Talk:Christopher Reeve

Juilliard

"It doesn't count bc he didn't graduate" is really not apt, it's being unnecessarily wedded to a style guide rather than being informative to the casual reader (the purpose of the site, not to live out a the fantasies of a publishing house). Therequiembellishere (talk) 05:08, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

As per Template:Infobox person, "It is usually not relevant to include either [the education or alma mater] parameter for non-graduates...". So, if Reeve left Juilliard before he graduated, it would make him a non-graduate. Degrees he earned is what's important. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 05:11, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

No. I think it's unnecessary for several reasons to constrain the education field only if someone got a degree. It's antiquated, exclusionary and credentialist. It's especially so in this exact case with Reeve and Juilliard since it's a core component of any biographical look at his early life. I think for similar reasons wikipedia has preferred to use "alma mater" (which is not a common phrase for our global English speaking audience) rather than the simpler "education" and that doing so is again unnecessary. It's a distinction without real purpose, other than the effect of being slightly more exclusionary thru a somewhat pedantic Latin phrase. Therequiembellishere (talk) 05:15, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

It is important to his overall education and has substantial coverage in the article. Just being accepted to Juilliard by itself is notable, the education he got there is important, the lack of a degree doesn't matter. Looks appropriate for mention in the infobox in the education attribute. Geraldo Perez (talk) 05:37, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

I'm fine with either option, and I understand both points of view. But if I had to choose, I would include Juilliard in the infobox. For two reasons: a) technically, he has a degree, albeit an honorary one; b) "usually not relevant" implies there can be exceptions. CJC-DI (talk) 08:43, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

Calling Julliard an Alma mater for Christopher Reeve is misleading because that gives a false impression he graduated or at least got a degree from there. If anything, it would be better for "education", but even then it's more important to highlight where one did graduate from. We shouldn't clutter the infobox with excess details on one's education. I therefore am inclined to only list Cornell within the field. Mentions of places attended where one doesn't graduate from ideally should be saved for article prose instead. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 11:52, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

Alma mater can refer to an institution that one attended, even if they did not graduate. But as I said, I'm fine with either decision. CJC-DI (talk) 12:08, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

People much more often (I'd guess at least 80% of the time) seem to mean where they graduated from when using such a term. Nevertheless, those take precedence over where one doesn't even get an associate's degree. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 12:27, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

You can list him as (dropped out) as with Bill Gates, the main example from template:infobox person AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 01:01, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

I agree with the concerns by SNUGGUNS and CJC-DI's observations on the situation. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 21:37, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

This remains to be a ridiculously overzealous desire to cling to guidelines rather than actually help a reader. If you ask the majority of people who know who Christopher Reeve is, the three things everyone will say is 1) Superman, 2) Juilliard, 3) horse accident. This idea that we can't include Juilliard because he didn't complete his BFA is just sheer pettiness, especially with the last clear notation to stay he attended the university without declaring he graduated (which the article text itself goes over in detail). It's a particular disservice to the reader about a core part of his biography, as previous raised in equivalence to Bill Gates. Therequiembellishere (talk) 03:43, 31 October 2025 (UTC)