Talk:Resident assistant

message: This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 January 2021 and 8 April 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Faithbagpipe, Warr5820. Peer reviewers: Kate Kastanza.
===Links normally to be avoided===
Except where noted, the below do not override the list of what should be linked to; for example, if the subject of an article has an official website, then it should be linked to even if it contains factually inaccurate material.
# In general, any site that does not provide a unique resource beyond what the article here would have once it becomes an example of brilliant prose.
# Any site that contains factually inaccurate material or unverified original research. (See Wikipedia:Reliable sources for further information on this guideline.)
# A website that you own or maintain, even if the guidelines above imply that it should be linked to. This is because of neutrality and point-of-view concerns; neutrality is an important objective at Wikipedia, and a difficult one. If it is relevant and informative, mention it on the talk page and let other — neutral — Wikipedia editors decide whether to add the link.
# Links that are added to promote a site, that primarily exist to sell products or services, with objectionable amounts of advertising, or that require payment to view the relevant content. See External link spamming.
# Sites that are inaccessible to a significant proportion of the online community, such as sites that only work with a specific brand of browser.
# Direct links to documents that require external applications (such as Flash or Java) to view the relevant content, unless the article is about those media (see Rich media below).
# Foreign-language sites, unless they contain visual aids such as maps, diagrams, or tables. (See WP:MOS-L for further information on this guideline.)
# Bookstore sites; instead, use the "ISBN" linking format, which gives readers an opportunity to search a wide variety of free and non-free book sources.
# Blogs, social networking sites (such as MySpace) and forums should generally not be linked to. However, there are exceptions, such as in cases where the article is about, or closely related to, the website itself, or where the website is of a particularly high standard.
: Since you clearly own and maintain the website, and it's not a particularly well-written or informative piece, I would vote not to allow this link. Lordwow 21:16, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  To clarify the statement above, "I attempted to add a link on the Resident Assistant page here to the log, but was denied because a user felt the site was commercial." I reverted the change, with the reasoning that it was "shameless self-promotion," not a commercial website. As stated above, Wikipedia users should not link to "A website you own or maintain..." Lordwow 00:38, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

message: Except where noted, the below do not override the list of what should be linked to; for example, if the subject of an article has an official website, then it should be linked to even if it contains factually inaccurate material.
# In general, any site that does not provide a unique resource beyond what the article here would have once it becomes an example of brilliant prose.
# Any site that contains factually inaccurate material or unverified original research. (See Wikipedia:Reliable sources for further information on this guideline.)
# A website that you own or maintain, even if the guidelines above imply that it should be linked to. This is because of neutrality and point-of-view concerns; neutrality is an important objective at Wikipedia, and a difficult one. If it is relevant and informative, mention it on the talk page and let other — neutral — Wikipedia editors decide whether to add the link.
# Links that are added to promote a site, that primarily exist to sell products or services, with objectionable amounts of advertising, or that require payment to view the relevant content. See External link spamming.
# Sites that are inaccessible to a significant proportion of the online community, such as sites that only work with a specific brand of browser.
# Direct links to documents that require external applications (such as Flash or Java) to view the relevant content, unless the article is about those media (see Rich media below).
# Foreign-language sites, unless they contain visual aids such as maps, diagrams, or tables. (See WP:MOS-L for further information on this guideline.)
# Bookstore sites; instead, use the "ISBN" linking format, which gives readers an opportunity to search a wide variety of free and non-free book sources.
# Blogs, social networking sites (such as MySpace) and forums should generally not be linked to. However, there are exceptions, such as in cases where the article is about, or closely related to, the website itself, or where the website is of a particularly high standard.
: Since you clearly own and maintain the website, and it's not a particularly well-written or informative piece, I would vote not to allow this link. Lordwow 21:16, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  To clarify the statement above, "I attempted to add a link on the Resident Assistant page here to the log, but was denied because a user felt the site was commercial." I reverted the change, with the reasoning that it was "shameless self-promotion," not a commercial website. As stated above, Wikipedia users should not link to "A website you own or maintain..." Lordwow 00:38, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Links normally to be avoided

message: Since a Resident Assistant is a job title rather than the name of a normal resident who assists with other residents, I suggest moving this article to Resident Assistant, which already redirects to Resident assistant. -- Noetic Sage 18:01, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally, I disagree.  The term is a generic term for the type of position.  For instance, I would say, "I work as a resident assistant at XYZ University."  Saying, "I work as a Resident Assistant at XYZ University," doesn't look right.  SchuminWeb (Talk) 03:19, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Titles can be used in both ways. For example, George W. Bush could say he is a president or the President. This follows for many positions which are generic: Vice-presidents, CEOs, and RAs. I have found, upon reviewing these other articles, that there doesn't seem to be a Wikipedia standard for position titles. CEO is used in lowercase while Secretary of State is capitalized, and both refer not to one specific position (such as President of the United States), but rather a generic position held by many people. Upon searching through WP:NAME I can't come across anything that addresses this concern. I have posted about this on the Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions page. -- Noetic Sage 01:12, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Just to add another view-point on this. Outside of the US (here in NZ and elsewhere in the Commonwealth) we seem to use the phrase 'Residential' followed by 'Assistant' or 'Advisor'. With this one would tend to say "I am a Residential Assistant at XYZ University". With that, to make the article more worldly I suggest adding "residential assistant/advisor" to the alternative names in the introduction. OuterLegsRace (talk) 08:46, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article title 

message: I was under the impression that Sheryl Crow was actually not an RA, but instead she was a Summer Welcome Leader or something like that.  Can anyone verify that she was actually an RA? -- Hunter00047 23:42, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Notable RAs

message: Who is Alison Heather, and why is she a notable RA? - 64.93.130.228 (talk) 01:20, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You just came in at the right time when someone was vandalizing the list.  All fixed now.  SchuminWeb (Talk) 03:27, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alison Heather? 

message: I tagged this piece for NPOV problems because of the tone of the introduction and job benefits section. It seems a bit like we're reading a brochure for RA recruitment. Can we come up with a way to make this more encyclopedic? Noble-savage (talk) 17:00, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've swapped out the neutrality tag for the tone tag, since it sounds like it's in an inappropriate tone rather than NPOV.  SchuminWeb (Talk) 19:49, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that even in its current form there are issues with the tone of the article. The section where it lists the various attributes necessary to be a RA doesn't seem very encyclopedic...--Rgb1110 (talk) 07:04, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality problem 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Resident assistant. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080516041956/http://www.residentassistant.com/famous/shalala.htm to http://www.residentassistant.com/famous/shalala.htm
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) 22:07, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified