Talk:Biola University/Archive 1

Belief Statements
The belief that "all those who receive Jesus Christ as their Savior and their Lord, and who confess Him as such before their fellow men, become children of God and receive eternal life ... [and] all those who persistently reject Jesus Christ in the present life shall be raised from the dead and throughout eternity exist in the state of conscious, unutterable, endless torment of anguish" is NOT particular to Biola.

This article is about Biola, and things that are PARTICULAR to Biola. In an article about a pine tree, there is no need to say, "As with other trees, pine trees have roots, a trunk, branches, and leaves." If you are talking about a tree, than anyone with any sense will know that trees have these things.

The article mentions that it is an evangelical Christian organization. That is sufficient.


 * Not everyone reading Wikipedia knows the core tenets of evangelical faith. Are there any actual reasons that the article is improved by keeping this information from the reader?  I would point out that the statement was in the original article several months ago, when the article was much smaller.


 * Please, stop being dishonest: no information is being kept from the reader. There is a prominent link to evangelicalism right there in the article.  If you think that article is insufficient to your agenda, please do modify it.  That way you can target all evangelical organizations in one fell swoop, saving yourself time and energy. 24.113.6.164 09:13, 20 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Something else to point out, though, is that as with many belief systems there are differences from institution to institution, organization to organization, etc. Just because Biola calls itself an evangelical Christian organization does not mean that it believes everything or is limited to everything in the article on evangelicalism. Maybe a better way to write the article is to reference the evangelicalism article and then point out specifics that are more unique to Biola. --Timmo13 (talk) 11:52, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

That's what links are for.
If people want to know the core tenents of Chiristianity, (BTW, this is not the belief of JUST evnagelicals- fundamentalists, conservative Catholics, Eastern Orthodox among others believe this as well.) They can click on the hyperlink within the article. The fact that it is in the older posts does not change the fact that it isn't particular to Biola, which is probably why this was removed (not by me.) That information is out of place.


 * The text in question:
 * As with other Evangelical Christian groups, it is the offical position of Biola University that "all those who receive Jesus Christ as their Savior and their Lord, and who confess Him as such before their fellow men, become children of God and receive eternal life ... [and] all those who persistently reject Jesus Christ in the present life shall be raised from the dead and throughout eternity exist in the state of conscious, unutterable, endless torment of anguish."
 * Looking over it, I'd say it is fairly standard and therefore non-notable. If the tenets included something odd then it would be different. -Willmcw 09:57, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Barry Corey
The article here says that Barry Corey is Biola's sixth president whereas the site clearly proclaims him as Biola's eighth... I know, I know, I can fix it myself... I just thought that we might want to figure out who the others are, too. haha. http://www.biola.edu/news/articles/070510_announcement.cfm

whoops! forgot to sign! Justi521 20:04, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

orthodoxy
"The majority of students and faculty identify as evangelical, but Biola students and faculty hold a myriad of perspectives within the overall schema of orthodoxy. Biola officially holds to the teaching of dispensational premillenialism although it is not necessary to hold to this eschatological view to attend the university."

This seems to be a little too POV (and perhaps copied off a flier for the institute) in using orthodoxy to mean correctness in the sense understood within the institute. For the general reader, orthodoxy is a word that would apply to catholicism, for example. I suggest a phrase like "overall conservative schema" or "overall bible-centric schema" or "overall fundamentalist schema" (I realize the last conveys the right sense to the outsider but is unnecessarily loaded). I'm not evangelical so it's not my place to decide on the wording here. - eeen 15 july 2007


 * the point seems to be that there are faculty and students ranging from anglican, to eastern orthodox, to fundamentalist Djgranados —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 06:50, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

notable faculty
Cinema and Media Arts, the purpose is to list notable faculty, not listing everyone inside your department. We should be focusing on individuals who continue to work or recently worked on projects, that a significant amount of people through out the world would recognize. Formerly being the Vice President of one of Hollywood's premiere agencies, Shapiro-Lichtman is. Working in the entertainment industry for the past fifteen years as a production supervisor on film projects ranging in budget from 15 million to 150 million is. Working as the band manager for a successful and recognizable band like Thrice & Cold War Kids is. Being responsible for the visual effects for Jurrasic Park, Godzilla, Independance Day, etc. needs to be highlighted. Directing multi million dollar projects, Exorsism of Emily Rose, is.

