Talk:University of Monterrey

Recent Deletes
Seems like someone is trying to delete the criticism section. Of course, it is not enough reason, but articles about competing institutions (like ITESM) have criticism sections, and it is only fair that this article has its own. However, the most compelling reason to have this section is that the text in that section has verifiable references, which means that deleting them will reduce the article's quality, not expand it. This means that removing the section will be against making wikipedia a better resource. Finally, no institution is perfect, and articles in wikipedia strive for neutrality. A criticism section is a good way to achieve this. Hari Seldon 01:53, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * FALSE!!! The ITESM doesn't have a Criticism page... so, if you want to do this on the Universidad de Monterrey page, that's fine, do it, but you'll have to write a whole Enciclopedia of everything that ITESM could be criticized for.

Please see: this link. Additionally, I am sorry to inform you that wikipedia does not work on a score settling basis. Just because the article about the competition haves or doesn't have an item, it doesn't mean that this article should have it. The purpose of the encyclopedia is to document and display published knowledge. In this case, "anything that the ITESM could be criticized for" may not be published knowledge. It is not the purpose of wikipedia to emit criticism, but if somebody else makes the criticism, and it can be referenced, it is wikipedia's job to portray said information as referenced. Deleting referenced information is vandalism. Adding, re-writing, and otherwise improving the article is not. Please consult WP:NPOV and WP:V for more information. Hari Seldon 21:53, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Hari, I can see you graduated from ITESM, therefore you're biased. Very biased...
 * Also, I can see you are one of the top contributors to the ITESM article, making edits from: "is one of the most important private schools in Mexico and Latin America" to "is for far the most important private school in Mexico and Latin America".
 * C'mon, what are you trying to prove! Who said this? YOU?!!! Please add references...
 * So, I'm guessing you hate the Universdad de Monterrey or simple just dislike it, as could be considered normal...
 * Also, the date I made the above comment, there was NO criticism section on the ITESM page. I suppose it was created right after that (strange, don't you think, as you're the main editor on ITESM page).
 * But anyways, I'm sure if somebody works on it for half an hour, they can find more than 100 references or "published knowledge" referring to bad stuff ITESM could be criticized for (just for headsake, I've been told www.dormidoandrade.com, a porn page, displays TONS of ITESM alumni). But this is not the case...
 * WIKIPEDIA SHOULD NOT BE USED AS A DIFFAMATION WEAPON AGAINST RIVAL INSTITUTIONS OR PEOPLE.
 * I just think that in UdeM's case, criticism to such an extent could have a whole and independent article about it. I'm not denying what happened, I just think that on the CRITICISM section, a brief summary should be included, and a reference to the main article.
 * Anyways, don't be surprised if a heavy ITESM criticism article show up soon... (May 25th, 2007)

Of course, my presumed bias is proven when you note that I am the one defending the position that the ITESM also have a criticism page. And, by the way, I did add a source to the statement that the ITESM is the most important private school in Mexico and Latin America. It is a ranking by the Economist. Please read the statement. I don't dislike the UDEM, I have friends and family in that school. I also find your statements disturbing, bordering on personal attacks, and uncalled for. The date you made that the criticism section on the ITESM page disappeared, it dissapeared due to a misunderstanding. You should have checked the article's history. The section returned and is still there. "I've been told" is not a reliable source, and the criticism section is not about what the institution could be criticized about. However, El Porvenir, El Norte, and Milenio are reliable sources, and the criticism section is about what the institution has already been criticized about. (Such as what is listed in the criticism section in this article, and in the ITESM article). In any case, the criticism section makes reference to comments by certain editorials on the contradictions of the institution. You see, any university may have students who do regrettable things on their own, without fault by the University. However, in this particular case, the UdeM's main marketing is "social values". So, the criticism made by these editorialists question, "where were those social values at the time of the crimes?, and why has the UdeM done nothing to prevent this?". In this case, I agree that the referencing sourcing the criticism needs to be added (I'll look for it this weekend), and the examples could be summarized. If you can find information on the University's official position, that would also be welcome, for NPOV. Hari Seldon 02:15, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Udem logo.PNG
Image:Udem logo.PNG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 02:22, 12 February 2008 (UTC)