Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Higher education/Archive 2

message: I've reformed Wikipedia:Naming conventions (schools).  It's a slightly different proposal based on more recent discussions at Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools.  Miss Mondegreen  talk   14:52, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Naming conventions (schools)]] reformed 

message: Should I create separate "College" and "University" categories or should I just group colleges in with the universities?  Also, is there a formal way of determining if a specific place is a college or a university?  --Abnn 12:42, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Current consensus is for universities and colleges to be grouped together for categorisation purposes (see, e.g., this discussion).  There isn't a universal test to determine whether an institution is a college or a university.  For the general pattern, see :Category:Universities and colleges by country. — mholland (talk) 13:12, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the quick answer, it helps me figure out the best way to go about things.  --Abnn 17:55, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I do think it might be useful to have some way of distinguishing between universities and their constituent schools, e.g., between the University of Pennsylvania and the Wharton School.  Perhaps someone with more skill than I could create a navbox or something for that? Esrever 02:12, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you talking about something like , with the "mother article" as the headline and then the constituent colleges under a subheading, or have I totally misread what you're looking to do?  If that's what you're looking for, I can whip you up a navbox in either that style or in the style of  in about ten or fifteen minutes ... less if you already have the would-be constituent articles already lined up someplace.  --Dynaflow babble 02:19, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: On second look, there are enough articles that the navbox would end up looking more like either  or  in terms of dimensions and the number of subheadings.  --Dynaflow babble 02:31, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: D'oh, that should've said infobox.  I was thinking of something to use for the individual schools of a university, like the UPenn and Wharton example, or Vanderbilt University and its College of Arts and Science. I don't know what fields one might add to distinguish the two; perhaps  is already sufficient in the way that I've sort of bastardized it at the CAS page. Esrever 02:46, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Heh, I've already started on a navbox for Penn because it seems to need one.  I think what you're doing with that infobox is sufficient, except that you may want to ask at Template talk:Infobox University if the template's maintainers can program in a line for "Sponsoring institution" or something like that, or you can program it in yourself if you think you can do it without making the template explode or melt.  Come to think of it, Carnegie Mellon West seems to be in need of something like that too.  Hmm... --Dynaflow babble 03:02, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Separate "College" and "University" categories? 

message: Here is an articles about colleges of education that needs to find an appropriate category. Is there anything to the effect of "colleges within the university"? Thanks in advance for assistance. - Freechild 17:33, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The article is already in :Category:School types.  You could move it to :Category:Types of universities and colleges if you feel it would sit better there.  If you're looking for something like :Category:Academic divisions of a university, you won't find it.  To be honest, I'm not sure that School of Education has much potential outside of "A School of Education is a division of a university that teaches Education."  It' a bit like "A School of Physics is a division of a university that teaches physics".  We're better off having an article on the discipline, Education, and separate articles/sections on individual schools of education etc.  — mholland (talk) 17:51, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: College of...

message: These currently commonly under Schools or Universities and the template does not fit either exactly.
On the other hand there are some that have the Polytechnic in the name but that fit the University category eg  Rensselaer_Polytechnic_Institute .
A modified Infobox for these or perhaps more than one that would cover colleges of education too?
Should this be a child project of WikiProject_Universities?
Some examples for a small country are here:
Polytechnic#New Zealand, Vocational education#New Zealand, Institute of technology#New Zealand
*Aoraki Polytechnic
*Otago Polytechnic
TransControl 11:57, 20 May 2007
:Hi there.  Could you point out ways in which  is deficient in catering for the above types of institution?  Are there specific fields you would like included in a possible new template, which are missing from the current box? — mholland (talk) 02:53, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Polytechnic]], [[Vocational education]], [[Institute of technology]]

message: I have nominated Illinois Institute of Technology for WP:GA/R due to inadequate referencing. I hope the article gets the attention it deserves during this process to retain its quality rating. Please see discussions at Wikipedia:Good_article_review#Illinois Institute of Technology. TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 17:11, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  IIT GA/R 

message: ...And how would we define accreditation of an institution that doesn't grant degrees?  This conversation needs new blood badly: Talk:List of unaccredited institutions of higher learning#Esalen Institute.  The article in question falls under the purview of this project, and a third opinion will be more than welcome.  --Dynaflow babble 20:35, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Should the [[Esalen Institute]] be considered a college?...

message: Has a guideline been developed for determining the notability of campus buildings, in particular residence halls and dormitories? I fail to see how most dorms would meet notability standards. While some buildings may be of architectural interest, most of the articles within :Category:University_and_college_dormitories_in_the_United_States seem to me to be unworthy of standalone articles. At best, some of the information might be merged with the appropriate university article. However, I recognize that this is just my opinion, so I thought that I should bring it to the attention of the relevant WikiProject. Cheers, GentlemanGhost 18:07, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Campus buildings again 

message: I notice some universities articles list which the Greek organizations are available on campus.  Does listing them alone meet WP:N or is there some other guideline to go by?  From the Project page it says Sports, clubs, and traditions -- Mention the sports team(s) of the college/university and what is notable about them. Here is also a good place to mention specific traditions of the college/university, like students' union activities, a student newspaper, fraternities, regular activities, etc. is just having fraternities make them notable?  --Jerm  (Talk/ Contrib) 18:46, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Greek Organizations

message: If anyone has the time and interest, Bowling Green State University is in desperate need of significant editing, reorganization, cleanup, sourcing, and...well, nearly everything.  It's in bad shape.  --ElKevbo 08:33, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Bowling Green State University

message: I have just completed a review of this article, and am letting you know that I've listed it as being of GA standard. --Fritzpoll 07:41, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Patrick Henry College]]  

message: I am troubled by the proposed rigidity of the standardization for entries on universities and colleges. One of the most useful and appealing things about the wiki is the the colorful and authentic descriptions that the authors of these entries often capture, not to mention the fun debates, and even the playful momenst of vandalism (just make vandals haev to use their real names) that ensue. Hamstringing these qualities seems to defeat the purpose and it does make the wiki less interesting, these entries more mindnumbingly boring and much less useful. The way the wiki is going in this area to judge from some of the entries that are most mighly rated is to crush out any sense of life or fun to be had in reading these entries--and people really do read them, and often to get  a flavor of a place before deciding to invest in a closer look or egads the 150K or so it will cost for the next four years. What users can do BEST is capture that personality in an authentic way.
So I beg of you to loosen up here and make room for life, for fun, for personality--these are the qualities that make the wikpedia more interesting  than any other "authortity" on any subject. It's not as if these places don't HAVE personalities, eh? Because if they all end up in the same dull numbling barren authoratativish hoohah, lordy lord please help us. (Wingnut99 15:39, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I'll take a moment and respond. The dang philosophy or goal here is pretty similar to most other Wikiprojects: improving articles. I doubt anyone here would be restrictive if people have better ideas suited to particular institutions; I've yet to see a Wikiproject that's stubbornly restrictive and I don't think any of the articles have had the life crushed out of them. Color and personality of a campus will always shine through if it really exists. Even so, this is an online encyclopedia and not an admissions pamphlet, so keep that in mind. Thanks for your thoughts! =) --Midnightdreary 16:48, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is the dang philosophy and or goal here?

message: The first ranking of UK universities on environmental criteria has been published: http://peopleandplanet.org/gogreen/greenleague2007. Might be worth a mention somewhere. Cordless Larry 10:50, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Green rankings

message: Ummm... The top part of the article looks absolutely horrendous, in regards to the Infobox placement and the outrageously large picture there. I tried to fix it, but the same IP keeps formatting it that way. I don't want an edit war, but it looks terrible. Regards, Cool Bluetalk to me 12:40, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. First, there are far too many images of the Cathedral of Learning - it's a gorgeous building but, really, it looks pretty much the same from all sides. I'd recommend a gallery because there are just so many images. I'm leaving a similar comment on that article's discussion page. --Midnightdreary 13:03, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  University of Pittsburgh 

message: Please watch List of unaccredited institutions of higher learning and other related articles.  This particular article has grown out of hand in the recent past and drastic action by a handful of editors has been necessary to begin pulling the article into shape.  In particular, the list grew enormous with only a handful of citations making it not only an embarrassment but a potential liability as several inappropriate redirects point to this article.  Those redirects are being discussed for deletion but that they were allowed to occur without a peep is shameful.
This particular article seems to be destined for another AFD in the near future but we must be much more careful when labeling institutions unaccredited or, even worse, diploma mills.  Those are not synonymous and we must be lulled into thinking so or allowing our articles to reflect that kind of lazy and incorrect information.  --ElKevbo 03:06, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The article is now up for AfD.  It is, indeed, stunning how out of control that list got.  The only reason I can think of for preserving it would be as a case study in the perils of article ownership.  --Dynaflow babble 04:35, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[List of unaccredited institutions of higher learning]]

message: I'm fairly new to this, so anyone with more Wikipedia experience feel free to speak up. If the point of Wikipedia is to be encyclopedic on some way, why are there list of alumni separate from the college/university articles? I suppose part of the question is: what is the purpose of these lists? Isn't that the point of our standardised Notable persons section? Do people really just say "hey I want to know every single person with or without a wikipedia article who went to such and such a university"? I feel that having a category of alumni makes sense, but not a list page. Thus, if you want to see a list, just go to the category. And those who truly are notable will be in the notables section of the university page. Furthermore, if someone wants to know if so and so went to said college/university, they should likely see that person on that university's page, or that university on that person's page, or some connexion via a category. It seems useless and superfluous (to me) to have these list articles. If it is determined to be a problem as I see it, it seems to be a rather large one, and would really be a big part of the project to clean up pages. Aepoutre 18:28, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem is that when you look at pages of universities that have a long history (Harvard, Yale, Princeton, etc) and/or major athletics or arts programs in addition to academic research (University of Michigan, Stanford, Duke University, etc.) it is difficult to strike a balance. Do you list all the MVPs of baseball, basketball, and football but not Olympians? Senators and Presidents but not Governors and Congressmen? Nobel Laureates but not Fields Medalists? Pulitzer Prizes but not Tony Awards? What about trade-offs between these groups? There is no standard for these sections. The point is that it is difficult enough to come up with a definitive line of notability for inclusion in the lists themselves, to say nothing of writing a concise section about the "notables" of an article as some lists would easily extend into the dozens. Every university has a different history, strengths, etc and it is far better to keep a separate list of these alumni than subjecting the main article to edit wars over who is or is not notable enough to 1. warrant inclusion on Wikipedia and 2. warrant inclusion on the main college/university page. Madcoverboy 18:58, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the reply. You make a very good point (I went to a very small school). I would say that this problem of very long lists could solved by, say, an alumni category, which would automatically list all the wiki articles about those who are alumni of the school. Yet not everyone will have a wiki article, and it would be far too complex to distinguish just those without as featured on the main page while just adding the category to those with. I suppose that could be done, but that'd be even more complex than the implications of my first question. Agreed? Thanks again! Aepoutre 19:07, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  List Question 

message: Speaking as a former student, the State University of New York at Purchase article is in pretty bad shape. It's full of unsourced statements, probably added by students and faculty for whom these are common knowledge, and even with my edits deleting some of the more blatantly biased statements, it reads a lot like a pamphlet from the school itself. I was hoping someone here who knows more about these things could look over the article and lend a hand. Several professors there reccomend the use of Wikipedia, I'd like to see that they aren't doing so in vain. Lucky number 49 22:21, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  SUNY Purchase College 

message: Greetings! I couldn't find anything by a quick glance through your project's page, but do you have anything like an example outline of how a page should be written, beyond the list of FA or good articles? I'm also wondering if anyone with a better understanding of the guidelines could take a look at the lists of student organizations and "notable" alumni at The Evergreen State College. An editor recently tagged those sections with , but I was under the impression that sections regarding the student orgs and notable alumni are, well, notable when in the context of the main page (except for larger universities that have their own list of notable alumni). Thanks! --Rkitko (talk) 01:47, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project example template? 

message: ***Please help Celebrate the Anniversary of the U of S Talk Help to bring it to feature status !!! We need to Reduce Red Links....Create necessary college articles...Upgrade Academics  Talk SriMesh | talk 05:13, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Celebration of an Centennial Anniversary 2007

message: Can someone with more template experience than me add the nocat= functionality to the various project templates (:Template:WikiProject Universities and :Template:Cleanup-university)?  This will prevent the Project's main page from showing up in the "universities articles needing cleanup" category and the like. I did it for the userbox template, but I don't want to screw up any of the "more serious" templates, if you will. Of course, if someone knows another way of achieving this functionality, that'd be great, too. Cheers! Esrever 20:24, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  templates 

message: Internationally, ARWU 2007 is out.  In the UK, the Telegraph has published a new ranking: not in-house, but the first table in the Torygraph since 2003, I think.  Editors may wish to push POV on their own alma mater update old rankings where they find them :) — mholland (talk) 14:06, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: University rankings (new, not improved)

message: To those who haven't checked it out yet, the 2008 US News rankings have been published. BlueAg09 (Talk) 23:08, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 2008 US News rankings

message: I'm wondering if I can get a larger body of opinions on this article. I'm determined to get it to GA status. Please look over it and let us know how we can make it better. I'd post this at peer review, but it takes months to get any replies there nowadays. Thanks. Wrad 03:29, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Brigham Young University]] review request 

message: Okay, as of about 30 minutes ago, there are officially no unassessed universities articles.  Every single page that's been tagged with  has been given a class rating.  As you can see from the project's front page, there are 18 Featured Articles, 3 A-Class articles, and 36 Good Articles.  It occurs to me that a worthwhile goal for this project might be to go about improving these top articles (i.e., improving the A's to FA and the GA's to A).  Is anyone interested in perhaps pooling our collective resources and going after one of these articles every week or other week so that we can improve the lot? Esrever 05:20, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  the future? 

message: At the above artice, there is some disagreement over the use of the Irish name for this university in the "native name" field of the infobox;  wider opinions are sought. The most recent discussions can be found here --Mark H Wilkinson (t, c) 06:29, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Queen's University, Belfast]] 

message: Suggestions please, re this thread at Talk:University of London.  Looks to me like a routine, spurious objection by a copyright owner, but I'd like to make sure that we're agreed on the logo's use per WP:NFCC.  Does the logo add more than the picture of Senate House I've replaced it with?  It's not a very widely-used logo, because the University of London is a federation, and each (much better-known and more comprehensively-branded) college has it's own logo.
If someone better-versed would also volunteer to draft a nice explanatory message to the copyright holder, that would be useful.  WP:LOGO appears to say we should just put the logo up and wait for UoL to remove it themselves, which seems a little unnecessary to me. Thanks, all. — mholland (talk) 23:03, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Logo of the University of London

message: Several University College London halls of residence are up for deletion - you may wish to contribute at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Schafer House. Paulbrock 17:19, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I commented there to the effect that as a general practice combination articles were the way to go unless it was an historic building. (this is similar to the treatment of individual fraternity chapters) DGG (talk) 19:25, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Halls of residence AfD 

message: Hey all! I figured if we want to be a legit WP we should probably have our own barnstar. WikiProject Video games has a basic image (to the left), and we could use the graduation cap logo we have on everything. I'm just wondering what others think about this and if someone wants to design it! --Noetic Sage 04:49, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I created a Barnstar and added it to the main project page. Check it out and start using it! -- Noetic Sage 02:25, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recognition for participants 

message: Feel free to add anything you think might be of interest.
* Please expand the article Polytechnic University of the Philippines. It seems that it's a little been tweaked. Thanks!
*(7/16/07) - There is a discussion at WP:COIN regarding POV and COI edits at SUNY New Paltz.
* (07/14/07) - Please help to promote to feature status a University in its centennial year: U of S
* (06/06/07) - There are new naming convention guidelines for schools (including universities). A School naming task force has been created to work with this project and the other school related wikiprojects.  
* (04/01/07) - Current relevant Wikipedia:Categories for discussion include:
**Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 December 30#Category:Chinese universities
**Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 December 30#Colleges and universities
**Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 January 4#Category:Emory and Henry College
**Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 April 21#Category:Alumni by university
* (01/07/07) - There is a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (definite and indefinite articles at beginning of name)#Universities_2 as to whether articles on universities should include "The" at the start of their name.
* (03/15/07) - Assessment page created.
* (01/04/07) - Messageboard added  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Noeticsage (talk • contribs) 04:39, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Message Board

message: There is a major problem here - not with the list itself but with the individual articles themselves - even a cursory glance shows that many are nothing more than adverts, I'm going to attempt clean-up but it's a big job for one man alone - please pile in! --Fredrick day 23:47, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of universities in india 

message: I've totally rewritten this list, with hopes of getting it up to featured list status.  I'd like it to be a good template for the other by-state college lists, which are pretty skeletal right now.  Any improvements or comments on the talk page are welcome. Toohool 19:28, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[List of colleges and universities in Vermont]] 

