From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The logo User:Odder has implemented is not correct for digital use -- notice the extra rings around the crest and seal -- it's only for print. Unless a digital logo can be found, I believe the prior version superior and supported by Cornell brand guidelines -- https://cornellbrand.cornell.edu/downloads/cornell-brand-book.pdf. — Eustress 20:15, 1 August 2014 (UTC) reply

I've restored the alternate web logo for now -- the print logo (taken from the magazine) does not go here. Perhaps we can get the default logo in web format from http://weill.cornell.edu/its/web/design/branding/? — Eustress 17:21, 2 August 2014 (UTC) reply
Whatever. odder ( talk) 21:58, 3 August 2014 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia uses representative artwork in our articles, this frequently means we do not use web logos, which may be different in quality, colour scheme, or format, and instead use a more representative logo. We're not bound by usage rules and can use whichever version of a logo is best. I've therefore added back in Odder's image and removed yours, which is now entirely different and in no way representative. Nick ( talk) 23:06, 3 August 2014 (UTC) reply
I see your points... I've gone with the original Weill-specific logo, but I've replaced the wordmark with the seal, which is what the lead image of the infobox is supposed to be. — Eustress 15:29, 4 August 2014 (UTC) reply

Human Rights section

I'm frankly not sure that that uncited section is sufficiently notable for inclusion. Tagged but still no refs. -- 2603:7000:2143:8500:A493:133E:BF54:BA9F ( talk) 03:37, 31 December 2021 (UTC) reply