While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
This doesn't seem to fit the Wikipedia definition of a full article. Suggest merging it with Baylor Bears Football page or expanding it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.42.57.184 ( talk) 00:52, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://sportsday.dallasnews.com/college-sports/baylorbears/2016/10/20/baylor-sexual-assault-scandal-timeline-football-convictions-title-ix-investigation. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)
For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. — Diannaa 🍁 ( talk) 14:02, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
IP User 129.62.125.9 has twice deleted ( 1, 2) the Timeline section from the article. On the second deletion, the user said, in part, that the section was "stolen from reddit threads," and linked to this. I ran an Earwig's Copyvio Detector to compare the article to the specified post on Reddit. Its results indicated that copying was unlikely (2.0% confidence) with only 2 overlapping phrases for a total of about 7 words, so the accusation is clearly unfounded. As both the section and the Reddit post cover the same material, the basic facts should match if both are accurate, but there is no infringement and the section, which has over 80 citations, should remain in the article. → Wordbuilder ( talk) 05:25, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
I have suggested that Baylor Sexual Assault Scandals be merged into this article. Its prose will be a nice addition, since the information here is primarily in bullet format in the Timeline section. Unless someone objects, I will merge that article into this one and place a redirect there. → Wordbuilder ( talk) 18:27, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
The Baylor University sexual assault scandal broke out into the media as alleged coverup and disregard to athlete actions, specifically members of football team at the university, by those within the athletic department. More specifically, the scandal broke in regards to Sam Ukwuachu and his alleged behaviors at Boise State and Baylor University. [1] As more information came out, it was alleged that administrators across various groups within the University covered up or otherwise hid or ignored things that football players on the team, both past (2011) and present (2015), had done. The university commissioned an internal investigation by a third party law firm. The findings, while somewhat vague identified the athletic department as culpable. Their head coach was fired, the athletic director resigned and the president stepped down. Is there a disagreement on the basis of the scandal?
Jacob Anderson - this individual was not part of the scandal. He was arrested, his fraternity suspended and he was suspended and expelled from the university and not allowed to graduate from Baylor. [2]. Baylor did not try to hide or otherwise cover up his behavior - which is the entire basis of the scandal, cover up and inaction; all references to him need to be removed from the article. Does anyone have a question or dispute the actions or what is written about Anderson?
If there are not any disagreements in regards to Jacob Anderson, he will be removed from the article.
Bigbrainbigfeet ( talk) 02:15, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
The article contains *many* statements and inclusions that Wordbuilder feels are relevant. I dispute the relevancy of many of additions in the time line. So, we therefore are two adults with different viewpoints. If paragraphs that were directly related to sexual assault allegations against football players were removed, it was done either through error or to remove duplicative information. Bigbrainbigfeet ( talk) 07:18, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
"Multiple WP:RSs comingle athletic with non-athletic/non-football references. That was the stable format of this article until you expunged much of that content and rewrote the lede to be football-specific.[1] The article and lede should reflect the content found in RS citations, not reflect your personal view of the topic - UW Dawgs.
The article has been under constant revision - it is essentially a living document and it did not start with non-athletic/non-football references. Who approved the change to include non-athletes? Who said those changes were accurate? Bigbrainbigfeet ( talk) 07:18, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
Let us see if we can even agree on a basic premise. How do we define 'scandal' in relation to that university? The scandal broke as related to *football* and up to 90% of this articles content relates to football players, coaches or people related to the football program. For sake of argument, let us remove "athlete" or "non-athlete" from the conversation. I argue that the scandal is the lack of oversight and lack of response from the university towards allegations involving sexual and physical assaults that occurred at that university. Victims were allegedly either stonewalled or had their claims dismissed and not investigated. *That* is the scandal. Is there a disagreement on this premise? Bigbrainbigfeet ( talk) 07:27, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
Wikipedia does not publish original thought. All material in Wikipedia must be attributable to a reliable, published source. Articles may not contain any new analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to reach or imply a conclusion not clearly stated by the sources themselves.UW Dawgs ( talk) 09:51, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
I argue that the scandal was the lack of oversight and lack of response from the university towards allegations involving sexual and physical assaults that occurred at that university. Victims were allegedly either stonewalled or had their claims dismissed and not investigated. I feel that description accurately describes the scandal and defines what the scandal was. Is there a disagreement on this premise? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigbrainbigfeet ( talk • contribs) 02:20, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
"Wikipedia does not publish original thought."UW Dawgs ( talk) 02:24, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
This doesn't seem to fit the Wikipedia definition of a full article. Suggest merging it with Baylor Bears Football page or expanding it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.42.57.184 ( talk) 00:52, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://sportsday.dallasnews.com/college-sports/baylorbears/2016/10/20/baylor-sexual-assault-scandal-timeline-football-convictions-title-ix-investigation. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)
For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. — Diannaa 🍁 ( talk) 14:02, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
IP User 129.62.125.9 has twice deleted ( 1, 2) the Timeline section from the article. On the second deletion, the user said, in part, that the section was "stolen from reddit threads," and linked to this. I ran an Earwig's Copyvio Detector to compare the article to the specified post on Reddit. Its results indicated that copying was unlikely (2.0% confidence) with only 2 overlapping phrases for a total of about 7 words, so the accusation is clearly unfounded. As both the section and the Reddit post cover the same material, the basic facts should match if both are accurate, but there is no infringement and the section, which has over 80 citations, should remain in the article. → Wordbuilder ( talk) 05:25, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
I have suggested that Baylor Sexual Assault Scandals be merged into this article. Its prose will be a nice addition, since the information here is primarily in bullet format in the Timeline section. Unless someone objects, I will merge that article into this one and place a redirect there. → Wordbuilder ( talk) 18:27, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
The Baylor University sexual assault scandal broke out into the media as alleged coverup and disregard to athlete actions, specifically members of football team at the university, by those within the athletic department. More specifically, the scandal broke in regards to Sam Ukwuachu and his alleged behaviors at Boise State and Baylor University. [1] As more information came out, it was alleged that administrators across various groups within the University covered up or otherwise hid or ignored things that football players on the team, both past (2011) and present (2015), had done. The university commissioned an internal investigation by a third party law firm. The findings, while somewhat vague identified the athletic department as culpable. Their head coach was fired, the athletic director resigned and the president stepped down. Is there a disagreement on the basis of the scandal?
Jacob Anderson - this individual was not part of the scandal. He was arrested, his fraternity suspended and he was suspended and expelled from the university and not allowed to graduate from Baylor. [2]. Baylor did not try to hide or otherwise cover up his behavior - which is the entire basis of the scandal, cover up and inaction; all references to him need to be removed from the article. Does anyone have a question or dispute the actions or what is written about Anderson?
If there are not any disagreements in regards to Jacob Anderson, he will be removed from the article.
Bigbrainbigfeet ( talk) 02:15, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
The article contains *many* statements and inclusions that Wordbuilder feels are relevant. I dispute the relevancy of many of additions in the time line. So, we therefore are two adults with different viewpoints. If paragraphs that were directly related to sexual assault allegations against football players were removed, it was done either through error or to remove duplicative information. Bigbrainbigfeet ( talk) 07:18, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
"Multiple WP:RSs comingle athletic with non-athletic/non-football references. That was the stable format of this article until you expunged much of that content and rewrote the lede to be football-specific.[1] The article and lede should reflect the content found in RS citations, not reflect your personal view of the topic - UW Dawgs.
The article has been under constant revision - it is essentially a living document and it did not start with non-athletic/non-football references. Who approved the change to include non-athletes? Who said those changes were accurate? Bigbrainbigfeet ( talk) 07:18, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
Let us see if we can even agree on a basic premise. How do we define 'scandal' in relation to that university? The scandal broke as related to *football* and up to 90% of this articles content relates to football players, coaches or people related to the football program. For sake of argument, let us remove "athlete" or "non-athlete" from the conversation. I argue that the scandal is the lack of oversight and lack of response from the university towards allegations involving sexual and physical assaults that occurred at that university. Victims were allegedly either stonewalled or had their claims dismissed and not investigated. *That* is the scandal. Is there a disagreement on this premise? Bigbrainbigfeet ( talk) 07:27, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
Wikipedia does not publish original thought. All material in Wikipedia must be attributable to a reliable, published source. Articles may not contain any new analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to reach or imply a conclusion not clearly stated by the sources themselves.UW Dawgs ( talk) 09:51, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
I argue that the scandal was the lack of oversight and lack of response from the university towards allegations involving sexual and physical assaults that occurred at that university. Victims were allegedly either stonewalled or had their claims dismissed and not investigated. I feel that description accurately describes the scandal and defines what the scandal was. Is there a disagreement on this premise? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigbrainbigfeet ( talk • contribs) 02:20, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
"Wikipedia does not publish original thought."UW Dawgs ( talk) 02:24, 7 November 2019 (UTC)