If every university and school listed their entire faculty listed, the pages would be terribly long.

Notable Faculty as per WikiProject Universities
The current Notable list is not acceptable according to WP:UNI. It really should be in paragraph form and scaled down a bit. Anyone have recommendations on how to clean it up? Anyone want to take on the task? Bmstephany (talk) 14:18, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

I can't believe this hasn't been addressed yet. I'll take a pass at it now. If anyone's monitoring this page, I hope you'll pitch in or address issues here. Theowarner (talk) 20:56, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Tone doesn't fit with an encyclopedia
This article uses unencyclopedic words far too much, such as being "proud" to be the birthplace of fundamentalism, as well as numerous unnecessary adjectives extolling the design of the university, when it should be talked about objectively. It's well written and well informed, but not in line with an encyclopedia I think. Killamator (talk) 16:33, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Agreed, and whats with this sentence... "On February 25, 2008, Biola celebrated its 100th birthday with a midnight concert by the internationally recognized band Switchfoot. Lead singer Jon Foreman even assisted President Corey in blowing out Biola's birthday cake on stage." I mean, so what? Please, someone stop this nonsense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.234.147.53 (talk) 09:35, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Noteworthiness of Clyde Cook
While I admire the late Dr. Clyde Cook, there doesn't seem to be anything unique about his own presidency that merits his own section apart from the other Biola presidents. As much of the information was already stated in the general history section, and anything not there would be better put on Dr. Cook's own page, I am deleting this section unless someone has a reason why it should be there. --Villanelle (talk) 05:08, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Centennial seal white.png
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Centennial seal white.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rockfang (talk) 19:10, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Centennial info
I've reinserted the information about the centennial and the celebration. It is part of the subject's history.--Rockfang (talk) 10:08, 18 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Well... it strikes me as trivial. WP:TRIVIA What's so important about their centennial? And who blew out the candles on the cake? It strikes me as pure fluff... the sort of stuff that might be included in promotional materials. And, not to mention, it's completely unsourced. Theowarner (talk) 14:19, 18 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I've gave it some thought and I agree.--Rockfang (talk) 17:47, 19 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Awesome. I'm editing. But, help me with this page. I'm going to be working on it a lot. Theowarner (talk) 17:49, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Proposed for deletion: BIOLA Building
The entire section has neutrality issues (WP:NPOV). I'm not it's at relevant. If it is, it can be reduced a single sentence and added to the history section, I'm sure. Any thoughts? Theowarner (talk) 01:46, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
 * The building downtown is a pretty notable building. While the current section is too much, I think a paragraph under History or under a Campus section (see WP:UNIGUIDE) would be appropriate.  Alanraywiki (talk) 04:10, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

What do you think of this? ''The classical Italian-styled Bible Institute of Los Angeles building was located at 550 South Hope Street and was completed in 1914, largely financed by Lyman Stewart. For many years, it was the tallest building in Southern California. When Biola relocated to La Mirada in 1959, the building was sold to the Church of the Open Door. In 1985, the buidling was sold to Dr. Gene Scott. In 1987, the Whittier Narrows earthquake caused significant damage to the building and it was condemned. The building was eventually demolished in 1988.'' Thanks! Theowarner (talk) 16:06, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Was the "Jesus Saves" neon sign on the building when Biola was there? If so, that should be mentioned because it was such an icon.  Other than that, your shorter version works for me.  Thanks, Alanraywiki (talk) 16:24, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! It's done. Theowarner (talk) 16:48, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I see your point, but obviously this building had quite the history with the city and the school and probably deserves more than a couple sentences. Plus, it bumps that centennial logo back to the edge of the page. Flavius Constantine (talk) 23:24, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I think more about the history before and after Biola should exist, just not in this article because this article is about the university rather than the building. It may be appropriate for a standalone article or included in an article about architecture in L.A. (although there does not yet appear to be one), or just included in the Downtown Los Angeles article.  At least the third paragraph in the current version about post-Biola use should not be in this article.  The article also indicates it was the tallest building in Southern California for many years, which is not supported by List of tallest buildings in Los Angeles for even just L.A.  Alanraywiki (talk) 00:04, 21 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I see that the entire BIOLA Building section is back up. I just don't see how it's relevant to this page. I mean, I get that the building existed. I get that it was an important building. And sure, maybe it's own page would be appropriate. Let me show you what I'm thinking on just the first paragraph:


 * So, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't enough to give the address? And frankly, I would just say: "In downtown LA." We have to say it was across the street from the library? Doesn't that seem... too conversational? Or something. And then to say that the library still stands today? This is not relevant. When it was complete... that goes in. Who paid for it... that goes in. This claim that it was the tallest building in Southern California is... well, unsourced. So, that's my edit of just the first paragraph.


 * I'll make those changes now. Theowarner (talk) 15:54, 21 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure why this section on a historic LA building was deleted. -- 202.124.73.28 (talk) 02:20, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Proposed for deletion: Chapel
This is the section I'd like to delete. The second paragraph is, of course, just student policies and while interesting, hardly worth of inclusion here. The paragraph above is completely without reference. Also, it has the tone of being celebratory. Like: what a great a chapel, so many people have spoken there! But, frankly, just about every building on every campus can probably list of people who have spoken there. There point is: it's a place where people speak. And then, it's not that important. I would for someone to be able to describe it architecturally. But, for now, "Biola's chapel is a forum for visiting speakers," is not interesting or worthy of inclusion here.

Any thoughts? Theowarner (talk) 16:19, 20 August 2010 (UTC)


 * "Chapel" at Biola is not a building, but rather a set of requirements for the students to attend approved events throughout the semester. Reference here: Biola Chapel, first two paragraphs.
 * For the second paragraph in the article, I agree with you. Either it should be deleted or just summarized to one sentence. --Timmo13 (talk) 12:04, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Torrey Honors Institute Merger

 * Support The Torrey Honors is but one program at Biola. Merger will improve the Biola article.--S. Rich (talk) 18:18, 8 October 2010 (UTC)


 * "Against" The Torrey Honors Institute is not just a program at Biola, but is almost a completely different school. Credits have to transfer from Torrey to Biola. The program is also unique from not only Biola but from undergraduate education across the board. It is the only school modeled after the Oxford model. It is interesting to note the Oxford recently ran out of money and is no longer running their institute the same way anymore, making Torrey even more distinct. Although Torrey is a part of Biola, it is different enough and unique enough to have its own article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Richieg (talk • contribs) 01:32, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The Torrey Honors program is an alternative general education requirement fulfillment option for biola students. To be in Torrey you must be a biola student. It is not possible to be enrolled in a different university from biola and be in the torrey honors program unless you are also enrolled in biola. Torrey Honors satisfies general education requirements only (excluding math and science requirements) so Torrey students take the same classes other biola students take in order to satisfy major requirements. Torry students do not have their own campus or housing. Torrey students do, however, have a titanic sense of entitlement and soaring matter of fact eliteness largely due to their complete lack of self-awareness as they are at a Bible college that teaches noah's ark happened in real life and not attending Oxford University during the 1900s. The Torry Honors program should hardly be mentioned let alone get its one page. 2601:204:C800:99C0:3C9D:C8EA:62CE:A742 (talk) 06:30, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
 * "Against" The Torrey Honors Institute is a different discipline in education modeled after programs at Oxford University employing aspects altogether different from those within the main university. Although operated within the Biola campus, the Torry Honors Institute functions as a separate and individual unit. Likewise, the Biola Youth program offers 'Star Academics' which offers tutorial and class coursework for basic academic courses such as physics, calculus, foreign languages, etc.  The Biola Torrey Academy, however, is a separate school focusing on classically informed and holistic approach education.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by Momsterluv (talk • contribs) 01:06, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Strong support:
 * Torrey Honors Institute is completely lacking in third party sourcing, so appears to fail WP:V: "If no reliable third-party sources can be found on a topic, Wikipedia should not have an article on it."
 * The article appears to meet WP:MERGE #3 (especially if unsourced material is removed per WP:V) & #4.
 * The assertions that Richieg & Momsterluv make in favour of retention appear to lack both any verifiable factual basis or any policy relevance.
 * HrafnTalkStalk(P) 04:39, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

History section?
I propose a deleting of the entire section. It has no third party sources and appears to simply be a version of the history of Biola from Biola University's website. There are point of view issues and sourcing issues. Theowarner (talk) 18:02, 27 September 2011 (UTC)


