in the context of Harvard: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/04/22/adl-trump-harvard-antisemitism/83162816007/

and I think coverage of the rankings in general and Jewish outlets shows that it can be significant for the reputation within a certain community (without making a judgement on whether or not it is justified):

Times of Israel: https://www.timesofisrael.com/adl-report-card-finds-campuses-fixing-responses-to-antisemitism/

Ynetnews https://www.ynetnews.com/jewish-world/article/b14msgxjyl

Jewish Telegraphic Agency: "The letter grades that the Anti-Defamation League has issued to campuses on their response to antisemitism are showing signs of growing influence: The group announced today that several schools have adopted new policies to improve their grades in the month since this year’s report was released."https://www.jta.org/2025/04/04/united-states/adl-upgrades-19-colleges-antisemitism-grades-as-some-enact-new-policies newsjunkie (talk) 19:30, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

I would like to remove the campus safety section since the information is from a decade ago and also does not fully contextualize what having a high number of formal title IX reports means, especially for brown specifically. The Washington Post article does not imply that a higher number of formal title IX reports means that more sexual violence has occurred on that campus, but instead even attempts to contextualize that it doesn't.

So, while the context of the Vox article is helpful, saying that there have been criticisms of these lists implies that there is debate within the sexual violence prevention world about what a higher number of formal title IX reports means. However, the body of the Washington post article does not disagree with the Vox article.

The simplest way to not imply that Brown was experiencing more sexual violence than other schools in 2014 (since that is not what the formal title IX reporting numbers show, even though a less informed person would easily read the paragraph that way) is to simply delete it. Unless there were campus changes due to being higher on this list, this statement provides little information about brown overall. The statements could also be rewritten to provide additional context, but unless actions were taken by the university around these types of lists, the information and context would likely be overdoing it for the brown university Wikipedia page. CLPond (talk) 15:02, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

I will be deleting this section shortly. For easier record keeping, the current paragraph is below:

Campus safety

In 2014, Brown tied with the University of Connecticut for the highest number of reported rapes in the nation, with its "total of reports of rape" on their main campus standing at 43.[190] However, such rankings have been criticized for failing to account for how different campus environments can encourage or discourage individuals from reporting sexual assault cases, thereby affecting the number of reported rapes.[191]

And the links are:

190 - https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2016/06/07/these-colleges-have-the-most-reports-of-rape/ & https://web.archive.org/web/20160609215517/https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2016/06/07/these-colleges-have-the-most-reports-of-rape/

191 - https://www.vox.com/2016/6/8/11879626/colleges-most-rapes-ranked CLPond (talk) 03:29, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Hello everyone,

Sorry to insert a small request here, but the Watson Institute of International and Public Affairs has been renamed to the Watson School of International and Public Affairs as of July 1st, 2025. As someone who attends Brown and this school, I do know that there are distinctions between the capabilities of a school and an institute; therefore, I believe any instance where writers refer to the Watson "Institute" should be updated to Watson "School." Of course, if any section is referring to what it was called in the past then it doesn't need to be changed, but because the university is making meaningful changes that accompany its reclassification, I find that representing it here for the rest of the world to see is important.

Sources should be very easy to find, but here's one for starters--see Brown explain it themselves:

Setting the stage for the Watson School: 7 key moments in international and public affairs at Brown | Brown University

Thank you! SquiggDog5 (talk) 01:48, 12 November 2025 (UTC)