User talk:Gpinder

http://healthexeclynx.org
Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that exist to attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam policies for further explanations of links that are considered appropriate. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you.--Hu12 20:09, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I appreciate your feedback, but I'm surprised our link is handled differently than another one on the same page-- mastersinhealthcare.com - which essentially offers the same kind of resource. (In fact, that site might be more insidious since it is now receiving ad dollars for its listings and we do not). The link I added does not send people to a direct provider, but rather to a listing of an aggregated list of numerous MHA providers. It's just a resource. Yes, we built the site, but it's a resource for the entire profession, not just the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

While I'm on the subject, why is it okay to exclude a non-profit source on one listing while allowing for-profit vendors on another (e-learning). That's inconsistent.

Regards, Gene Pinder Assistant Director UNC-Chapel Hill

merge
The pages for the individual departments in your school are non-viable. We have essentially no such articles, and regardless of any personal opinion I might have, I can tell you as an experienced administrator here working with pages from academic institutions, that in practice they do not have any realistic chance of being accepted in a discussion at WP:AFD. For a guideline for how to write about articles in which you have a conflict of interest, please see WP:BFAQ--though written for businesses, it applies just as well to non commercial organisations.

I am among those (few) administrators active here in trying to get the optimum presentation of higher education in Wikipedia, and we know how much to try--we can not do other than will be accepted by general consensus here. . We have worked with other universities on this, and  those who have followed our advice have good extensive appropriate articles for their schools,and those who have not, have found the articles on individual departments deleted and the articles on the schools greatly truncated. Please integrate the articles on the separate departments into the main article--cutting them to perhaps three paragraphs each. Please remove all promotional language. The style for an encyclopedia is not the style for a college web page. Our reputation depends on being an encyclopedia providing the sort of information people look for in an encyclopedia, and not a source for promotion. I will then tell you what additional material would be appropriate, and help you find the best way to add it following our accepted practices. I hope for your cooperation as a fellow higher education professional; for further advice or discussion, please feel free to contact me by email from the link on my user page. DGG (talk) 09:13, 23 March 2008 (UTC)