Talk:University Press (Florida Atlantic University)

POV & Peacock
POV - I'm not sure. I've only asked for it to be checked over. Please read the tag. I certainly think the awards section is POV, and I think the article is unbalanced.

Peacock terms - I'll remove this tag. GreenJoe 02:44, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I couldn't find any POV issues here, so I removed the template. The awards section is fully sourced and the source cited in the History section checks out. There is a passage that needs a source, but it's "merely" unsourced info, not POV. (It reads "In 2007, the UP redesigned its online product and added daily news, blogs, videos from Owl TV and music from Owl Radio. It has become the first such college newspaper in the United States to do so.") --Orlady (talk) 05:50, 28 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Regional awards do not necessarily deserve much emphasis. all but one of these were clearly regional. DGG (talk) 07:24, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Recent Changes
For the owner, you changed it again to funded by the SGA. Because the paper gets funding from SGA does not mean it is owned by the SGA. Florida Atlantic funds the SGA who then funds the paper. So by your logic the paper is still owned by FAU, along with the SGA as well.

Also, I keep removing the list of former editors because none of them are notable in anyway. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collect of information. KnightLago (talk) 14:26, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Student Fees are earmarked for the SGA. The students fund SGA, the university merely oversees the handling of the finances. The SGA is not given funding from the general operating fund. 131.91.94.151 (talk) 15:53, 27 January 2010 (UTC) usemasper

Owner
SGA is funded by A&S which comes directly out of each students' tuition. FAU does approve SGA's budget and has limited authority over them, but I doubt anyone would say FAU's owns SGA. Except for budgetary matters FAU and SGA have no authority over the newspaper and ownership implies authority. In fact there have been times the student newspaper has operated without a budget. So unless you can cite someone that states FAU owns the student newspaper I will continue to change it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.110.159.118 (talk) 23:12, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * So FAU provides the funding, the facilities, the equipment, and a paid adviser. Exactly who do you think owns it? I also notice looking at the UP's website that FAU is directly under the UP's title. Without university approval you legally wouldn't be able to use FAU's name. Under the general information section you have the UP as "Florida Atlantic University's Student Newspaper." Again, come on. This is a paper, while independent of FAU's leadership, operating within FAU. Ipso ergo FAU's paper. KnightLago (talk) 23:32, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

SGA owns the budget the students own the content. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.110.159.118 (talk)


 * Again, FAU owns SGA's budget, who then own the UP's budget. The UP is clearly operating under the auspicious of FAU for all of the reasons stated above. What is you problem with that? What do you suggest we put for the owner in the article? Also, don't forget to sign you comments using four tildes (~) . KnightLago (talk) 00:25, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

My problem is, is that the relationship between a student newspaper and its university is complicated. It's not just a simple matter of who owns who. If the university decided tomorrow that they were going to shut down the newspaper for the hell of it, a court would quickly overrule that decision because of the laws regarding freedom of the press. But if Disney decided to shut down ABC tomorrow no one could stop them because they're a private corporation. If the university pulled the UP's funding tomorrow the UP would continue to operate. If ABC's budget was pulled I doubt they'd continue to exist. 76.110.159.118 (talk) 00:43, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't see you point here?... IF FAU closed up tomorrow so would UP. If SGA was dissolved tomorrow UP was still be around and would have one hell of a store to publish.  --Jerm  (Talk/ Contrib) 00:54, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree the relationship is complicated, that is why I am trying to come to some rational compromise with you. If the university decided to shut down the UP tomorrow, depending on the reasons, there might not be much you could do about it. Freedom of the press allows for free expression without government censorship, it does not guarantee that a paper stay open. And as far as I know, Florida law doesn't require universities to have newspapers. What do you suggest we put for ownership? KnightLago (talk) 01:33, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

This seems to be a good discussion. But do either of you have any sources you can cite to back up your claims? 163.192.21.43 (talk) 15:49, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * ref added --Jerm (Talk/ Contrib) 16:28, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I briefly read through this and I didn't see anything saying FAU owns the UP directly. Which part proves ownership? I did see that Brogan has final budgetary control of the SGA though. KnightLago (talk) 17:25, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * damn... I guess that source would fail WP:OR because one would have to put one and two together. It says that SGA gives Student media its budget and that FAU gives SGA its budget.  OH well.  I doubt there is any statement out that that says "UP is owned by FAU".  This entire argument is silly in the first place. --Jerm  (Talk/ Contrib) 18:32, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

