Talk:Huntington University
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Indiana, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Indiana. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. | ||
|
Article Grading: |
|||
This article seems a bit one-sided in it's evaluation of the university, and reads like a brochure. A little more unbiased information on the school would be appropriate.
Contents |
[edit] Balanced treatment
In February, this article was updated and modeled on the pages of such diverse Indiana colleges as Ancilla, Bethel, Butler, and Anderson. Do you have the same criticism of those sites? The new info regarding the academic freedom controvery in the History section perhaps offsets some of your concerns.
[edit] Response
I added the section on Sanders myself before starting the talk article. The article is now much different from what I originally saw, in that it's far more comprehensive. It should be pointed out that the colleges you list as 'diverse' are all (with the exception of Butler) schools with religious affliations (specifically Christian).
[edit] photos
There are some photos at
http://www.flickr.com/photos/laffy4k/sets/104147/
if anyone has time to upload them. — Dunc|☺ 17:34, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] NPOV
This article still appears to have been taken, or at the very least adapted, from the univeristy's website or print publications. I've never edited info on Wikipedia before, so I'm a little apprehensive to do so here. Causes for concern are the claims made at the beginning of the article, in paragraphs 2 and 3. Perhaps instead of stating that "Huntington is...", a more neutral form of phrasing (such as replacing "is" with "strives", "claims", or "asserts") could be employed? Also, the section on academic freedom and John Sanders used to be a bit more in depth. While the full account might be more appropriate in the John Sanders page, the controversy was widely covered in Christianity Today and The Christian Century, and perhaps ought to be expounded upon a bit more in the body of the HU article. Because it was/is such a debated subject, how should it be handled here? Should there be any external links at the bottom of the page to editorial writings from HU students, alumns, staff and faculty on the controversy (both pro or con)? I'm not sure of Wikipedia policy concerning links to editorial content. Comments? Suggestions? --Jkwhitley 09:08, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
