User talk:Ubpeters

Welcome!

Hello, Ubpeters, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! Aymatth2 (talk) 16:24, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Manual of Style

Akwa Ibom State University of Technology
I see you have added a lot of material to this article. Two points you should consider: Please consider toning down the language a bit and citing your sources, so as to improve the article and avoid the risk of having unverified content deleted. Try to remember (this is not always easy) that the article should depict the institution as it is seen by reliable independent sources, rather than the way it wants to be seen. The purpose of an article is not exactly to communicate the truth about a subject but to communicate what is generally thought about the subject. Thanks, Aymatth2 (talk) 16:24, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
 * All Wikipedia articles must be strictly neutral in tone. This version sounds rather like an advertisement, which is not allowed.
 * Everything in Wikipedia must be verifiable, meaning the article should have footnotes showing the source of each bit of information.

Ubpeters (talk) 06:03, 2 July 2010 (UTC) I have been searching for how to reply to your message Aymatth2. Perhaps this is the only way?

It is mostly a matter of tone and sourcing. Think about the paragraph:
 * "In today's knowledge-driven world, education remains the key to the transformation of people and societies. Thus, AKUTECH's programmes and curricula have been developed with an unusual capacity for problem-solving and social re-engineering. Indeed, AKUTECH is conceived to make an outstanding difference in the Nigerian University system by fostering a culture of academic excellence nurtured by practical professional experiences and linkages with its immediate and global environments."

This sounds like it has been lifted from a publicity blurb on the school, and if that were the case would be a copyright violation. Fine words, but it does not tell the reader much at all - most readers would see it as pure fluff. The first sentence is a platitude, and almost any university anywhere in the world would be comfortable with the remainder of the description. No source is given: where does this information come from? Has an independent source made that evaluation of the school's program, or is it just a claim the school is making? Should I take a shot at "neutralizing" the article? Aymatth2 (talk) 13:35, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Not sure if I answered you. You can reply as you have by editing this section to add your reply, or you can click on (talk) after my signature, then click on the "new section" tab, and leave a message there. It works either way. Aymatth2 (talk) 18:22, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Ubpeters (talk) 03:40, 5 July 2010 (UTC)Upon reviewing the article, I think I somewhat agree with your critique. That paragraph describes our ambitions for the university we are developing, however, it doesn't quite belong here so I will delete it.


 * I think it reads better. It is still not perfect, and of course it never will be given the nature of Wikipedia, but it gives a reasonable view of the university, its aims, the curriculum etc. Oddly, articles like this are sometimes best written by people who do not know much about the subject, and just rely on what they can dig up. That means the article really is just a summary of what has been said about the subject, which is the goal. Then people who do know about the subject can add value by correcting the obvious mistakes and misinterpretations. That would not apply to articles about science, history etc., but probably does apply to most articles about organizations and living people. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:28, 5 July 2010 (UTC)