If the argument is so silly why do you seem to care so much? Secondly please stop adding FAU as the owner until a consensus is reached. Each of us have an opinion and it should be respected instead of saying I'm right and then changing it. 163.192.21.43 (talk) 18:46, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I was being blod... and I added a citation. You don't seem to be adding in fruitful input.  --Jerm  (Talk/ Contrib) 20:26, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

List of Editors
I've noticed other student newspaper pages have a list of editors. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.110.159.118 (talk) 00:06, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I know some do, but the majority don't. This is because the editors are not notable. If the editor goes on and does something to be notable, then they can be mentioned. But Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate list of every person who held a position ever within an organization. KnightLago (talk) 00:28, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

What constitutes notability? The very first editor would be notable because she was the first one. While some of the other ones were embroiled in controversy that reached beyond the boundaries of FAU. 163.192.21.43 (talk) 16:13, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * WP:N defines notability. The problem with this list is that these people are not notable. I don't even believe the first editor is notable. You also have the problem that this is not nearly a complete list of editors. There was a first thirty years ago. And for the ones that you claim to be notable, are there multiple secondary sources written primarily about them? KnightLago (talk) 17:23, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * This is a complete list of editors. The UP was founded in 1998 and it has every editor listed since then. Before the UP was founded there were the other student newspapers in the 70's, 80's and early 90's but those would be separate articles. So I think the first editor would at least be notable because she was the first. And since you strongly disagree in listing all of the editors would it be appropriate to provide a link to that list by saying something like for a complete etc...76.110.159.118 (talk) 23:21, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * What was the paper called before 1998? We could put the first editor in the history section and a link in a footnote or at the bottom in the links section to the list of editors. I am fine with those. What do you think? KnightLago (talk) 23:42, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * To be honest I don't remember the previous name of the paper right now. I do believe that in the 70's the paper was called the Atlantic Sun. I agree with putting the first editor in the history section and I'm ok with putting a link to the editors as a footnote and/or in the bottom links section.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.110.159.118 (talk) 02:17, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that link but I'm still a little confused. That talks about the articles being notable not individual parts of the article. I agree a separate Wiki page does not need to created for each editor but I don't see anything wrong with a list of the editors. I see lists around Wiki all of the time including a list of gay male porn stars, many of whom I doubt are very notable. I hope I don't sound argumentative. 163.192.21.43 (talk) 18:44, 11 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I directed you there because you asked what constitutes notability. The notability guidelines do not directly limit article content with the exception of lists of people. In the case of lists of people, notability in a list is covered by WP:BIO, and the list of people section here. KnightLago (talk) 22:29, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

POV tag
I placed the npov tag on the article page because of the issues with ownership and list of editors (above). I also call into question the undue weight give to a controversy with the UP advisor in the history section. --Jerm (Talk/ Contrib) 02:14, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I disagree with the undue weight comment. This controversy made national news. Since it was T.V. news there's no way to really cite it or reference it though. 76.110.159.118 (talk) 02:36, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * What I am trying to say is a large portion of the article is about one incident.--Jerm (Talk/ Contrib) 02:40, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * That's true but how much more is there to say. 76.110.159.118 (talk) 02:43, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * This is not a NPOV problem. The controversy is covered fairly from both sides. Please remove the tag. KnightLago (talk) 03:00, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

First in the Nation
I'm not sure why adding the word "claim" to be the first in the nation does not work. This is the sentence from the reference. I think the word claim takes care of any dispute.

"After perusing every other student media website we could find, we decided to try something that we hadn’t seen: one site that combines the following…[and] Well, we figured out why we hadn’t found anyone else doing this."

As for whether the blog is credible it's a part of The Center for Innovation in College Media. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.110.159.118 (talk) 02:48, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 one external links on University Press (Florida Atlantic 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/20151123235112/http://spjsofla.net/wp-content/themes/mimbo2.2/images/2010-Final-Results-With-Comments.pdf to http://spjsofla.net/wp-content/themes/mimbo2.2/images/2010-Final-Results-With-Comments.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070818125633/http://www.spjsofla.net:80/spj/2007_wins_comment.htm to http://www.spjsofla.net/spj/2007_wins_comment.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100407081326/http://www.dcinternships.org:80/ipj/specialevents/luncheon.asp to http://www.dcinternships.org/ipj/specialevents/luncheon.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110717164024/http://universitypressonline.com/editor_in_chiefs.html/ to http://universitypressonline.com/editor_in_chiefs.html/

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 10:23, 22 February 2016 (UTC)