Talk:DigiPen Institute of Technology

message: Hello,
First, in accordance with Wikipedia’s plain and simple conflict of interest guide, I should state that I am an employee for DigiPen Institute of Technology, and have been tasked with reviewing the content on the school’s Wikipedia page.
I have taken a strong look at the page — taking into consideration the aims of Wikipedia as well as DigiPen’s inherent interest in its web presence — and have come up with a list of recommended changes for this page that should mesh with Wikipedia’s goals as well as address many of the issues mentioned on this Talk page.
To formulate my suggestions, I have looked at the Wikipedia pages of other for-profit and private universities. My goal is to simplify and clarify the points on this Wikipedia page so that readers can gain an informed understanding of DigiPen and what makes the school, its students, and its faculty notable. I would like to encourage a neutral editor to look over my suggested changes (they are relatively light, and are mostly redactions rather than additions) and input the changes at their discretion. I'll be watching this page if anyone has any questions or suggestions.
Now with all that said, onto the suggestions!
 As CorporateM suggested below, I have moved my (lengthy) suggested changes to my user page. I encourage anyone interested to take a look.
--Infinifold (talk) 22:03, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Whoa. I've taken a shot at some serious cleanup of the page, removing most of the unsourced and/or promotional material. Regarding the draft above, the only sources I saw at a glance were primary sources from the organization itself, whereas the primary basis of the article should be credible, independent sources. Also, you should place draft material in a user space draft, as it creates a huge mess on the Talk page trying to do it this way. You can do this by going to User:Infinifold/sandbox then using bold and strikeouts to indicate suggested changes. CorporateM (Talk) 01:53, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  DigiPen's Suggested Changes 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on DigiPen Institute of Technology. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.next-gen.biz/features/game-industrys-100-most-influential-women
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20161123052925/https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school/?443410-DigiPen-Institute-of-Technology to https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school/?443410-DigiPen-Institute-of-Technology
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:46, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: It was mentioned that DigiPen does research for companies without references to the said companies' public press release or objective sources. The references are to articles on DigiPen's web page. Thus, this article reads more like an advertisement than anything else.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:600:8080:11AA:182E:6828:C95E:F5C4 (talk) 00:57, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  References are mostly from DigiPen itself 

message: An unregistered editor is insisting that this article specifically say that this institution is not regionally accredited. That is true but it's completely unnecessary; the institution is accredited by a reputable national accreditor and there is nothing critically important or meaningful about regional accreditation (or lack thereof). ElKevbo (talk) 15:37, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regional accreditation 

message: The additional citation for the Jim Sterling video feels unrelated / unnecessary. The video, while potentially notable for prospecting art students, is not really influential in a macro sense. 4.16.175.130 (talk) 22:55, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jim Sterling Video: Unrelated?