Talk:American River College

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject California, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

	Portal This article is part of WikiProject Universities, an attempt to standardise coverage of universities and colleges. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this notice, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale.

[edit] Fall 2005 enrollment

I saw an internal memo that put enrollment for the Fall 2005 semester at about 70,000+ (I can't remember how high it was, it may have been 80,000, but it was at least 70,000). It said ARC was the largest community college in California. The Ungovernable Force 06:19, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Fall 2005 4th-week "headcount" enrollment for the entire Los Rios Community College District was 71,430; headcount for ARC was 31,488. ARC could be #1 for Fall, depending on what happened at some other colleges that are close in size. Of the 109 in the state, for the Spring 2005 semester only ARC, Mt.SAC, CCSF, and SRJC were over 30,000. — RandallJones 21:22, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Anthony and Ian of Smosh fame as "alumni"?

According to the Smosh article, Anthony and Ian are still attending the college. Is "alumni" really an appropriate category for them to be listed under? Perhaps "notable alumni and attendees" if they are still there - and if not, the main Smosh article should be updated. Ministry of Silly Walks 00:55, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Good idea. I'll change it to that now. And what is Smosh? That also means we can re-add Adrian Lamo, although last I heard he actually was an alum. Hope he comes back. Ungovernable Force^{Got something to say?} 06:39, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion of ACT scores and continued deletion of information

For the sake of a broader audience, part or all of the discussion below has been transferred from the User namespace at User_talk:Groupthink#American River College ACT score deletion to this space below. Please continue the discussion here.

Groupthink and Daniel deleted the information about American River College's ACT score deletion, asking for references and cites. When that happened the post was again deleted, and AR's page protected. This action, especially occurring on a college's page, again shows just how serious this whole matter has gotten.

Why would someone ask for references only to disregard them and continue with a policy of ignoring the truth, truth that was just asked for and then discarded? Is Wikipedia expecting to be considered a factual place of information, or is it a place of displaying only the truth as Wikipedians wish truth to appear? If the answer is the latter, then Wikipedia has just acheived its goal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.212.151.57 (talk • contribs) — 76.212.151.57 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. 15:59, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia deletes information about AR's ACT scandal of 1989, asking for references and citations before accepting facts. But when that happens, Wikipedia deletes that, also. Wikipedia shows itself to be an unacceptable source of factual information and not a resource to be used a a research tool. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.212.151.57 (talk • contribs) — 76.212.151.57 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. 15:35, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I hope I'm not feeding a troll by responding; I do try to assume good faith. I've checked over the "ACT scandal of 1989" material, and unless I'm mistaken, I fail to see any references to reliable sources. So I'll tell you what: If you can post a list of verifiable sources here, I'll request immediate unprotection for this article and do my best to see that your additions remain intact. If you're just fooling around however, go away or I will taunt you a second time. Groupthink 15:48, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I'll get busy on it. In the meantime, you can go ahead and contact Hagar (Randall-Hagar@calpsych.org, 916-442-5196) yourself. He has interesting answers, and you can start dodging the NAMI AB 1421 people yourself. They're getting pretty fast with the "men in white suits" phone calls. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.55.37.181 (talk • contribs) — 75.55.37.181 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

It's up to you, not other editors, to attribute/cite your sources. Groupthink 01:23, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

And it's up to you to acknowledge them rather than continuously deleting them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.245.123.102 (talk) 04:47, 8 November 2007 (UTC)