User talk:Inquietudeofcharacter

Stone-Campbell Vs. Restoration Movement
This is a bit of a tough one. I have to acknowledge that the books I have seen tend to favor the former, but they may be a comparatively unusual sampling. My personal preference would probably be to list it as a WP:RM and see what sort of response we get. I imagine that the requested move, if somewhat controversial, and it probably will be at least somewhat controversial, will get some input from others, particularly as I'm fairly sure it will appear on the Christianity WikiProject's article alerts section. That would probably be the least troublesome way to go. And thanks for having remembered the SMU conversation. I hope everything worked out basically satisfactorily. John Carter (talk) 01:10, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, I wasn't even aware of it, but WP:RM sounds like an excellent idea. I think it worked out fairly well considering the circumstances. --King of the Arverni (talk) 13:33, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Eastern
There are hundreds, if not thousands, of colleges and universities named Eastern something. I'm sure most of them are nicknamed "Eastern" by their students. Adding them all to the dab page is unworkable, and there's no reason to single out Eastern Nazarene. I imagine this situation is one of the reasons we have WP:DAB. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:57, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I disagree. I did utilize discretion when adding the education bits from other dab pages, but I didn't think that I "singled out" anything inappropriate, especially since there are individuals who refer to the institution in question as "Eastern". I'm usually considered a "stickler for the rules" (though I suppose that I care more about the core content guidelines, like V and NOR), but in this case, and especially since the dab page isn't overly long, I don't see how removing it improves the encyclopedia. If we were dealing with a page that really had "hundreds, if not thousands" of entries then I might agree with you. I also might be more inclined agree with you if you were to propose a better solution than simple content removal. I may not have named any of these schools, but I would like readers to be able to find them. If you have an alternate solution to propose, I'd love to hear it and reach some consensus. --King of the Arverni (talk) 22:19, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * There are a number of problems. First, if you have Eastern Nazarene, then why shouldn't other people come along and add their alma maters? Eventually, we'd have hundreds of such entries. (I had already pruned a bunch off previously.) You could try creating an article called List of schools with Eastern in the title, but I'm sure that would get deleted very quickly. The thing is, Wikipedia can't be all things to all people; in particular, it is WP:NOTDIRECTORY. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:45, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, I totally agree, but I don't see everyone coming along and adding their alma maters. I see one guy taking two "Eastern U/C" pages and adding relevant entries to "Eastern" (no, I didn't include the University of Baltimore because it's changed names, but I didn't remove it from the other dab page). I've no intention of creating an awkward list like that, and I'm not sure why you'd suggest that I do so if we both know it wouldn't fly (it's certainly not the collaboration and dialogue I was hoping for!). I'm not convinced that this is a slippery slope, either -- I'm going to run a "real" search now to see just how many eastern u/c articles there are. BTW, I'm really quite excited to hear your response to my question on your talk page! --King of the Arverni (talk) 22:54, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Nvm, I can see how you perceive this, especially as someone with a lot of DAB experience. I agree with you 100% now, haha. Sorry for the hassle. --King of the Arverni (talk) 22:58, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!
Hi, I just wanted to say thanks for suggesting WP:UNI to me. I don't know why I didn't join much sooner! Thanks again! - Masonpatriot (talk) 19:16, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * My pleasure! I'm glad you're enjoying the participation! --King of the Arverni (talk) 19:56, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

RE: Link
I was using Huggle at the time of the edit, and i mistook the edit for something else. It was a stock warning template as you said. I have explained what happened on User talk:Agg56tt page. Sorry about this ill be more careful next time.  Kyle  1278  03:14, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * No worries; I understand totally. --inquietudeofcharacter (talk) 04:08, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Loyno
No problem. There are so many of them NCs, no one can be expected to be able to keep track of them all :).—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 15:06, August 10, 2009 (UTC)

Central MS
Yes, I still think it should be merged. If you dispute the concept of Central MS being merged, I will be happy to start a discussion page. WhisperToMe (talk) 01:54, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm inclined to agree, but I'd like to see some specific reasons (since I'm not familiar with middle school article guidelines). Let me know what your specific rationale is; I'd love to discuss it. --inquietudeofcharacter (talk) 02:07, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Daniel Webster College
The Daniel Webster College page is clearly being used by individuals who intend to smudge the name of the College, presumably because they are disgruntled because of the sale to ITT-ESI. Every edit I have made, except a ref tag error that caused the template to fail, for which I apologize, has been factual and backed up by sources. I have corrected a number of factual errors and I was also the one who identified the new president of the college (Nadine Dowling).
 * R: I don't care what you've done; that still sounds like WP:OWN and it's still a focus on contributor rather than content, which is against Wikipedia guidelines.

Meanwhile, please comment on the following:

1. Link to ITT Educational Services, Inc.: In your own words, "unless ITT ES owns several things besides ITT Tech, this works." I have explained that ITT-ESI owns at least two entities: ITT Tech and Daniel Webster College. It makes no sense, therefore, to link ITT-ESI to ITT Tech, no more than it makes sense to link ITT-ESI to Daniel Webster College. I was the one who added the ITT-ESI link when there was a separate page for ITT Educational Services, Inc. For reasons I do not understand, this page no longer exists, and redirects to ITT Tech. The only logical arrangement is to have "ITT Educational Services, Inc." link to the parent company, and to have "Daniel Webster College" and "ITT Technical Institutes" link to the two separate educational entities.
 * R: Two is not, and never has been, several. It's a redirect, and I've said before and I'll say again that if you have a problem with the redirect then discuss it there; don't edit war over at at the Daniel Webster College article.
 * RR: Merriam-Webster Online:several (2a) several: "more than one" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.189.248.170 (talk) 20:59, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * RRR Please don't leave ref tags on my talk page. I'd encourage you to take another look at that entry, since it says "more than two but fewer than many". Speaking of "sticking to the facts", sir. Also, see ("an indefinite number more than 2 or 3 but not many"),  ("Being of a number more than two or three but not many"),  ("more than two but not many"),  ("three or more, but not many"),  ("being more than two but fewer than many in number or kind"),  ("Consisting of a number more than two, but not very many; divers; sundry; as, several persons were present when the event took place."). This is very much a waste of my time. If you want to talk about ITT ES, go talk about it there and stop leaving poorly researched arguments on my talk page. --inquietudeofcharacter (talk) 21:11, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * RRRR You do realize that words can have multiple meanings. This is why the definition has several entries. One of the meanings of "several" is "more than one", so it is simply incorrect to say "two is not, and never has been, several." The fact that you even are arguing this reveals that you really are not interest in facts: To you, enforcing the rules of Wikipedia is more important than the truth. There is more to life than Wikipedia. And how is it that you are exempt from WP:OWN?
 * First, you conveniently chose the only dictionary that a) provided that definition and b) provided such little context for its use! Second, according to Wikipedia, it's not about truth but verifiability. Third, I'm not exempt from WP:OWN, but I'm also don't have an single-purpose account and haven't demonstrated any tendentious editing. This conversation is over. Discuss content disputes in the proper place -- not here. --inquietudeofcharacter (talk) 21:31, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

2. Career college: The page for Career college defines this term as a "vocational school (or trade school or career school)." I have never even heard of the term career college being used in conjunction with Daniel Webster College. As you well know, its history is as a residential college focused on Science, Technology, Engineering, and Management (STEM) education. The college is accredited by NEASC, offers bachelor degrees in aeronautical engineering, mechanical engineering, computer science, social science, psychology, business management, sports management, homeland security, aviation, gaming/simulation/robotics, etc, and has a graduate school with at least two MBA programs. These are not vocational programs and this is not the profile of a vocational school. Even the term "proprietary college" is really bizarre. What college is not proprietary? Why does DWC get singled out for these sort of labels? It really should best be described as a "for-profit college", and nothing else.
 * R: I don't care what you've heard of re: DWC. The career college article defines such an education as "Traditionally, vocational schools have not existed to further education in the sense of liberal arts, but rather to teach only job-specific skills, and as such have been better considered to be institutions devoted to training, not education." DWC is not a liberal arts college, and trains students for professions. You weaken your argument rather than strengthen it by referring to NEASC and an MBA, for reasons I've already discussed on the article talk page.

3. Describing the 23 layoffs as a "media controversy": This is so subjective that I don't understand how anybody can reasonably describe this as a factual statement. The past President declared that he didn't think there would be layoffs. Two weeks ago there were layoffs, and last week the President himself was let go. These events have been reported more or less factually by the Nashua Telegraph, a local paper, in two articles. The events can be described as tumultious, but there is hardly any media controversy. If there is, I would like explained to me what the controversy is.
 * R: You say that "the [article] is clearly being used by individuals who intend to smudge the name of the College [sic]" but your assertion that I was trying to "smudge the name" of DWC was my intention when I added sources doesn't assume good faith to begin with. See below.

I prefer to believe that you are not intentionally trying to damage the reputation of the college, but the net effect of your actions is that you are allowing individuals to create a clearly negative perception. I do find your threat of a ban to be completely uncalled for, when all I have tried to do is to restore a level of factual relevance to the page. If you can point to a case where any of my edits are countered by facts or evidence, then please do so. Further, I assure you that I do represent neither ITT-ESI nor Daniel Webter College. I resent that you cast aspersions on my credentials simply because my IP address is in Pepperell, MA.
 * R: As I've said, adding the sources of which I'm aware isn't done to ruin a reputation. I also think that my concerns about your edits are valid -- try to see this from my perspective. I work heavily with WP:UNI. After adding sources to an article, an anonymous editor who's only really edited this article shows up and seems personally interested in things like jobs at the institution and its reputation, mostly adds sources from the school website, and happens to be in Pepperell. If this editor assumed bad faith on your part, wouldn't you have concerns? According to guidelines, a legitimate concern is not a personal attack. You can take all the umbrage you want, but that doesn't make it any less of a concern.

I have reviewed WP:Talk, notably the list titled "Behavior that is unacceptable", and do not see anything there that applies to my edits. I also have not "blanked out or deleted portions" of page content or templates (with the exception of the ref tag error, which was accidental), other than to remove information that is not factual in nature. I also note, with interest, the entry "Be welcoming to newcomers".
 * R:The only reason I didn't add a welcome template to your talk page, as I usually do, is because you'd already edited Wikipedia before (and the first message ever left on your talk page was... a warning!). I referred to talk in the sense that "you need to talk about this with me" before editing further, according to guidelines, not necessarily in the sense that you needed to read it (although I'm glad that you did; it has some very helpful information). As for deleting, there's a content dispute going on; it doesn't matter if you consider it okay to delete info. that you consider erroneous because it's still deleting useful information.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.189.248.170 (talk) 03:59, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I hope this clears some things up for you. I'm very pleased that we're finally talking about this. --inquietudeofcharacter (talk) 13:36, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

RR: I have nothing to do with the warning related to August 2. I have never edited that page. As you well know, the IP address is dynamic, and gets rotated among different users. For volunteering time for what is supposed to be an encyclopedic body, you have a surprisingly presumptive attitude. Stick to the facts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.189.248.170 (talk) 20:49, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * That's the price you pay for using an IP address; I've already said that I didn't welcome you because you already had one (FYI, the welcoming committee doesn't welcome those who already have talk pages). For someone so upset about presumption, you're rather presumptuous. I didn't assume that the August 2 edit was you, only that I couldn't welcome you as you would've preferred. And you'll have to be much more specific about facts to which I, in you're opinion, haven't quite "stuck" if you want that argument to "stick". Try reading WP:TALK more broadly this time, and please sign your comments properly. --inquietudeofcharacter (talk) 20:55, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Anderson University (Indiana)
Hello. I noticed that you added a cleanup tag to the subject article, but you did not indicate on the talk page specifically what issues needed to be addressed. Do you have specifics that I can engage? Thanks. -- Absolon S. Kent (chat),
 * Yes, sorry, I'll get to it in a minute. I was just reading it the other day and noticed a couple of minor things, but I'm dealing with some other issues at present. Talk to you again soon! --inquietudeofcharacter (talk) 13:33, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

DWC
Because I'm a reporter at the Nashua Telegraph I really shouldn't be editing articles about ongoing topics that we cover; it might produce some sort of appearance of conflict of interest, or something like that. But I couldn't stand seeing that wildly inaccurate statement any more; I had been waiting for somebody else to fix it for ages! - DavidWBrooks (talk) 14:40, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Haha, okay, no worries. I understand. Maybe I'll get around to it, or someone else will see the refimprove tag on the airport article. Thanks again for helping with the DWC article. :-) --inquietudeofcharacter (talk) 14:42, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Hamline University
It would be helpful if instead of polluting university pages with little boxes if you would provide specifics on what you believe needs to be done to conform with the wiki university guide that you seem so enamoured with.

Better yet you could consider making some of these changes that you believe so desperately need to be made. Flashdornfeld (talk) 18:12, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Please don't make personal remarks about my likes or dislikes. Your desire for me to elaborate re: cleanup is reasonable, but not entirely necessary; there are reasons the article has failed GA more than once, and looking over WP:UNIGUIDE, taking it seriously instead of casting inappropriate aspersions on editors who refer to it, might help rectify the situation. In the future, as I do plan on cleaning up the article at some point, please make an effort to respect talk guidelines and be more civil. --inquietudeofcharacter (talk) 18:58, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Tulane Logo
Hey, I reverted the Tulane logo back to the old black and white one because, a. I didn't realize it didn't have a transparent background until I was another computer, and b. Although a higher resolution, it didn't look as good as the b&w version did when enlarged.

Also, thanks for your advice on the edit summaries. Most appreciated. Gonk (talk) 23:12, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Category:Top-importance Chicago articles
If you continue to be actively associated with WP:CHICAGO, please change the date at WikiProject Chicago/members to August 2009. For the rest of this month we are looking for more candidates to be promoted to Category:Top-importance Chicago articles. We are hoping to bring the list of category members to a total of 50. Either you have participated in past votes and discussions or you have recently signed up to be a part of WP:CHICAGO. In either case, please come visit Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chicago/Assessment where we are determining who to add to the September 1st ballot. Some candidate debates have lingered, but there are many new ones from the project's top 50 according to the Wikipedia:Release Version 0.7. Help us determine which pages to add to the ballot.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 03:56, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

CFD
Forgot to tell you — I've nominated Category:Universities and colleges affiliated with the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America, which you created, for deletion. Nyttend (talk) 00:40, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
 * No worries! Any particular reason? --inquietudeofcharacter (talk) 03:11, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

WP:CHICAGO voting for Top-importance Chicago articles
Feel free to come vote at WikiProject_Chicago/Assessment for our next Category:Top-importance Chicago articles. Voting continues until September 10 and nominations/discussions are ongoing for future ballot candidates at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chicago/Assessment.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:51, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Francis Collins (Geneticist) page external links
Hi, Please excuse me if I have missed something, but I left a post questioning the removal of the long list of external links from Francis Collins' page on the discussion page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Francis_Collins_%28geneticist%29 I realize it would be more convenient to you if I left the comments here, but my goal was to open up more generally a discussion of the page and what should be on it rather than have a personal natter. As a more personal aside, I have seen instances of wikipages where people editing with one slant on something -- e.g. a political or religious figure -- edited heavily toward that bias. The other side comes back and edits radically in the other direction. It gets ugly and the results are far from satisfactory. My feeling about these particular references -- which, in honesty, I have not read or listened to -- is that it is not a horrendous set of sources people could look at to get a flavor of how people are reacting to Collins' forthrightness about his faith. While I personally believe what he has done in science is profound, even world-changing, it is also very unusual -- a historic first, at least for the 20 and 21st century -- to have a scientist of this stature and especially one in government -- who is open about his faith. I understand that this makes many many people squeamish, but Collins is what he is and it invites disaster to whitewash the faith issue. Celia Kozlowski (talk) 09:32, 3 September 2009 (UTC) - I'm looking for time to go through the deleted references and restore the ones that are in keeping with the wiki rules on external links -- I'm pretty sure many of them are. In the meantime, the last editing of F. Collins' page has changed what I think you put in there as a direct quote from Collins. I am guessing that this change happened because the person who put it in didn't realize s/he was changing a direct quote. I am hoping that you will revert the change if that is the case. cheers, Celia Kozlowski (talk) 16:45, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) I have no idea what you're talking about -- I cleaned up the EL but didn't remove any references. 2) I have no intention of reverting edits solely based on your say-so. 3) Please leave comments re: your content concerns on the article talk page. 4) Have a great day. --inquietudeofcharacter (talk) 16:33, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Peacock Tag on Boston University Page
Hello Inquietudeofcharacter,

You have added recently a tag to the general article "Boston University" indicating the article contains " wording that promotes the subject subjectively without imparting verifiable information".

I have also taken note that you failed to specify what sections of the article you were attempting to identify and made no further effort to flag the sections of the article you found violated Wikipedia's neutrality policy, I have removed the tag for the time being, please in the future do not simply add template tags without identifying either in the edit summary section or by beginning a new string on the discussion page of the the article what sections or specific lines prompted the editing or adding of template tags.

Thank you for your understanding and cooperation in this matter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Celareon (talk • contribs) 05:26, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Blue Hills Technical Institute
Heads up, I redirected Blue Hills Technical Institute to Massasoit Community College. BHTI was formerly a two-year technical college, and it became the Canton campus of Massasoit in the late eighties, see The building next door, Blue Hills Regional Technical School, is a high school founded in 1966. For the edits on South Shore, Bridgewater and MMA both "serve" the South Shore, as do Curry and Massasoit. Milton is borderline South Shore, as is Canton. My point is, many residents from the South Shore end up attending those as regional colleges, as they also attend UMASS Boston and UMASS Dartmouth. The reality is, the South Shore is not an official region but a lot of commentary comes in claiming the cities and towns inland or otherwise close to Boston aren't in the South Shore. So my thinking is, if you add an Education section and you then proceed to list colleges that aren't in the region in many peoples mind, you are going to have to be fair about it and include BSC and MMA. I know this is simply my own experience in having lived here, but a businessman in Brockton can paint "South Shore Doohickie Repair" on the side of his truck and serve many customers in Kingston and Marshfield, but a strong majority of the residents in Kingston and Marshfield would say "no" if you asked them if Brockton is part of the South Shore. Kind of sucks to have an article like that which presents these sort of problems, doesn't it? Sswonk (talk) 02:19, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Haha, sure does. Shall we add Bridgewater to the "other" list? The only reason I didn't include it in the list before is because I was making sure that the communities listed matched the map -- perhaps you can fix that for us! Thanks for the fascinating Blue Hills info., too. As I'm sure you know by now, I love that stuff. --inquietudeofcharacter (talk) 03:09, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Would you believe I have been looking at that map for two years knowing it is entirely subjective but also realizing anything made to replace it would also be entirely subjective unless it had several colors denoting which lists a given town is a member of? And what if I used the list from the Patriot Ledger, which is the self-proclaimed "South Shore's Newspaper Since 1837"? Sharon? The current map's creator left the building after making less than twenty edits, about half of which were deleted. Then there is the MAPC, which excludes Plymouth because it is not close enough to Boston, so as a result the SSC excludes it and this makes the closest thing to an official designation incomplete. It is not an easy thing to do, draw a map of an area that doesn't really officially exist. I think I could go for a two color map, dark blue for the CZM list and light blue for every other town not on that list but in the article. I would not add Sharon in spite of what the Ledger claims, and even Avon, Canton and Brockton are suspect. Terms like "South Shore" are abused throughout the country by marketers and real estate firms to attempt to give a location on the periphery of a popular, affluent or nice sounding area membership. I also think consensus based on a synthesis of the various lists creates problems for a map. I think the CZM list is the best, but someone will hit back with the Legder claim. Can't win. Take care, I'll get back online tomorrow. Sswonk (talk) 04:03, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Guinness
Hi. I found you in the WikiProject Ireland. I'm currently mediating a case here about Guinness. Can you please go there and give your opinion? Those involve want a comment from someone knowledgeable with Irish matters. Thanks in advance. Bejinhan Talk   13:11, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

College List
Please stop reverting my edits. I did that because the current RFA commenters want them there. If you want to comment, please go here. Note that it took me an hour and a half to do that, so please consider what you are doing before you do a massive edit like that. I also rollbacked it because of edit conflicts. If you want to comment, please go here: Featured list candidates/List of colleges and universities in Massachusetts/archive2. Thank you. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 03:06, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, I do know that 75% of the links lead to the same site. I will fix that tomorrow. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 03:08, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I also want to bring up the NEASC part at the FLC page. Also note that these references are different from the ones that were removed earlier in the year. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 03:24, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * No worries about the refs. I'l just take them out of their own special, and unwarranted, column and place them with the information that's being cited. I'll also re-add the NEASC information, since there's no reason not to and it improves the article. I'll add the tag while I'm doing this, so I hope no one interrupts. I agree with your assessment that it will take some time.... And perhaps I'll get to fixing the NCES refs later. --inquietudeofcharacter (talk) 16:41, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I know that you're helping, but would you please discuss what your doing on the review page. Why did you remove those images? The list kind of needs images anyways. Did you add all of those citation tags to the introduction? If so, please remove them as they are pretty much cited in the text. Also, I heavily modeled this site after the New Hampshire and Vermont articles, so that it all makes sense. Also, I think all of these changes might cause this review to be opposed because it might be viewed as unstable. I also disagree with the redirect as it is the only one out there that is split from the main page. Well this is my opinion, so I'm looking to see what your views are here. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:54, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Why would I discuss first? That's not being bold. If one recognises that my last few edits are helping, that reinforces the fact that discussion can be nice but isn't necessary. Besides, we're discussing here, and not much is happening over at your FA nomination. I've seen you nominate like this before, but I don't understand why you take it so seriously, especially when the nominees are unstable because they shouldn't be FAs. I agree that the tags were a bit much, but I didn't have the time to go back and be more judicious with them the other day (consider: that fact might explain why I don't bend to your will when it comes to discussing every edit) -- and it's reasonable per V, which states that we need to cite each statement with an explicit reference to the content (for example, saying that ArsDigita University has existed for the shortest time is an unverified superlative and may constitute OR, I've seen a few of those claims in that list, since you seem to assume that it's definitive). I, for one, value following V much more than FA status, especially since the latter is intended to be predicated on the former. So, in summation, my views are that you should focus more on article improvement than article status. Maybe then your FA nominations won't be shot down quite so often. I'm just trying to help. --inquietudeofcharacter (talk) 13:52, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I forgot to mention: modeling this article off the NH and VT doesn't give it a free pass (IMHO, the NH list looks like crap). We're doing a much more thorough job with this article, and I'm rather pleased about that. It was also reasonable to split the article based on size and length. There are links between the two; don't worry. I hope you're not taking any of this personally, since that's certainly not the intention, even if it may sound that way to you. Take care. --inquietudeofcharacter (talk) 14:03, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, I see your point. Sorry for appearing like a jerk Sunday, as I did a lot of weird things here that day. I do know though that the other state ones were nominated years ago, so a review might be in order. I did forget about the bold part though, so please forgive me there. Thanks for the full response. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 21:06, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I just realized that I never read your first response until now. Now I really feel like an idiot. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 21:08, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't even worry about it; I've certainly had my bad days before, and I know how that can go. I don't hold it against you, since I know that you're genuinely concerned about article improvement, too. And I really am sorry if I come off as a pain in the ass sometimes, too. I can be very difficult at times! --inquietudeofcharacter (talk) 19:16, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Uni navbox
Hi there. I just wanted to open a discussion about our differing views on Template:Colleges and universities in Oklahoma. You chalked up my differing opinion to WP:OWN, which I think is an unfair allegation to start out with without further discussion, and does not address any substantive reasons why the navbox was formatted the way it originally was. Just to move beyond the WP:OWN issues, here are similar navboxes that I did not create (or navboxes that I did not place in that particular format, if you look at the histories) that are formatted in the same way:


 * Template:Colleges and universities in Arkansas
 * Template:California Community Colleges System
 * Template:Colleges and universities in Los Angeles County
 * Template:Colleges and universities in Orange County
 * Template:Colleges and universities in the Inland Empire
 * Template:San Diego County Colleges and Universities
 * Template:Santa Barbara County Colleges and Universities
 * Template:Santa Clara County Colleges and Universities
 * Template:Ventura County Colleges and Universities
 * Template:UnivSysGa
 * Template:Colleges and universities in metropolitan Chicago
 * Template:Kentucky Higher Education
 * Template:Public universities and colleges in Louisiana
 * Template:Universities and colleges in Maine
 * Template:Colleges and universities in Maryland
 * Template:Massachusetts Public Colleges
 * Template:Minnesota State Colleges and Universities
 * Template:Colleges and universities in Missouri
 * Template:NevadaUC
 * Template:Colleges and universities in New Mexico
 * Template:SUNY
 * Template:Public universities in Pennsylvania
 * Template:Colleges and universities in metropolitan Milwaukee

These are some of the ones I found, so you can see that WP:OWN doesn't enter into this. All of them separate out two-year public (or private, if needed) institutions. Some use the shortened institution names and others don't. I guess I just don't see the the blanket reasoning why 2-year institutions shoudln't have their own section of the navbox, as they are a distinct type of institution, different from a 4-year public institution. I think the issue of name format is just a difference of preference between the two of us. Also, I don't see why the Oklahoma navbox is singled out, or is that just one that caught your eye? Anyway, just trying to get your sense of things in order to resolve the issue. Thanks. - Masonpatriot (talk) 18:46, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for opening up the discussion; I've been very off-and-on lately, and more bold than usual as a result. Thanks for the examples that you didn't create, too, and I'm glad OWN isn't an issue here. Perhaps you offered examples that you had because you are more familiar with them. I'm singling out the Oklahoma template because, as you said, it just "caught my eye", but I have worked on some of these templates and have an idea of what helps me and what doesn't, as well as what's accurate and what's not, so I hope that you'll understand that I'm trying to improve the usability of the navboxes, not undermine your efforts. Now, I understand that you want to separate two-year colleges, but to name one section "public" would, by definition, include community colleges. So to make the second two-year v. four-year distinction after already separating public v. private doesn't work well because it's misleading, and we really need to choose which is more helpful (for the record, I'm fine with either, though clearly not both). Which distinction do you see as being more helpful to the reader? If you'd prefer to lump all two-year together and all four-year, that'd be fine with me. You might notice that some of the templates you cite are actually navboxes for only public institutions, so the two v. four divide works well there. I also seem the recall that the main editor of the general NY template had a field day with overspecialising all sorts of curriculum-related categories there, and I've been meaning to address that for a long time, too. As for the full name, it's not a big deal except that many of them have similar names and the abbreviated versions you used appear, from what familiarity I have with OK colleges, to be arbitrary anyway. I don't think it's a big enough template to worry about shortening names too much, especially if they're not the real abbreviations or make things more confusing for the reader. --inquietudeofcharacter (talk) 19:50, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Thomas More College of Liberal Arts
When you get a chance, could you check the tags at the top of Thomas More College of Liberal Arts. I realize that the contents itself still need "enhancement" to say the least, but I think I just solved the external references one and pretty much cleaned up the tone. If you still have problems with those, you might jot a note or two if the edit summary won't hold them all. Thanks. Student7 (talk) 12:41, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

American International College
Hey Inquietude, I see that you also have cleaned up at American International College. I have just restored the article to your latest version: an IP had added whole bunch of not so relevant information, and another editor started removing that bit by bit, leaving a bit of a mess. Perhaps you can also keep an eye on it. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 20:56, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

AIC
Not sure why are you reverting to your edit of AIC page, not only that it has a weird set up... it contains less information. The current page has been set up from the beginning by my self and a few other persons who added all the pictures and text. You just jump in and start changing thing that only reflect your personal preference on how you like the page to look without actually contributing the content. Earlier version has a full 'intro' paragraph and a 'history' paragraph along with a top-to-bottom list of presidents and alumni. What is the problem with that??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.48.232.150 (talk) 22:37, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * First off, I'm "keeping an eye" on the article, as requested above. Second, having added photos does not bestow upon you special editing credentials -- stick to content. Speaking of which, I have no personal preference, and edit according to guidelines. And speaking of guidelines, your "edition", as you like to call it, violates several of them: a) none of the "full intro" you've added meets WP:V so it's not nearly as helpful as you claim; b) such a lead violates WP:LEAD because it doesn't act as a summary and violates WP:UNIGUIDE because it has a clear focus on specific degree offerings and therefore might violate the spirit of WP:ADVERT; c) it violates WP:CREDENTIAL and other bio/name standards with regards to the list of presidents; d) it violates the WP:MOS with regards to section headings, which you think should all have "AIC" in them; e) it violates WP:UNIGUIDE again by putting the notables into a list format; f) it's vandalism to remove appropriate article tags; g) it removes and butchers infobox parameters; the list goes on. Clearly, my revert isn't based on personal preference. A recent revision that meets guidelines still features pictures, a history section, &c. And if you're saying that you, or a friend of yours, made this edit, too, then keep in mind that it's not okay to use misleading edit summaries. Hope this clears everything up for you. Cheers! --inquietudeofcharacter (talk) 13:31, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Quincy
Hello. Yes, of course, I have sources to support my edits to the list. I wrote most of the Hingham history entry here, as well as the history of Old Ship church, as well as any number of other New England history edits. I didn't see where other inline sources were added (to this particular piece) so I was reluctant to break up the text. Regards, MarmadukePercy (talk) 16:32, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * No worries about the inline bits for the long lineage -- most of it comes from a single source, so it seemed a little overboard to add it to every line. We can move that to the external links, though, if you want, so that you can add your sources to the article. I'm less worried about breaking up the text and more so about citing sources. Thanks again for your contributions. Very helpful information! --inquietudeofcharacter (talk) 18:40, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

AIC edits.
O.K. we have a Mr. Know-It-All... someone that is a stickler for all the rules out there. So, lets go over some of the arguments from a practical point of view. 'WP:V' how is it that you are claiming that this rule is being broken by the original edit, all the original information was very strait forward and verifiable, based on AIC's own web-site... nothing too in-depth that may be open to interpretation and such. 'WP:UNIGUIDE' regarding Notable persons... why don't you check out some other college "Notable Alumni" sections... they are identical in set up to the original edit... FOR ONE, NO ONE CALLS THAT SECTION 'NOTABLE PERSONS' JUST 'NOTABLE ALUMNI' another sections that is not in in line with other NORTHEAST-10 colleges is 'Extracurriculars' again no one calls it that... just 'ATHLETICS'... wise guy. So, let me make this simple... I notices that you ended your response with the slang "Cheers" a slang used mostly in the UK. So, if you are using UK college Wiki rules than keep them to you self... the original edit was based on other US college pages (just look at them for comparison), the original edit falls in line with those rules. Again, it seems that you are just bending things to suit your taste... and by the way, it's not just 'me' or my 'friend' that set up the edit that I'm arguing for, just check out the history page before you and some other clown started to change things about a month ago. Finally, if you are so sure of your-self than please forward this argument on to the administrator for arbitration. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.76.234.100 (talk) 22:49, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Gordon College edits
Hi, I am wondering if we can reach an understanding as far as the intro to the Gordon College (MA) entry goes. I can see that my first attempt at an improved introduction (lead) had some flaws, but I don't really understand your argument as far as the second one goes.

The problem that I see with the existing lead is that some of the information it presents is not central to the subject matter and seems somewhat trivial. For instance, the very first sentence states the former owner of the land the college sits on, which really is more of just an interesting aside than a central statement about what the college is.

Additionally, I feel that citing the campus' relation to Boston is much more relevant than its relation to Beverly.

If you are concerned that the statement about Gordon's satellite campuses is not followed up in the article, I would be happy to add it there. In general the article is missing a lot of key information and seems to be focusing almost entirely on the changes in name and location.

I've looked at a lot of other college entries in doing this and found what I uploaded to be in keeping with what has been done elsewhere. The only piece of 'unique' info in my lead was the satellite campuses--everything else was repeated later in the article, so I don't think it should be a problem.

See: Wheaton_College_(Illinois), Biola_University, Calvin_College.

Thanks for your time, Pendragon25 (talk) 18:02, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'd love to reach an understanding! That understanding will likely come about faster as you become better acquainted with Wikipedia guidelines, of course, and I'd love to go over them with you more in-depth, if you like. The biggest obstacle to our lack of an understanding is, quite honestly, the subjectivity when you say things like, "my first attempt at an improved introduction". It's understandable, because it's not entirely natural to be disinterested, but that's why we have guidelines! Leads are article summaries; therefore, you cannot include information that isn't part of the main article body -- and you don't need to cite sources for summaries if you've properly cited that information in the main article body. Gordon College is closer to the city of Beverly than the city of Boston; it's not as if it's in metroBoston or has subway access, so Beverly does just fine. I'd like to see a source for the satellite campuses. Keep in mind that you can't use other articles as guides, only guidelines. --inquietudeofcharacter (talk) 18:59, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Ok, its nice to know I don't have to cite things if they are cited in the rest of the article, and I wasn't trying to add anything that isn't detailed later on (I think the satellite campuses are worth noting in the article, but I was just taking things one step at a time). But for now let me just list specifically the things I think are important for the intro:

1) I think the first sentence should establish the fact that the school is a Christian school, is a liberal arts school, and is in the evangelical tradition. If the point of the lead is to give a concise overview and define the topic, these seem like the most fundamental points. Its not that I think the Princemere Estate fact is useless, but with such a brief introduction it seems out of place in the first sentence.

2) We both included the same second piece of information: how it was founded. I worded this line to include the year it was founded in--I really feel like its an important piece of info for colleges and universities and warrants being here. I also specified that it was a training institute for missionaries to the Belgian Congo. That's a distinction (as opposed to a generic missionary training program for anywhere) which is helpful to clarify (and just interesting as far as getting a sense of its history).

3) The reason I'm saying Boston is more relevant than Beverly is not because it the closest town to Wenham, but because it is a more relevant city to the larger online audience. Unless you live in eastern MA, Beverly is a useless piece of information because you have never heard of it. It is common practice to define things in terms of the closest widely-known landmark/city in reporting and general writing. Furthermore, Beverly is sort of arbitrary- Wenham is a comparable distance from Hamilton, Manchester, Ipswich, etc. 35 miles is within the vicinity of Boston (as well as the commuter train system) and I believe its important to give statistics that are relevant for a wider audience.

4) As far as the residential satellite campuses, I don't mind leaving that out, but maybe if we end up adding the information to the article it could be a relevant fact for the lead. I'm drawing it from a few sources on Gordon's website http://www.gordon.edu/page.cfm?iPageID=1799&iCategoryID=72&Gordon_In_Lynn&Live_In_Lynn_-_Barton_Hall http://www.gordon.edu/inboston http://www.gordon.edu/page.cfm?iPageID=611&iCategoryID=59&Global_Studies&Gordon_In_Orvieto There are other programs in different locations, but these are the ones that Gordon owns its own campuses and living quarters on.

Thanks! Pendragon25 (talk) 20:40, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Brown university seal.png)
 Thanks for uploading File:Brown university seal.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you.  Zoo Fari  04:22, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Brown university logo.png)
 Thanks for uploading File:Brown university logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you.  Zoo Fari  04:22, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Mount Vernon Nazarene University
Dear Inquietudeofcharacter:

I appreciate the time and effort you've put into this University's wikipedia page. I am the person who has been building on and correcting your edits.

While I see some sense to many of the information you've posted, much of it is outdated and biased. Many of the links do not even seem to connect to information that corresponds to the information cited. I also find that much of the information is irrelevant to the basic information about the school. Not only that, but the layout of information is redundant at times and can be pieced together in a more logical format.

Through the majority of my edits, I have attempted to update information, delete information that may be misleading, and represent accurate portrayal of the school. For instance, to say that the school is "a college of the past" (a name that I have never encountered in conjunction with the school) simply because it offers a major that several other schools offer seems a bit condemning. Surely, you see that limiting the "academic" section to this fact when the school has over 85 different majors and is ranked #26 in the Midwest is not making the article content encyclopedic; Rather, it is misinforming readers.

Also, I do not notice any other Universities' wiki websites treating the social life content with such strong negativism. Although Taylor University has guidelines that are quite similar to MVNU's, their section on it remains untainted. In my opinion, student life should also include clubs/organizations, well-known events on campus, travel abroad opportunities, ministry opportunities, etc. To leave all of this out in order to keep in the content that is currently in is nothing short of narrow. It should also be noted that faculty and staff are NOT required to attend chapel three times per week.

I can understand why you feel your composition for the article is important and informed; however, I would encourage you to allow some more detailed, up-to-date edits that are complete with citations straight from the website and other published sources. I will continue to make edits until this page is improved.

Thank you, again.

Atink (talk)Atink —Preceding undated comment added 19:38, 4 March 2010 (UTC).
 * Hi, there! Thanks for your note, and your kind words. Sorry if my blanket reverts undid any good edits. Keep in mind that Wikipedia is about verifiability, not truth. You cannot remove cited information and references that you find objectionable; in fact, I made my reverts because your edits were tagged as removing references. It was rather messy, which is why I opted for the blanked undo, though I could probably pay closer attention to the edits you made. I'd be all for adding the ranking bit to the academics section, per WP:UNIGUIDE, but I can't recall what else was added that was useful. Is there any way that you can add information (if there are supporting sources) and remove only uncited information? That would be ideal, according to the standards of the Encyclopedia. Oh, and before I forget, making references to other university articles is not a valid argument, because guidelines almost always trump example articles (and Taylor's article isn't even a good article, never mind an example one). --inquietudeofcharacter (talk) 03:29, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Engineering at ENC
Hey there. Good edits overall on the ENC page, just want to clarify that ENC doesn't offer that mechanical engineering program. Feel free to take a look at the pdf listed in the citation to verify. Peace! 71.184.132.240 (talk) 02:31, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Chicago Meetup and update
Last fall you indicated that you continue to be active with WP:CHICAGO. If you continue to be active please update your active date at WikiProject Chicago/members. Also, we are planning a Chicago Meetup. If you will be able to attend the meetup from 10:30-11:45 a.m. on Saturday May 1, 2010 at the UIC Student Center West, please sign as an indication of your intent.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:25, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Newbury College
The edits recently made to Newbury College's information on Wikipedia should remain as is since you can document the factual information through the college's web site or official documents. The information now provide is much more current than the previous description.

Thanks!


