User talk:CityU Webmaster

March 2010
If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
 * 1) editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
 * 2) participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
 * 3) linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. hbdragon88 (talk) 05:10, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

CityU article
Sorry to disturb. Your edit on City University of Hong Kong's ranking section was reverted because of the following reasons:


 * QS World University Rankings and QS Asian University Rankings (or QS university rankings: Asia) have ranked tertiary institutions of Asia separately and independently:
 * CityU is 18th within the continent in the QS World Ranking 2012/13, after: HKU, NUS, TokyoU, HKUST, KyotoU, SNU, CUHK, PKU, NTU, THU, OsakaU, KAIST, TIT, Tohoku U, NTU, NagoyaU and Fudan. You can check up the reference for such details.
 * It has been 12th in the QS Asian University Rankings of 2012 and 2013 only. You can take a look at this official website which clearly states that "The methodology differs somewhat from that used for the QS World University Rankings...". Thus, two versions of positions within Asia in QS rankings should be displayed.


 * Your removal of the ranking table, which is for a quick look of one's numerical results in the latest three major rankings (ARWU, QS and THE), on that section is without proper reasons.

Moreover, your source about the QS under 50 rankings was added. Thank you for providing this information and you can have a look on it to make sure that it is there.

Thanks for your attention!

Biomedicinal (talk) 20:34, 6 July 2013 (UTC)