message: Can we please get some neutral editors to monitor and weigh in at The College of William & Mary?  Some editors insist on placing an image on the article at the very top and on the left.  I've provided incontrovertible evidence that that placement screws up the TOC and first section for some readers but the image continues to be moved because "it looks better" to those other editors.  --ElKevbo 11:59, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: William & Mary image

message: I'm having Florida Atlantic University undergo peer review before taking it to WP:FAC. Please review the article here and offer advice/suggestions.
Thanks,
KnightLago 20:51, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Florida Atlantic University]]

message: Hi! The article on Panjab University, Chandigarh is currently rated as stub class. I think it at least qualifies as start-class. Can someone please assess it and make suggestions. Many thanks! Amit@Talk 17:19, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looking over the article, it could probably barely qualify for start-class. The only things that have changed since the last assessment (Sept. 25, 2007) are a few added wikilinks, some rewording, and one reference. Article class doesn't really matter until it's a good article. I'm a bit reluctant to change the rating as of yet, unless one or two more people believe it is start-class. However, what should be important to you is improving the article in accordance with our proposed article guidelines. The article still needs a lot of work, and changing the class isn't going to affect that as of yet.—Noetic Sage 19:37, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks. I guess I'll have to try to make it better. Probably also travel to Chandigarh to get some pictures of the university :-/ Amit@Talk 13:11, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requesting assessment for Panjab University article 

message: Just out of curiousity, have any of you noticed marked discrepancies between recent US News endowment figures and endowment figures made available by respective university publications? There was some discussion of what seems to be overreporting by over 400% at Talk:University of California, Irvine#Endowment again, followed by a system-wide removal of the US News figures from all UC campus articles, which all seemed to have been misreported to various extents. I was wondering if this misreporting seemed consistent across all university articles, or if anyone can explain what US News seems to be measuring here. Ameriquedialectics 22:15, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: US News endowment figures

message: Hey everyone. I should have posted this earlier, but the article on Dartmouth College student groups is up for deletion and discussion ends tomorrow. As Dartmouth College is a featured article, the result of this vote will probably set precedent for our proposed article guidelines. It'd be nice to get opinions from other participants in our WikiProject. Discuss here.—Noetic Sage 15:20, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Student groups article up for deletion 

message: I populated :Category:History of schools and :Category:History of United States colleges and universities today. Enjoy :) —Disavian (talk/contribs) 06:39, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of schools 

message: The October newsletter has been started and will be sent out in the next week. Please contribute anything to it that you think is valuable! The promoted article list is already accurate unless anything changes in the next couple days. —Noetic Sage 18:48, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Newsletter prep 

message: All, if you have an opinion either way, please note that the bulk of user categories for your school of graduation are up for deletion at this page right here. This is a chance to speak your mind about how education can/does/does not affect Wikipedia work. —ScouterSig 03:59, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alumni categories up for deletion 

message: There are two articles that list Canadian university total endowments, and endowments per student:
*List_of_Canadian_universities_by_endowment
*Group_of_Thirteen_%28Canadian_universities%29
They are not in agreement with each for all the numbers and who knows which one is in agreement with the truth.  I have marked both pages to question the factual accuracy.  Having these two lists seems troubleseome as they would have to be maintained to keep upto date information, plus at the least they should agree with each other!
99.231.89.235 05:04, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Canadian University Endowment figure disagreement on Wikipedia 

message: Are templates such as Template:State_University_System_of_Florida to be used only on the actual university articles in the template or should they be used for university programs as well. I ask, because if you look at what links to this template there a number of colleges within universities, centers, and university histories using the template as well. KnightLago 02:01, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think personally that the only articles which have that template box should be those that are linked to in the box. So colleges within universities, centers, and histories should not have the template appended at the end. Other people may feel differently —Noetic Sage 05:03, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

text: It looks expandable, I mean if you really want, you can make the template be a two-column list with the list of universities and the right column could be the departments and whatnot of the respective universities.  However, it would make the template look very messy.   I suggest if you really want to put a navibox at the end of a university article, make your own for that state univ.  See Template:FloridaTechTemplate.  Although this is a private university, it is still applicable for this purpose.  Hope this helps.  - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 07:25, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: State University System Template question

