This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Pennsylvania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of University of Pennsylvania on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.University of PennsylvaniaWikipedia:WikiProject University of PennsylvaniaTemplate:WikiProject University of PennsylvaniaUniversity of Pennsylvania articles
Latest comment: 7 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion
The article Mary Cullinan incorrectly reports the percentage by which Dr. Cullinan received a vote of "no confidence" from faculty senate. The wikipedia article reports that she received a vote of 76% "no confidence," but in fact she received a vote of 63% "no confidence." The figure of 63% can be found in the minutes for March 10, 2014 on the following website: http://www.sou.edu/senate/minutes/2014/index.html. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.211.104.148 (talk) 09:34, 2 June 2016 (UTC)Reply
140.211.104.148, I looked into this, and I found the 76% number to be correct as reported by reliable sources, which say, "Those percentages are different than the ones released about two weeks ago which calculated the no-confidence vote percentage from the entire faculty as a whole." I am adding the archive URL of this source to the article. If you have comments or questions, leave them below. —Prhartcom♥ 14:10, 2 June 2016 (UTC)Reply
The 76% being reported in that source is clearly attributed to SOU computer science professor Kevin Sahr, so if this article is going to use that 76% figure then it should be properly attributed to him, because the overwhelming majority of the sources all report the no confidence vote as 63%, as well as the official minutes from the university - 63 percent, 63 percent, 63 percent, 63 percent, 63 percent. The following source reports it as 63% too, but also includes Sahr's explanation for the figure he alone uses: Sahr explains, “The reason that it was reported the other way is the language in the bylaws has to do with the total faculty population.”. So if Sahr disagrees with the "language in the bylaws", which resulted in the no confidence vote being reported as 63%, and he calculates it at 76% based on his own interpretations and opinion, then attribution to Sahr and his 76% figure should be reflected in the article.--Isaidnoway(talk) 16:16, 3 June 2016 (UTC)Reply
