User talk:Fortunafavetfortibus101

Welcome!
Hello, Fortunafavetfortibus101, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one of your contributions does not conform to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy (NPOV). Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.

There's a page about the NPOV policy that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Questions page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Below are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! -- VViking Talk Edits 14:35, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

2020 University Prestige Statements
Hi,

Regarding Drevolt and I's debate regarding prestige statements in the lead section of top university wikipedia pages, I maintain the contention that either we allow certain statements of prestige on pages of certain top universities or not at all. The most objective way to assert these statements is through looking at international and national rankings. My issue with the matter was that Drevolt seemed to be targeting only certain universities (e.g Columbia) when removing these 'prestige' statements and allowing others to remain (e.g Yale) despite numerous rankings favouring one over the other and vice versa. Therefore, what I now propose is that if we are to have lead sections without a sense of boosting or showing a clear bias, we should remove these statements from all top universities pages. This would include statements of prestige made on Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Columbia, Stanford, MIT, UChicago, Oxford and Cambridge's pages. A better way of discussing these universities' reputations (as Drevolt stated) is perhaps by using the ranking sections of these universities pages and not the lead section. Prestige is subjective and therefore mentions of it enable a degree of vandalism. In conclusion, I propose we remove all 'prestige statements' from the lead sections of the pages I mentioned above unless there is ample evidence beyond the court of subjective, public opinion as to what constitutes a highly prestigious university. The most unbiased way to measure this is by the use of rankings and if we are not to acknowledge this on one universities' page, then we shouldn't acknowledge it on any others.

Fortunafavetfortibus101 (talk) 00:06, 13 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi Fortunafavetfortibus101, I agree with you. There's no neutral way to assess claims about prestige, and the best way to resolve the issue is removing the statements. I wasn't deliberately targeting any particular page, I was just in the process of removing rankings that I had noticed listed in the lead of several pages (which there's an established consensus against). But I agree with your general assessment, and I'll support the removal of prestige statements of this sort in all cases. Also, it might be worth posting this to the Columbia talk page as well to help build consensus. --Drevolt (talk) 02:12, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Important Notice
Doug Weller talk 18:56, 13 October 2020 (UTC)