Talk:University Athletic Association

Enrollment
Should really be undergrad only. Pretty bizarre to see UChicago represented as a 14,000-strong school when their athletic program more accurately reflects their small UG body. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.247.246.6 (talk) 21:18, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Recent change
There is no consensus for this change, which adds some very tangential information about two other conferences. Barring a developing consensus it needs to be removed.--Cúchullain t/ c 21:40, 17 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Barring any objections here I will restore the page.--Cúchullain t/ c 21:55, 20 November 2011 (UTC)


 * One editor's opinion does not constitute a consensus. Where is the policy that if there are conflicting versions with no consensus, the original version must stand? I am aware that there exists WP:BOLD which might not be policy but it encourages editors to make changes to improve articles — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.32.129.220 (talk) 22:59, 20 November 2011 (UTC)


 * In this case your change was not an improvement, and was in fact rejected by multiple editors. WP:BOLD is tempered by the bold, revert, discuss cycle. The burden of evidence is on YOU to defend your change via discussion, and you haven't done this. Additionally, you are engaging in edit warring and will be blocked from editing if you continue.
 * I have now included a source that says specifically that all of these universities are AAU members and altered the wording somewhat to address your concern. Hopefully that resolves the issue.Cúchullain t/ c 23:04, 20 November 2011 (UTC)


 * who are the "multiple editors" that rejected my edits? I only see your name in the history — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.32.129.220 (talk) 23:11, 20 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Nice try. As you know you were reverted by both myself and Dirtlawyer1, and that's just at this page. Your first step should have been to come to the talk page and discuss it. Do that in the future and these problems can be avoided.--Cúchullain t/ c 13:58, 21 November 2011 (UTC)


 * No, dirtlawyer1 called my edit "vandalism", which it was not, and since that editor believed he/she was reverting vandalism with their edit it doesn't actually establish any sort of consensus — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.32.129.220 (talk) 20:40, 21 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I've already directed you to WP:BRD and WP:BURDEN. There's nothing more to discuss here.Cúchullain t/ c 01:19, 22 November 2011 (UTC)