Talk:Memorial Union (University of Wisconsin-Madison)

message: I deleted "and domineering" as connected with beautiful. I don't understand this construction. What is the reference for it?
I deleted "new" about the sign. I saw a similar sign in the early 1960's on the building so I don't think it qualifies as new. Is there any reference source for this being new or a change of policy? The Union has always hosted public events, but I don't know of it ever being anything other than a membership facility.
This page needs citations to third-party sources.FleetCaptain (talk) 21:08, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Edits March 19, 2008 by FleetCaptain

message: I changed a mergeto tag on Wisconsin Union. It had been suggested that that article be merged into the University of Wisconsin - Madison. To me, merging Memorial Union and Wisconsin Union makes more sense. The Memorial Union was the beginning of the Wisconsin Union which supervises two buildings and their activities. Neither article is particularly long.FleetCaptain (talk) 02:52, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Totally agree with merging Memorial Union (Wisconsin) and Wisconsin Union, but not with merging with University of Wisconsin - Madison.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.252.24.161 (talk) 15:05, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger with Wisconsin Union? 

message: I'm conflicted on this one.  The idea that there could be one good Union article, including details on the unions, is appealing.  But separate pages for the Wisconsin Union, the building Memorial Union, and the building Union South seems more useful.  I think the Wisconsin Union article should remain basic while we expand and improve the Memorial Union page.  It is difficult to separate the two, but due to the scope of the Wisconsin Union idea they both deserve their own pages.
What does anyone else think?
Mhansen3 (talk) 19:57, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I would have to agree with you here. The MU is one of the most iconic buildings on campus and, well it is under the jurisdiction of the Wisconsin Union I don't think that's how people identify it. The Wisconsin Union 'organization' and the Memorial Union 'building' are two totally different things.Daniel J Simanek (talk) 20:12, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Separate Ideas, I believe 

message: I think it makes more sense, if there is to be a merge, to merge Memorial Union (Wisconsin) into Wisconsin Union. The history of the organization and the building are heavily intertwined, but the organization pre-dates the building by many years, and as the article notes, its activities extend beyond the two buildings it operates.
Jagapen (talk) 23:20, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vice Versa, Maybe 

message: When I said that certain edits appeared libelous, I meant just that. They look to me to be unsubstantiated negative statements of fact that are published. I am not an employee of the Memorial Union or University of Wisconsin; I am a graduate of the UW and a member of the MU. I have suggested to Union employees that they might check with UW legal department to see whether (or not) legal action over your statements here would be warranted. I don't know what they might choose to do.
I believe additional edits by Tortugadillo also violate both OR and POV policies of Wikipedia. Where is the independent substantiation for these claims? The remarks clearly are editorializing rather than simply expressing facts - if such facts can be substantiated. Even if they could be substantiated, do they belong in this encyclopedia article? Remember that this is not a newspaper or magazine reporting on current events. There are usually at least twenty events happening at the Memorial Union on a given day, many of which are newsworthy in their own right. I expect that there are many independently verifiable instances where the Memorial Union was the site of some very unpopular but uncensored speech. Is that worthy of this topic or an appropriate part of it? I think not, but a NPOV presentation would require that they be researched and presented. But then that, itself, might constitute using Wikipedia for presentation of original research.
Tortugadillo, you apparently don't like the way the Memorial Union is run. You can stand outside and picket or leaflet if you want. Many people have been known to use the Library Mall directly across from the Memorial Union to leaflet and try to persuade. You can, if you are a member, try to get on the governing board of the Memorial Union. You can do a lot to make a change. That does not mean you can or should muck up this Wickipedia article with your disappointments and point of view. If you wish to persuade others here, try doing so on this (discussion) page rather than willy-nilly adding your point of view to the article.
I am glad that I am not the only person taking an interest in  maintaining a NPOV in this article. Thank you Bugsmasher. FleetCaptain (talk)  —Preceding comment was added at 20:23, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edits by Tortugadillo - libelous? 

message: Might as well post written responses to Tortugadillo and his anonymous sock puppets as he tries to turn this article into his own personal mudslinging target. The posted source for pests in the halls mentions a single cockroach sighting in the building over a year ago, which hardly supports the very harsh statements that "the building suffers from poor oversight" and "mice and cockroaches can sometimes be spotted in the corridors".  Security cameras in buildings are not a new phenomenon and are common in both private and public buildings, particularly those that sustain the level of traffic that Memorial Union does.  As such, mentioning them at all is unnecessary, let alone the sinister tone the anonymous editor attempts to create by highlighting them.  Finally, cherrypicking events out of news articles over the past several years looking for "bad PR" is entirely unencyclopedic, and these snippets have no place in a general article.  That these attacks against this page have gotten one user indefinitely blocked confirms that Wikipedia administration considers them unacceptable edits. Bugsmasher (talk) 06:38, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Defense 

message: The current page layout is probably the most optimal for the current content and organization (by this I mean sections, headers, etc.), but is there a better organization out there that will result in a better layout? The problem I see right now is that the layout looks good on some screen resolutions, and messed up on others. I was thinking that a new organization could remedy this.  Any ideas for page organization, like sections names, section breaks and, so on? Daniel J Simanek (talk) 18:15, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page Layout 

message: nuff said  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Orenthal Jus ad Vincula (talk • contribs) 17:57, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Hardly Notable

message: It's absurd to have two separate pages for "Memorial Union" and "Wisconsin Union" since they are one in the same. Only one building now that Union South has been torn down. But why is the Wis. union worthy of an encyclopedia entry anyway..? It's just a student union. All universwities have one. Could it be that the sleazy crooks who run the Wis. Union are looking for free advetizing anywhere they can find it..? 
More importantly, "unsubstantiated" criticisms are not libelous unless they contain false information. It is a fact that Union Director Mark Guthier is a sleazy criminal, and so are several of his staff including Hoofer "Coordinator" Jim Rogers. Both of these men have committed multiple felonies. Don't wanna hear it..? Then don't go looking for information on them/the Wis. Union. You will not like what you find. 
It's obvious that Bugsmasher and FleetCaptain (see entries above) don't like to hear anything negative about their precious Wis. Union. In fact, both of you have committed libel by accusing tortuggadillo of libel. Follow..?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.210.61.64 (talk) 03:03, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  ditto and then some 

message: SUPPORT I believe Wisconsin Union is really not notable or encyclopedic on its own, but its contents could be moved into Memorial Union (Wisconsin). It appears that there was beginning to be a consensus on this over a year ago, but the discussion is a bit hard to follow due to vandalism in between.--BaronLarf 05:31, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger proposal

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Memorial Union (Wisconsin). 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/20070311003726/http://www.hoofers.org/history/Early%20Union%20History.htm to http://www.hoofers.org/history/Early%20Union%20History.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) 14:55, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018)