Talk:Columbia Union College

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 Columbia Union College is within the scope of WikiProject Seventh-day Adventist Church, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Seventh-day Adventist Church and Seventh-day Adventist Church-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
Stub This article has been rated as stub-Class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.

Article Grading:
The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.
WikiProject Seventh-day Adventist Church To-do:

Columbia Union College is part of WikiProject Maryland, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Maryland.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
A mortarboard 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.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.

[edit] Negative note

I am not against including a negative note about this college, but why isn't it at the end of a long article on the good things about CUC? This article needs a lot of work. --Cromwellt|talk|contris 20:48, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

A lot of articles in wikipedia need a lot of work - see, for example, here for a list. It probably isn't that helpful to post a comment on a talk/discussion page that an article needs a lot of work -- better to spend that time actually improving the article, even a little bit. John Broughton 18:53, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "At a Glance" section

The "At a Glance" was copied from the college website [1]. I have removed this text from the article. The website does not assert copyright, but that's a given whether they do so or not, nor does it provide any sort of free-use license. Even if we were allowed to use the text, we shouldn't use it as-is. It reads like an advertisement, not an encyclopedia. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 16:44, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

The text has since re-appeared, and I've deleted it again. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 23:26, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pollution

This section is important to this article because it is a serious accusation regarding the college's place in the community. Clearly, someone who'd like to whitewash this part of the college's history has decided to delete this section. If that person would like to delete that section again, I suggest that they register, sign in, and make their case on this page. Otherwise I will continue to revert deletions of the pollution section.FoamParty 06:01, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

IMHO, this section should be removed. The article is about a college. The pollution incident is something minor and historical from the nonacademic building and grounds department(!). There is an undue weight question about mentioning it at all, let alone in a paragraph that is comparable in size to the entire main article. Lou Sander 14:47, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
I'd have to agree with the individual who stated that the article is supposed to be about the college. I'd also agree that this article will lessen in importance over time as it becomes less time-relevant news. During my edits I left it for now even though this is last year's news.Djneufville (talk) 15:35, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
According to the college, the college became compliant as with State approval with their rain-water drain issue in '07. I am trying to get a date of when this occured. So at any rate, as this is '06/'07 news which appears to now be closed, I'd vote to remove this pollution news note soon as old news perhaps as this news will soon be two years old and apparently is no longer an issue. The article will then be focussed on the school as some have noted is needed. Let us know if folks agree or disagree... Djneufville (talk) 04:31, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
It is time to get rid of the pollution material. Lou Sander (talk) 04:56, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Waited for as much response. Based on the feedback and that this news item is a couple of years old, and apparently no longer an issue, this article will be about the college and the news note is removed as of today. Discussion remains open on if folks want to bring this back to this article.Djneufville (talk) 21:24, 8 March 2008 (UTC)