Talk:Concordia University Irvine/Archive 1

Archive 1

Concordia

Moved here from my talk page.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 20:15, 27 February 2014 (UTC) Hey, Alf ... Can you enlighten us as to the problem with Concordia University Irvine updating and enhancing our entry with authorized and accurate information??? We have an incomplete entry, we are trying to bring it up to speed, and you just deleted some new information on a whim. What gives? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.200.229.189 (talk) 20:06, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

No whim; the section is "notable faculty." That usually means notable enough to have a wikipedia article, not just locally considered notable at the institution. Also, when notables do have an article it's usually enough to just summarize what they're known for and let the reader get the details in the article. This:

the most successful female beach volleyball player of all time when she retired in 2012, with 112 individual championship wins in domestic and international :::competition. Misty May is a current Masters in Coaching student at Concordia University Irvine

is just way too much detail and contains way too many "peacock terms" for a "notable people" kind of section. I'm going to move this to the article talk page so others can weigh in. So you work for the school?— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 20:15, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, Alf, I work for the university and was tasked with adding the information you so summarily tossed out without even the courtesy of a notification or rationale. So forgive if I sound a little peeved.

Just so we at Concordia don't invest a lot more time creating content you are simply going to delete without warning, can you enlighten us as to what we are and are not allowed to add? Your opinions seem so very subjective, and I'm wondering what prevents me from just going around deleting stuff from the articles of others in the same way you have... it's a godlike position you've assumed.

So... why don't we start with your telling us who qualifies as "notable" enough to merit a separate article? Do we just create an article about the person and hold our collective breaths hoping somebody like you doesn't pass judgment and wipe it out? We'd rather not waste our valuable time if our efforts on Wikipedia ultimately will be made futile by some editor's personal opinion. Give us some direction here. Thanks.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.200.229.189 (talk • contribs) 14:53, 28 February 2014‎ Moved here from my talk page just now.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 14:57, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Why don't you read WP:N for information on which subjects, including people, count as notable enough to have an article. There are specific guidelines for what makes professors notable, at WP:PROF. Also, since you work for the university, you should read WP:COI, which has information about editing on behalf of your employer. Also, you can certainly go around deleting whatever you want, but you should read the guidelines and policies first otherwise everyone's going to get mad at you.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 15:04, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

How do we get rid of the neutrality and close connection with the dispute on the main article page? Sheafrates (talk) 21:41, 29 May 2014 (UTC)sheafrates

The close connection tag will go away as your edits are vetted by other editors without connection to Concordia, and possible after said editors rework the text to make sure it's from neutral point of view, rather than reading like an ad brochure. The neutrality tag, likewise, will go away after the article is vetted for NPOV. Obviously, the more edits made by an editor with a conflict of interest, the longer before those tags can go away. —C.Fred (talk) 02:25, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

I can see that some work is ongoing for this article. I'd like to join in and help, if that's okay. I live in the area - know people who have attended the university - know of Concordia professors/lecturers who have been noted in HBR and Forbes. If anyone is already working on improving this article, please post and let me know how I can help. Thx. RWyman^t@lk 00:21, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

I've started my work - I have citable sources for new content. RWyman^t@lk 00:54, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

The initial work has been completed - I have removed multiple issues - citations, COI, POV, and Advert. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RayWyman (talk • contribs) 03:33, 16 June 2016 (UTC)