 * The whole history of the Bible Institute Of Los Angeles has been deleted. Why? Paulburnett (talk) 00:32, 22 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Because we do not allow material that relies solely on self-description (sole reliance on such material renders the results neither neutral nor verifiable). HrafnTalkStalk(P) 04:34, 22 May 2012 (UTC)


 * It was all easily sourceable stuff. I encourage editors to put the material back in, from this version. -- 202.124.75.16 (talk) 00:45, 29 May 2012 (UTC)


 * I've added back a rewritten and sourced history section. -- 202.124.73.28 (talk) 03:53, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I did some revision to the history section to provide some academic sources for the historical information presented. I wrote a Ph.D. diss. that has been published as "When Streams Diverge" that is to date the most detailed academic study of Fundamentalism and Biola in Los Angeles through 1929.  My opinion about the sources cited in the article is that they are too general and at several points do not apply specifically to the topic, hence, I tried to strengthen them with more specific academic sources from the field.  I can add references to primary source material, but wasn't sure if that is the best way to approach a Wiki article.  For example, I can source primary reference material from many private collections, but is this in the public interest?  Hopefully my edit is fact based and neutral point of view, although I have added material that is not commonly used or known by Biola University.  For example, very few know about the role of a man by the name of A. B. Prichard, the school's first vice-president, because official school literature has omitted references to him--even if his early role was, admittedly minor.  I tried to maintain the same content in the section but made some style changes, changing some passive to active voice and the like.Daniel Draney (talk) 21:14, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * We shy away from primary sources for encyclopedia articles as using them often entails conducting original research. We're here to summarize existing information, not create new information.  And please be careful not to overemphasize anything that hasn't been widely covered by reliable sources. ElKevbo (talk) 22:00, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Primary sources are the correct sources to be using. Reading primary sources is not original research. Using sources that reference primary sources allows for corruption of the information therefore the sources referencing the primary sources should be verified by comparing them to the primary source therefore primary sources are the correct sources to be using. Referencing primary sources does not create new information. 2601:204:C800:99C0:3C9D:C8EA:62CE:A742 (talk) 03:56, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Claim re U.S. News Ranking
I question the statement that "In its 2013 college rankings, U.S. News & World Report ranked Biola in the top tier of its 'Best National Universities' category,[29]ranking Biola 174 out of 281 National Universities." U.S. News did not divide that category into tiers, and if it had I doubt that the first tier would extend as far down as #174 out of 281.

Whoever wrote this may have been referring to the fact that U.S. News ranked Biola as a national university rather than a regional one. That's a perfectly reasonable point to make. But as written, the claim is that U.S. News deemed Biola stronger than most other national universities. That claim is untrue.

Rather than change the text myself, I decided to write this comment and see if anyone has a response. Perhaps the claim is justified for reasons that are not apparent to me.


 * Because nobody has responded to the earlier query, I deleted the words "the top tier of". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.4.239.249 (talk) 22:02, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Biola University. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130524155722/http://studentlife.biola.edu/spotlight-pages/biolas-statement-on-sexuality to http://studentlife.biola.edu/spotlight-pages/biolas-statement-on-sexuality

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 10:17, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 one external links on Biola University. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20150519193124/https://www.biola.edu/finance/pdf/13-14_financials.pdf to https://www.biola.edu/finance/pdf/13-14_financials.pdf
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20140722141704/http://biolamissionsconference.com/faq.html to http://biolamissionsconference.com/faq.html
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20071221065240/http://www.talbot.edu:80/studentlife/oncampusactivities.cfm to http://www.talbot.edu/studentlife/oncampusactivities.cfm
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20121005071441/http://studentlife.biola.edu:80/campus-life/student-handbook/chapel-attendance to http://studentlife.biola.edu/campus-life/student-handbook/chapel-attendance
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20071011225143/http://biola.edu:80/news/articles/2007/071008_manhattan.cfm to http://www.biola.edu/news/articles/2007/071008_manhattan.cfm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 17:00, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Biola University. 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/20110521210513/http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities to http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities
 * Added tag to http://www.biola.edu/academics/torrey/faculty/profile.cfm?n=john_reynolds
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140211181653/http://100.biola.edu/index.cfm?pageid=33 to http://100.biola.edu/index.cfm?pageid=33

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) 18:39, 20 July 2017 (UTC)