message: Zion Bible College is a new England seminary not accredited by the New England Association of Schools and Colleges, the regional accrediting organization. IPs have just started deleting properly cited information about accreditation without engaging in any dialogue on the subject. I do not wish to run afoul of the 3-revert rule -- any suggestions? --A. B. (talk)  17:53, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: semiprotected for a few days against anons. DGG (talk) 20:22, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, --A. B. (talk)  20:24, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: For the record, I would call this institution a Bible college, not a seminary. (See the linked articles to understand the difference.) Since the Association for Biblical Higher Education has been recognized as an accreditor by the cognizant US authorities, it counts as an accredited school. There are many Bible colleges that aren't even accredited by ABHE, and it's relatively unusual for a Bible college to have regional accreditation. In articles about other similar schools, Wikipedia generally does not include text about the fact that ABHE accreditation does not count for much in the secular academic world. In my humble opinion, that message should be communicated effectively by the sentence in the article lead that says "The school's sole purpose is to educate and prepare Pentecostal leaders for work in pastoral ministry, prophetic ministry, evangelistic ministry and teaching". Furthermore, the article should state that the only major field of study offered in this school is "Bible." With those inclusions, I would acquiesce to the deletion of the information about Zion's lack of regional accreditation -- but the article should have links to articles about accreditation. --Orlady 22:02, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good points, Orlady -- I stand corrected. --A. B. (talk)  22:47, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Zion Bible College]]'s accreditation -- anonymous text deletions 

message: The BYU article has been fully protected due to edit-warring over the lead. We seriously cannot come to a consensus on a good lead on our own. Please come and contribute to the discussion to help us hammer something out that will be in accordance with WP:LEAD. Wrad 01:20, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Speaking of leads, I'd appreciate it if someone would try to expand the lead on Georgia Institute of Technology. —Disavian (talk/contribs) 04:41, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We are having problems with the lead again. Please come back around and help us resolve issues. Wrad 19:42, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[BYU]] 

message: There's been a bit of a brushup over at MIT regarding the number of Nobel Laureates affiliated with MIT. User:MITBeaverRocks has been boosting the number of affiliated Laureates based upon information available in their Nobel biographies and asserting that other universities similarly inflate their numbers by citing visiting and postdoctoral appointments, but User:Mike Lin contends that this is an unpublished synthesis of information. While MITBeaverRocks is likely correct in both quantification and underlying argument, I similarly raised concerns mirroring Mike Lin's. Further input is requested to reach a consensus. Madcoverboy 18:33, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  MIT Nobel Laureate affiliations 

message: Over at Regent University there has been a dispute about whether or not an alumnus who became involved in a national political scandal should be mentioned in the body of the article in a controversy section. An RFCpolitics has already been opened, but input from the WikiProject Universities editors would likewise be appreciated. Please see Talk:Regent University#RFC re: Goodling and comment. Madcoverboy 18:33, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: (Repost from the RfC) As much as I hate politics, I believe that it is unfounded to nail an alumna's failures to the institution who gave her an education unless there is direct involvement of Regent University in the scandal. This sets a negative precedence for future articles, in which people involved in any scandals or controversies will then subsequently bring down the NPOV of the articles belonging to the involved party's individual affiliations, from elementary school to the grocery store they shop at. - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 06:12, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regent University alum controversy 

message: I'm thinking we might start some more infoboxes for furthering our WikiProject coverage into the people related to different universities.  I'm currently in the process of creating a standard infobox for university presidents, and will soon expand (depending on the success of president infobox) to university deans and other major characters in a university.  Is this a good idea or has someone already done all of this?  - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 20:32, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the university president box sounds interesting, but I am not sure if boxes for deans and others are really necessary. KnightLago 20:59, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There's already an infobox template for university presidents:  (which is appropriate for any university chief executive, no matter the title).  Are you proposing to simply edit that, or were you looking to create something new?  No objections either way, really, but I just wanted to you know that such a box already exists.  As far as other university-affiliated people go, I imagine that the above template could be fairly easily adapted for use on those pages, too. Thanks for proposing this.  Cheers! Esrever 21:42, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks!  I'll try to adapt to this one.  If I find stuff missing, I'll probably add fields to the box so we can expand the infobox's usage.  :-)  - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 00:59, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

text: And on that note... I just updated that university chancellor's infobox.  There is no longer a 250x225px resolution limit on the images so we now have more options.  We should probably include  into our WikiProject so we may include them in more university-affiliated articles.  - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 04:24, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent!  Feel free to add it to the main project page.  Also, you might make a note there that  redirects to that template, so people can use it for either "title". Esrever 16:40, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infoboxes 

