Talk:BI Norwegian Business School

message: Is it relevant to put such emphasis on the EQUIS-certification (It is the only educational institution in Norway which has been certified twice by EQUIS.) when BI is in fact the only institution that has been tested twice? I cannot see any reference to BI failing the (national) NOKUT-evaluation, even though this was a much bigger issue in Norway. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.179.150.194 (talk) 21:05, October 29, 2005 (UTC)
:I added an extra sentence to balance it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.179.150.194 (talk) 23:48, October 29, 2005 (UTC)
:Seems like someone has been editing, removing the negative part (see above). It is not very flattering for an "academic" institution that the negative part of their history is simply erased without debate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.37.52.102 (talk) 09:12, December 3, 2005 (URC)
::I have gone through all past revisions of the article and restored some information that was removed and requested references for a lot of information. As for the information about having failed NOKUT twice, I do not want to reintroduce that into the article without a proper citation. __meco (talk) 08:44, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  EQUIS certification 

message: BI Norwegian School of Managment changed it's name today, to BI Norwegian Business School. The article and article name should be edited concerning this. 
Source: http://www.bi.no/en/About-BI/News/News-2011/BI-to-change-its-English-name/  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.165.69.90 (talk) 15:30, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name change 

message: Information about a blogger, Elisabeth Norheim, has repeatedly been placed in the introduction to this article. This seems inappropiate for an article on the school per WP:IRI, and even if it was, it does not belong in the intro. Otebig (talk) 12:33, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Elisabeth Norheim 

message: Prior content in this  duplicated one or more previously published sources.  Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)
For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  — Diannaa (talk) 00:38, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed