User talk:Tamtam1008

September 2009
Your recent edit to Far Eastern University (diff) was reverted by an automated bot. The edit was identified as adding vandalism, or link spam to the page or having an inappropriate edit summary. If you want to experiment, please use the preview button while editing or consider using the sandbox. If you made an edit that removed a large amount of content, try doing smaller edits instead. Thanks! (Report bot mistakes here) // VoABot II (talk) 06:00, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Your recent edit to Far Eastern University (diff) was reverted by an automated bot. The edit was identified as adding vandalism, or link spam to the page or having an inappropriate edit summary. If you want to experiment, please use the preview button while editing or consider using the sandbox. If you made an edit that removed a large amount of content, try doing smaller edits instead. Thanks! (Report bot mistakes here) // VoABot II (talk) 06:08, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

I checked the source. Your contribution was a clear copyright violation: just a cut'n'paste from the "about" source. You will be blocked if you cannot obey Wikipedia copyright policy. DMacks (talk) 06:18, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Article improvements
Hello, and thank you for your note. If you wish to contact me via e-mail, as a registered user, you have the option to click "e-mail this user" in the toolbox to the side of my page. I'm afraid that I do not otherwise publicize my e-mail, as administrators on Wikipedia are sometimes subject to harassment. However, e-mail communication is unnecessary. The article is currently semi-protected, as we do not seem to be able to otherwise to prevent material being pasted onto Wikipedia in violation of our copyright policy in this and the related article Far Eastern University - Institute of Accounts, Business and Finance. But I am unlikely to implement suggestions via e-mail, as Wikipedia prefers open communication about and development of articles. Ordinarily, you would be welcome to implement your changes directly to the article, discussing any issues that develop with the contributors who might dispute your material, but the semi-protection of the article means you will not be able to do this until your account has contributed to the project a bit more. In the meantime, you are welcome to discuss your ideas for the evolution of the article at its talk page, so long as you do not paste content onto any page of Wikipedia that has been copied from somewhere else. (You can only do this if verification to use the material has been supplied to the Wikimedia Foundation by one of the processes described at Donating copyrighted materials.)

Beyond copyright concerns, some of your additions do not meet the core content policies of neutrality and verifiability and are unlikely to be permitted on Wikipedia. Statements like "Far Eastern University looks back to its triumphant first 75 years as it marches forward to the fulfillment of its vision-mission of becoming the leading, non-sectarian institution of learning in the Philippines", even if we are given permission to use them, do not meet those policies. Some other claims would need citing to a source other than the university's website. The university is understandably interested in promoting its own achievements. While this is a normal goal for an official website, it makes them questionable for using as a source of some information in articles. Basic details, such as some of those I sourced to the website, can generally be used so long as they are written in original language. Claims such as that the university "has a strong heritage in athletics" needs to be sourced to somewhere else. (See the reliable source guideline.) Some of the other information, such as the list of student organizations, may or may not be determined to be appropriate for conclusion by other Wikipedians. Wikipedia is not a catalog, and it strives to include information that is of encyclopedic interest only. The notable alumni list would only be appropriate if sourced — for each entry, we need a reliable source verifying that they are alumni

Wikipedia is not here to provide a second home page for the university or to advertise it. While the university is certainly notable enough to merit an article, we are creating a neutral, factual encyclopedia providing a summary of reliably published information about the university. Material that does not meet that aim is not appropriate for our website. (See Five pillars for a brief overview of Wikipedia's policies.)

If you want to get an idea of how to develop an article on a university within Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, you might want to take a look at Duke University or Texas A&M University. Both of these are listed as "featured articles" on Wikipedia, which means that they are among the best articles on universities that the project currently has to offer. You see that neither of them includes the kinds of bare lists of information, such as the "student organizations", that you put into the article along with the copyrighted text. Also note how images are staggered throughout the article and selected to highlight specific details within the text. While I retained the gallery of images in the article that had been there prior to the introduction of copyrighted material when I did my clean up, expanding this much beyond what exists there now is not likely to be seen as an improvement. Instead of putting in pictures of everything, it is most useful to select those pictures that best reflect the university and the article and integrate them with the text. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:59, 13 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I had suggested you discuss this at the article's talk page. While as an administrator I will remove material that violates copyright, other questions are a matter of consensus of interested editors. The question of which images and how many should be used in the article, for instance, is not up to me. I suspect a gallery of 17 images is overwhelming to the page and will interfere with "load" times for the article. It is generally regarded as preferable to select the best images to represent the article, and I have no opinion on which those best images would be.


 * The collection of links and lists, in my opinion, is overwhelming to the article. As I mentioned above, a list of every student organization is not necessarily helpful. While that kind of information may be valuable on the school's website, it isn't encyclopedic. The notable alumni lists are inadequately sourced and do not meet verifiability guidelines. Further, without proper sourcing, there is no way to ensure that these individuals is notable, which is a problem under the neutrality policy. For example, Luz DeGuzman, Assistant Professor, Mercy College, New York. Who is he? What makes him "notable"? What makes Wilbert Ching, Lecturer in Allied Health and Medical Assisting, Quienbaug Valley Community College, notable? A lecturer at a community college is not inherently noteworthy.


 * I've already explained some of the problems in the athletics section. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:06, 13 September 2009 (UTC)


 * As I said, you should discuss this at the article's talk page. I've already explained some problems I have with User:Tamtam1008/sandbox. You should seek consensus to see if other contributors agree with adding this material to the article; as it currently is, I do not. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 20:02, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi there
Hey. I removed the article you copy and pasted into the talkpage of user:Moonriddengirl. It would be best to place the article on your userpage or a sandbox, and then link it to her talkpage. Simply pasting it in takes up room and makes it more difficult for other users to use her talkpage. Thanks, Skinny87 (talk) 13:55, 13 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I have moved the material to User:Tamtam1008/sandbox, where it can be easily accessed but will not interfere with talk page function. I'll discuss specifics in the section above. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:57, 13 September 2009 (UTC)