Talk:Union Literary Institute

Notable people
Wikipedia guidelines suggest not listing people as Notable if there is not an existing article about that person. You non-notable Notables may be deleted. David notMD (talk) 21:43, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Just to add to what David notMD posted, "Notable (fill in the blank)" sections are really only intended to included entries which are Wikipedia notable, with the most basic criteria for inclusion per WP:CSC being that there already exists a Wikipedia article written about the subject. In some cases, the inclusion may extend to entries who/which don't have articles yet written about them, but who/which are almost certainly considered to be Wikipedia notable as explained in WP:REDYES; however, many editors prefer that even in such cases that an article about the subject be written first and only then add their name to the list. Embedded lists like "Notable (fill in the blank)" sections can have WP:Namechecking problems by people trying to add entries that they think are notable, but which don't really meet Wikipedia's various notability guidelines. Since this list seems fairly small that might not be much of a problem at the moment, but it would be a good idea to establish some basic inclusion criteria from the start to try and keep such a thing from ever becoming a problem. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:44, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Lead seems too long
Lead section seems a bit too long which is throwing the article out of balance. Per MOS:LEAD, the lead section should basically only be a summary of the main content in the article: it shouldn't really be the only place where such content is mentioned. It seems that quite a bit of the content in this article's lead might work better added to separate sections within the article body; for example, a "Background" section or a "Curriculum" section could be created and some of the content moved there. The two big block quotes in the lead seem also a bit too much per MOS:QUOTE. Short quotes can be used to further the reader's understanding, but as quotes start to get "too big", the question kind of becomes whether the same content can be expressed in simple text by the editor adding the content in their own words without actually using as much quoted text. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:33, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Fixed. deisenbe (talk) 14:27, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

When closed?
The info box and the article disagree about when closed - 1880 or 1914. And a 1924 newspaper clipping https://www.newspapers.com/clip/5369260/union_literary_instituteits_demise/ documents the end of a legal proceeding that led to the ULI property being sold and the money to go to the state. David notMD (talk) 09:02, 8 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks. My revisions are:

deisenbe (talk) 11:08, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Union_Literary_Institute&diff=920220725&oldid=920212640
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Union_Literary_Institute&diff=next&oldid=920220725