Talk:Roger Williams University School of Law

Untitled
Please do not put discussion within the article. If there is something worthwhile that you would like to add to the article, feel free. Also, sourced corrections are welcome (by the way...linking to the bar passage rates from Roger Williams promotional material...maybe not such a good source).

As others have mentioned, the majority of this article was obviously written by staff at the school. So not terribly neutral. Any attempt to redress this situation would be great.

Tox07 09:14, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Reputation
I'm glad that people are attempting to fix this article but it's one-sided enough without removing any tiny bit of (sourced) negative contribution. I'll concede that the link to the average salaries is a couple years old and can be removed. I'll look for a more recent source which will undoubtedly give the same results.

But the Vault.com link to the "underated schools" is at least as poor a source. The link lists about half of the schools in the US as "underrated", for one thing.

Also, when you actually read the comments for Roger Williams, it says "Great students who choose the school because of all the full-tuition scholarships the school give out."

That's a backhanded compliment. It's implying that school has a very bad reputation and "great students" only go there because they're given full scholarships.

Finally, saying "currently, Roger Williams is a fourth tier law school" is a clear case of weasel word usage. It's implying that the school is up and coming and will one day soon get out of the fourth tier. Any evidence of this?

Tox07 13:59, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

the schools intro article needs edited. the current news should either be moved from the intro into its own section or removed all together. stuperduper seems to only be posting about this one topic & determined to include his/her opinion. with a current news event like this the info is already outdated.

Removing Unsourced Material
Full disclosure – I’m writing from the Public Affairs office at RWU.

The final paragraph of this entry (which actually appears under the Sources list) is entirely unsourced and as far as I can tell, stands in violation of both Wikipedia’s verifiability and neutrality tenets. It also seems to be this user’s only post to Wikipedia, and he/she has no user page on the site.

Assuming no objections within the next 48 hours, I’ll remove the paragraph. If anyone wants to do so sooner, please feel free to jump in. Bclark204 (talk) 16:31, 21 January 2011 (UTC)


 * After searching for source materials, it seems as though none exist online. I agree that the paragraph should be removed, unless a reliable source can be found. Masonpatriot (talk) 18:23, 21 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi there. I'm a member of WikiProject Universities who spent three summers at Roger Williams University as a Teaching Assistant for the Johns Hopkins' Center for Talented Youth program. I sort of "adopted" the RWU articles when I saw how underdeveloped they were. (The photographs in the Roger Williams University article are all mine, for example.) I hadn't noticed the addition of the unsourced prose in questionr, but I would have deleted it immediately if I'd caught it. No worries. And thank you for declaring your potential conflict of interest. I can see you've taken the time to become familiar with Wikipedia's principles and policies, so you're already miles ahead of many well-intentioned but heavy-handed Public Affairs offices of universities. :) &mdash;Bill Price (nyb) 19:02, 21 January 2011 (UTC)