 * Removing references isn't a valid argument for leaving an article as-is. And since your most recent edits de-wikified much of the article, I'll be reverting it back to a version that better meets WP:UNIGUIDE. --inquietudeofcharacter (talk) 23:14, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

The article no longer contains any advertising language at this point. Since the information you keep posting is more than 3 years old, I am assume that the new description will now satisfy Wikipedia's requirements.Jchillo (talk)
 * Excellent. I kept the "career" wording, but there is no reason to remove a hatnote, and there's no immediately apparent reason to remove well-sourced info. The link to the article about the Bridgewater State game is dead, so I removed that. Let's continue to refine this -- and please follow the UNI guidelines. --inquietudeofcharacter (talk) 19:44, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

The second paragraph of the text is derived from the college's mission and vision statement that can be found at www.newbury.edu - is located on page 5 of the college's catalog. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jchillo (talk • contribs) 12:20, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Indiana Wesleyan University/Wesley Seminary
Greetings.

I have reported your recent actions regarding the Indiana Wesleyan University and Wesley Seminary articles on the Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Flavius Constantine (talk) 03:16, 1 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm pretty sure that you're require to talk about it, not before edits, but before reporting edits. Thanks for the heads-up, though. Left a message over at the article talk page and still waiting for you to respond. --inquietudeofcharacter (talk) 16:59, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

IWU
I have reverted to a previous version of the article; may i suggest you go to the talk page and start a discussion of why you prefer your version. Cheers, LindsayHi 04:29, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that. Left a message there. Still waiting for a response. --inquietudeofcharacter (talk) 17:00, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Universities Signpost Interview
Hello Inquietudeofcharacter! My name is Mono and I represent the WikiProject Desk at the Signpost. Mabeenot recommended that I contact you, so I wanted to invite you to participate in the Signpost's upcoming report on WikiProject Universities. This is a wonderful opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. If you'd like to join in, I've posted interview questions here. Thank you!  ℳ ono

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Mono at 21:41, 11 August 2010 (UTC).

Suggestion to pull this project under WikiProject United States
It was recently suggested that WikiProject Idaho, to which you are a member, may be inactive and it might be beneficial to include it in the list of projects supported by WikiProject United States. After reviewing the project it appears that there have not been any active discussion on the talk page in some time and the only content updates appear to be simple maintenance so being supported by a larger project might be beneficial. I have begun a discussion on the projects talk page to see how the members of the project feel about this suggestion. --Kumioko (talk) 20:17, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Suggestion for WikiProject United States to support WikiProject Maryland
It was recently suggested that WikiProject Maryland might be inactive or semiactive and it might be beneficial to include it in the list of projects supported by WikiProject United States. I have started a discussion on the projects talk page soliciting the opinions of the members of the project if this project would be interested in being supported by WikiProject United States. Please feel free to comment on your opinions about this suggestion. --Kumioko (talk) 03:28, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

September 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States
--Kumioko (talk) 04:29, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Mnupioneers.png
 Thanks for uploading File:Mnupioneers.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a template, along with your question, beneath this message.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 18:30, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

December 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States
--Kumioko (talk) 02:44, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

January 2012 Newsletter for WikiProject United States and supported projects
--Kumi-Taskbot (talk) 18:42, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Ichthus: January 2012
 In this issue...

- Ichthus is published by WikiProject Christianity For submissions and subscriptions contact the Newsroom
 * From the Editor
 * What are You doing For Lent?
 * Fun and Exciting Contest Launched
 * Spotlight on WikiProject Catholicism

You're invited! New England Wikimedia General Meeting
Message delivered by Dominic at 08:41, 11 April 2012 (UTC). Note: You can remove your name from this meetup invite list here.

Orphaned non-free media (File:Laboure seal.png)
Thanks for uploading File:Laboure seal.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 05:36, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Laboure logo.png)
Thanks for uploading File:Laboure logo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 05:48, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Christianity newsletter: New format, new focus
Hello, I notice that you aren't currently subscribed to Ichthus, the WikiProject Christianity newsletter. Witha new format, we would be delighted to offer you a trial three-month, money-back guarantee, subscription to our newsletter. If you are interested then please add your name tothis list, and you will receive your first issue shortly. From June 2013 we are starting a new "in focus" section that tells our readers about an interesting and important groups of articles. The first set is about Jesus, of course. We have also started a new book review section and our own "did you know" section. In the near future I hope to start a section where a new user briefly discusses their interests.-- Gilderien Chat&#124;List of good deeds 21:06, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

2nd Annual Wikimedia New England General Meeting
You are invited to the 2nd Annual Wikimedia New England General Meeting, on 20 July 2013 in Boston! We will be talking about the future of the chapter, including GLAM, Wiki Loves Monuments, and where we want to take our chapter in the future! EdwardsBot (talk) 09:20, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Proposed Northern Ireland Wiki Meetup
A Wikimeet is proposed for Northern Ireland in the next few months. If you have never been to one, this is an opportunity to meet other Wikipedians in an informal atmosphere for Wiki and non-Wiki related chat and for beer or food if you like. Most take place on a Sunday afternoon in a suitable pub but other days and locations can also work. Experienced and new contributors are all welcome. This event is definitely not restricted just to discussion of Northern Ireland topics. Please add your suggestions for place and date to the discussion page here: Proposed Northern Ireland Wiki Meetup. Philafrenzy (talk) 10:01, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

New England Wikipedia Day @ MIT: Saturday Jan 18
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by removing your name from this list.)

College towns
I could use some help on my own college town, Murfreesboro, TN. Let me know if you can be of assistance. Hufsakamal (talk) Hufsakamal —Preceding undated comment added 20:23, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

You're invited!
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by removing your name from this list.)

Nomination of Miss Viet Nam Continents for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Miss Viet Nam Continents is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Miss Viet Nam Continents until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. The Banner talk 08:19, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Xulaseal.png
 Thanks for uploading File:Xulaseal.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:32, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

This Friday: Women in Architecture edit-a-thon @ Cambridge, MA
You are invited to join the Women in Architecture edit-a-thon @ Cambridge, MA on October 16! (drop-in any time, 6-9pm)--Pharos (talk) 18:28, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:06, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:09, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Gordonseal.png
 Thanks for uploading File:Gordonseal.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:25, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

The 10,000 Challenge
Hi, at The 10,000 Challenge we're striving to bring about 10,000 article improvements and creations for the UK and Ireland and inspire others to create more content. In order to achieve this we need diversity of content, in all parts of the UK and Ireland on all topics. Eventually a regional contest will be held for all parts of the British Isles, like they were for Wales and the Wedt Country. We currently have just over 1900 articles and need contributors! If you think you'd be interested in collaborating on this and helping reach the target quicker, please sign up and begin listing your entries there as soon as possible! Thanks.♦ --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:41, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Latin American 10,000 Challenge invite
Hi. The WikiProject Latin America/The 10,000 Challenge ‎ has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland The 10,000 Challenge and WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Brazil, Mexico, Peru and Argentina etc, much like The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. At some stage we hope to run some contests to benefit Latin American content, a destubathon perhaps, aimed at reducing the stub count would be a good place to start, based on the current WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon. If you would like to see this happening for Latin America, and see potential in this attracting more interest and editors for the country/countries you work on please sign up and being contributing to the challenge! This is a way we can target every country of Latin America, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant!♦ -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 00:36, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Europe 10,000 Challenge invite
Hi. The WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 09:06, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Miss Viet Nam Continents