message: Trouble is brewing here again. Could all those who participated last time please return? I want to avoid having an edit war that gets the page blocked this time. Thanks. Wrad 20:08, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Brigham Young University|BYU]] Lead 

message: At last.  After our long discussion, it is finally here.  The code is done.  - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 06:10, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Universities/COTF]] 

message: :: --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 11:43, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article for deletion: Wessex Scene 

message: :: --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 11:46, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  updated --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 02:10, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article for deletion: SURGE 1287AM 

message: *
*
*
*
*
*
:: --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 18:37, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 19:09, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Multiple Student Union articles up for deletion

message: I'm beginning to work on a new WikiProject Universities header infobox replace our current Template:WikiProject Universities.  Please take a look at the template.  Thanks!  Comments welcome as always!  - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 04:22, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks good, but I'm not really sure why the current template is not sufficient. The only additions I see are the prioritization and infobox-needed parameters. I personally don't think prioritization parameters are necessary - that's why we have COTF. Prioritization is much more subjective than class-ranking, and I don't think it would be of much usefulness. The infobox-needed parameter is definitely useful and, although 95% of all university articles have an infobox, would help eliminate the list of universities without infoboxes. —Noetic Sage 05:17, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's very infobox oriented, but I like the B-class rating.  It gives many Start/Stub class articles goals in fulfilling the minimal requirements to satisfy as a B-Class article.  I think it will contribute and help the COTF.  :-)  Let me know what you think!  Thanks!  - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 05:38, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't much care for the "priority" rating, either.  How do we decide what universities are "highest importance"? I don't think it's something this particular project needs.  Others may disagree, of course. Cheers! Esrever (klaT) 17:26, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have commented out the Priority section of the coding for review of the rest of the template.  Any other suggestions?  Thanks! - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 15:19, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Where do the B-class criteria come from? I can see how it would be useful, but I'm not sure it should be integrated into the template. If its purpose is to help COTW, then why not have some sort of list like that on the COTW page for the stub article? Personally I'd rather see a stub-improvement task force that would do this for one article at a time. It could be very helpful though, I'm just not sure how much I like it yet. Just some thoughts. —Noetic Sage 01:08, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The original coding is from WikiProject Florida.  Well, I think it guided my first couple of articles to achieve B-class from stub/start class.  The 5 categories are simple and easy to understand while still important enough to not be ignored.  I personally really liked it.  But I mean this B-class category system is really what I like about this template, if you don't want it, I don't see a point in keeping this template at all.  - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 03:13, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[User:Jamesontai/Sandbox07]] 

message: Is this article near GA status?  If not, please let me know what needs to be done.  Thanks.  - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 15:11, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll give you a couple quick suggestions. First, expand the intro per WP:LEAD. I'd also get rid of all the redlinks that are unlikely to be articles any time soon. Check your sources, too. The more "fit.edu" sources you use, the less weight the article carries. Even an alumni magazine is a start, but local newspapers, The Chronicle of Higher Education, etc. will give it more credibility. Also, I see a reference note to another Wikipedia article - I'm pretty sure that's not a good idea. Consider putting it up for peer review for some deeper insight. --Midnightdreary (talk) 15:18, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Florida Institute of Technology]] 

message: "Templates" under Manual of Style and "Peer Review" are both red linked.  Are we going to pursue these functions on this WikiProject?  And are we going to establish some kind of Portal Revision Committee that will update the core parts of the portal at least once a week?  - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 05:00, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Red links on the WP:UNI infobox 

message: I'm wondering if anyone actually uses , , or . They seem rather clunky and to almost contradict the infobox template and our guidelines. A university department should rarely have its own article, and the world rankings template appears to be only used on one article. What does everyone think about these templates? —Noetic Sage 06:23, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah I was contemplating about whether to include those links at all on the article, but I thought if I took it out completely...someone's going to complain...haha.  Anyways, I'm perfectly fine with taking them all out... although I think the Campus one might be used for Honors Colleges or something (which, technically if they're off campus and they establish WP:N, then this infobox should be available to them.  The department one should be deleted anyways... it looks... well... horrible.  The World Rankings one is good if anyone actually cared to use that.  - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 07:10, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outdated templates