Talk:University of Cincinnati

message: While I think that the architecture section is very pertinent, I think it could be improved. I would like to see more information about who initiated the plan, when they did it and why.  What is there right now has some definite neutrality issues:
"The university has had a strategic plan for the last decade for new architecture to be built by "signature architects." UC itself has an outstanding architecture and design program, and the efforts to have these famous architects design new campus buildings have encouraged students to attend the College of Design, Architecture, Art, and Planning (DAAP)."
Specifically at issue are the phrases "outstanding architecture and design program" and "encouraged students to attend the College of Design, Architecture, Art, and Planning." These sound like an advertisement for the DAAP.  In reality the DAAP does get high ratings, so possibly some mention could be made of that (with a referenced source of course).  Otherwise, unless there is an article somewhere that states that enrollment in the architecture program is up because of the architecture on campus, these statements need to be removed. 
A.Fox 21:21, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Architecture Section (POV) 

message: Am I missing something here? Youngstown is almost the furthest point in Ohio from Cincinnati. I am going to change this to Cincinnati, but I wanted to add something here in case I am for some reason crazy. 69.61.210.69 (talk) 15:56, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Location Youngstown? 

message: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cubbie15fan (talk • contribs) 20:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conflict of Interest - Student Athlete section  

message: In the fall semester of 2018, the new dormitory Marian Spencer Hall and dining hall OTG (On the Green) were added to Main Campus. Article needs to be updated on a lot of new activity  --Vosa1 (talk) 04:36, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding new dormitories and dining halls 

message: The page (it is not a Wikipedia article - it is not encyclopedic, at all) contains big swaths of content sourced solely to the school's website, or not sourced at all.  This is classic conflicted editing, hijacking the page in Wikipedia to serve as a proxy for an organization's website, which exists to promote the organization.  Sections of pages based solely on the organization's website cannot be neutral; they are just mouthpieces for the organization.  The more a page is sourced that way, the more it is just a proxy for the organization's website.  Pages about universities are very, very prone to this, which is why they have their own "booster" tag. 
This edit, although the edit note said , falls very short of the mark. The page is deeply flawed from the sourcing on up.  Fixing this, will take a lot more work than removing some bits of content here and there. Jytdog (talk) 19:26, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Note on tags 

message: Under the history and UC2019 section, it seems like it that section focuses more on the presidency of the school, if so it should be renamed and add more to that category. 
The research section has facts and figures that are unsupported, should be removed or sourced. 
The controversies, specifically the Sam Dubose section, show some bias in the case. Should be changed to be more informative. Vosa1 (talk) 17:37, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit suggestions