Just saw this post on businessweek and figured people here would benefit from this info. The source is FanaticalFan, a poster from S2S and BW that is somehow affiliated with Wharton:
"https://s2s.wharton.upenn.edu/wh-wharton/messages/?msg=17204 - Wharton 2005 / 06 Waitlist Discussion
https://s2s.wharton.upenn.edu/wh-wharton ... ?msg=17204 - Wharton 2006 / 07 Waitlist Discussion
Couple of interesting points
"Wharton has been so open about their process - why being so unjust about waitlisted candidates. Please let us know how you decide to pick the waitlisted guys
1) Do you pool them with the R2 interviewed candidates to pick up the best candidates?
1A) Is there any differentiating factors over those candidates - are waitlisted candidates treated equally/below/above the R2 interviewed candidates
2) or do you pool R2 interviewed candidates and pick up your best candidates first, and then pool the remaining candidates and waitlisted candidates to see whom to pick?
Thanks in advance."
"Definitely more like 1. One of the reasons for the waitlist is to deal with uncertainty as to application numbers and quality between rounds, until adcom can see what R2 is really like. We want to ensure that an application of given quality stands an even chance in either round. Normally a considerable number of R1 waitlists are admitted in R2.
I know waitlist sucks, but I don't think there's anything unjust about the process
FF"