The article Miss Viet Nam Continents has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern:
 * The details are not significant and winner was already included in the Miss Viet Nam Continents.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Richie Campbell (talk) 16:42, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject United States/The 50,000 Challenge
--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:40, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

New 10,000 Challenge for Canada
Hi, WikiProject Canada/The 10,000 Challenge is up and running based on The 10,000 Challenge for the UK which has currently produced over 2300 article improvements and creations. If you'd like to see large scale quality improvements happening for Canada like The Africa Destubathon, which has produced over 1600 articles in 5 weeks, sign up on the page. The idea will be an ongoing national editathon/challenge for Canada but fuelled by a contest such as The North America Destubathon to really get articles on every province and subject mass improved. I would like some support from Canadian wikipedians here to get the Challenge off to a start with some articles to make doing a Destubathon worthwhile! Cheers. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:55, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

New Challenge for Oceania and Australia
Hi, WikiProject Oceania/The 10,000 Challenge and WikiProject Australia/The 5000 Challenge are up and running based on The 10,000 Challenge which has currently produced over 2300 article improvements and creations. The Australia challenge would feed into the wider region one and potentially New Zealand could have a smaller challenge too. The main goal is content improvement, tackling stale old stubs and important content and improving sourcing/making more consistent but new articles are also welcome if sourced. I understand that this is a big goal for regular editors, especially being summertime where you are, but if you'd like to see large scale quality improvements happening for Oceania and Australia like The Africa Destubathon, which has produced over 1700 articles in 5 weeks, sign up on the page. The idea will be an ongoing national editathon/challenge for the region but fuelled by a series of contests to really get articles on every province and subject mass improved. The Africa contest scaled worldwide would naturally provide great benefits to Oceania countries, particularly Australia and attract new editors. I would like some support from existing editors here to get the Challenges off to a start with some articles to make doing a Destubathon worthwhile and potentially bring about hundreds of improvements in a few weeks through a contest! Cheers.♦ --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:12, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Sunday July 16: New England Wiknic @ Cambridge, MA
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Orphaned non-free image File:MVNUseal.png
 Thanks for uploading File:MVNUseal.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:30, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Council for Christian Colleges and Universities (logo).png
Thanks for uploading File:Council for Christian Colleges and Universities (logo).png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:41, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Neslseal.png
Thanks for uploading File:Neslseal.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:37, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Southern Nazarene University seal.png
Thanks for uploading File:Southern Nazarene University seal.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:57, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Southern Nazarene University (logo).png


The file File:Southern Nazarene University (logo).png has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Unused logo with no article used, it's also can't move to commons because of an unused logo will be deleted as of out of project scope."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Willy1018 (talk) 03:20, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Elmscollegeseal.png
Thanks for uploading File:Elmscollegeseal.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:29, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

2019 US Banknote Contest
Sent by ZLEA at 23:30, 19 October 2019 (UTC) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk)

Category:Universities and colleges affiliated with the Association of Baptist Churches in Ireland has been nominated for discussion
Category:Universities and colleges affiliated with the Association of Baptist Churches in Ireland has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Place Clichy (talk) 07:45, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Category:Universities and colleges affiliated with the Baptist Convention of Hong Kong has been nominated for merging to
Category:Universities and colleges affiliated with the Baptist Convention of Hong Kong has been nominated for merging to. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Place Clichy (talk) 07:45, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Coordinators and help needed
Hi, if you are active on Wikipedia and are still interested in helping out with urgent tasks on our large Schools Project, please let us know here. We look forward to hearing from you. Sent to project members 13:58, 29 August 2021 (UTC). You can opt of messages here.

Wikimedia US Mountain West online meeting
Wikipedia users in the United States Mountain West and High Plains will hold an online meeting from 8:00 to 9:00 PM MST, Tuesday evening, February 14, 2023, at meet.google.com/kfu-topq-zkd. Anyone interested in the history, articles, or photographs of our region is encouraged to attend.

If you don't wish to receive these invitations any more, please remove your username from the Meetup/US Mountain West/Invitation list. Thanks.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:42, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

Wikimedia US Mountain West online meeting 05/09/2023
Wikimedians of the U.S. Mountain West will hold an online meeting from 8:00 to 9:00 PM MDT, Tuesday evening, May 9, 2023, at meet.google.com/kfu-topq-zkd. Anyone interested in the history, geography, articles, maps, or photographs of the Mountain West or the future direction of Wikipedia and the Wikimedia movement is encouraged to attend. Please see our meeting page for details.

If you don't wish to receive these invitations any more, please remove your username from the Meetup/US Mountain West/Invitation list. Thanks. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:14, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

Wikimedia US Mountain West online meeting 08/08/2023
Wikimedians of the U.S. Mountain West will hold an online meeting from 8:00 to 9:00 PM MDT, Tuesday evening, August 8, 2023, at meet.google.com/kfu-topq-zkd. Anyone interested in articles, history, geography, maps, or photographs of the Mountain West or the future direction of Wikipedia and the Wikimedia movement is encouraged to attend. We may try to organize one or more Wiknics. Guests are welcome. Please see our meeting page for details.

If you don't wish to receive these invitations any more, please remove your username from the Meetup/US Mountain West/Invitation list. Thanks.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:18, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

US Mountain West online meeting November 14
Wikimedians of the U.S. Mountain West will hold an online meeting from 8:00 to 9:00 PM MST, Tuesday evening, November 14, 2023, at meet.google.com/kfu-topq-zkd. Anyone interested in the Mountain West or the future direction of Wikipedia and the Wikimedia movement is encouraged to attend. All guests are welcome. Please see our meeting page for details.

If you don't wish to receive these invitations any more, please remove your username from our . Thanks.

-MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:03, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

U.S. Mountain West Online Meeting
Wikimedians of the U.S. Mountain West will hold an online meeting from 8:00 to 9:00 PM MST, Tuesday evening, February 13, 2024, at meet.google.com/kfu-topq-zkd. Anyone interested in the Mountain West or the future direction of Wikipedia and the Wikimedia movement is encouraged to attend. All guests are welcome. Please see our meeting page for details.

If you don't wish to receive these invitations any more, please remove your username from our . Thanks.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:50, 1 February 2024 (UTC)