Talk:Peabody Institute

Johns Hopkins University High‑importance

	This article is related to the Johns Hopkins University WikiProject. Learn more about this collaborative project here.Johns Hopkins UniversityWikipedia:GLAM/Johns Hopkins UniversityTemplate:WikiProject Johns Hopkins UniversityJohns Hopkins University-related articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Classical music

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical music, which aims to improve, expand, copy edit, and maintain all articles related to classical music, that are not covered by other classical music related projects. Please read the guidelines for writing and maintaining articles. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.Classical musicWikipedia:WikiProject Classical musicTemplate:WikiProject Classical musicClassical music articles

Higher education

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

Maryland: Baltimore Mid‑importance

	Maryland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Maryland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Maryland 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.MarylandWikipedia:WikiProject MarylandTemplate:WikiProject MarylandMaryland articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Baltimore Task Force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Untitled

The Clinton Adams link that the Peabody Institute's article mentions is a different Clinton Adams. Same name, but links to the wrong guy.

does someone think they can find a better or more pictures of the Peabody than the one that is shown? I'm sure there are more

Faculty?

Are there any criertia for determining who qualifies as a notable faculty member? The current situation just looks increasingly like a list of everyone regardless of notable-ness. --Wspencer11 (talk to me...) 17:58, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is a difficult question, though, clearly names do not belong in this list of people who just are not on Peabody's faculty. At a prestigious institution it is likely that many or most of the faculty are notable. Because the range of specialties is broad, it is also difficult for any one person to know who is notable in all the different areas. For example someone able to determine which of the composition or jazz faculty are notable would not necessarily be able to say whether someone in the opera or early music departments was notable. For now, it seems reasonable keep the list more inclusive and see whether linking articles appear which might give better grounds to keep someone in the "notable" category. --Servais 18:31, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I second that "notable" means wiki links. The user inquiring about Clinton Adams, for example, should make a Clinton Adams page if he desires information about a specific faculty member. 71.179.76.18 05:28, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

as of now there are a number of dead links in the faculty section.i am hesitant to delete these people, although i suspect that they have left the school. however, on the subject of notability; it's not like most of them have their own articles. they're just listed, and link to their pages on the peabody website.those who someone thought sufficiently noteworthy link to their own wp articles.Toyokuni3 (talk) 05:17, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tori Amos?

It seems to me that the fact that Peabody discontinued Tori Amos's scholarship isn't the slightest bit notable in 'pop culture', and doesn't deserve such prominent (or perhaps any) notice in this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.244.110.203 (talk) 17:33, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The preparatory accepts children regularly as young as 3. I would suggest that stating a 5 year old was their youngest is incorrect. Moreover, she was not a student at the Institute which grants degrees, but merely at Peabody Preparatory which does not grant degrees. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.173.226.229 (talk) 12:16, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fatuous: US News & World Report (= get'ur national college ratin's, right 'cher!)

The methods and judgements (= opinions) of the marketing and journalism staffs at the USN&WR --for assigning precise numerical rankings of U.S. colleges and universities is: fatuous and illusory.

Initiated as a marketing and publicity gimmick to pump-up sales of an ailing weekly news mag, the gig has proven very sucessful, by USN&WR's criteria; but, by reducing all data to that which can be forced into numeral ratings --or by ignoring data that doesn't quantify-- it has brought misinformation and confusion to students and their parents. And, the 'whole show' has cheapened the behavior and values of college bureaucrats as they now try to out-guess and out-spin 'the competition' in presenting their colleges annually to all those poseur-judges --note, other mags and other poseurs are jumping into the game-- and then to the public in the 'ratings' game.

Several college administrations have by now recognized the pitfalls and potential for silly or unethical behavior in the spinning of infomation to the public; and they are dropping out of the 'ratings' game.

At WP we would do well to avoid those who preach a gospel of being able to provide numerical ratings to the vast range of qualitative diffences between colleges and universities.--71.99.108.84 (talk) 08:06, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Leading conservatory in the world?

whoa! that statement requires substantial backing up, and may STILL be too pov. at least one, and preferably several citations are an absolute must.Toyokuni3 (talk) 05:23, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And changing it to "leading conservatory in the U.S." doesn't rectify that problem. There are several conservatories in the US which could be considered the equals or betters of Peabody, such as Curtis, Eastman, Julliard, et al. depending on your source. We need to verify these claims, not just make them less extreme. (As a response, I'll be changing it to "one of the leading conservatories in the U.S." until someone can provide a reliable source to back up the claim that it is the leading conservatory.) Beggarsbanquet (talk) 23:43, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Many professional musicians would agree with the claim it's among the best, but the list of comparables isn't very good. Julliard probably does lead in the list of prominent alumni, but schools like Jacobs/University of Indiana, Shepherd/Rice, and University of North Texas have produced as many, if not more, of the top musicians in the world as Peabody. In addition, the statement that no "formal" rankings exist is a bit fatuous, since "formal" rankings don't really exist for anything else. U. S. News & World Report does rank graduate programs in music; to be sure, there are a number of attempts to rank music schools by a number of different outfits, e.g. eduers.com. Even the Wikipedia entry for Eastman/Rochester has a section titled "Rankings," with references to USNWR.

Dbartramr (talk) 22:01, 10 November 2010 (UTC)dbartramr[reply]

Update faculty

I had to remove a faculty member who has transferred to another university. I think perhaps someone should check the faculty listing to make sure it is current. Beggarsbanquet (talk) 23:47, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Faculty" section does not meet guidelines

I've tagged this section for removal, as it stands. Wikipedia is not a directory of an educational institution's entire faculty. Only notable faculty meeting Wikipedia's academics notability guideline should be listed here (and linked to their Wikipedia article). JGHowes ^talk 22:12, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I suggest leaving just the faculty members with articles on the encyclopedia. Airplaneman ^talk 02:57, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll remove them as planned. Airplaneman ^talk 00:19, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Glaring Omission

the complete absence of any description of the programs and degrees available is unimaginable. musicology?composition? conducting? performance? describing the architecture is all very well, but what does the school DO? sheesh!Toyokuni3 (talk) 03:04, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Peabody Children's Chorus

sings in concerts biannually ...

Is that twice a year? or every other year?

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/biannually recommends to avoid this expression. --Bahnmoeller (talk) 20:38, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]