This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
This article is being discussed for deletion, but somehow the notice that the article is being discussed for deletion was removed from the article itself. Could someone more knowledgable than I restore that notice to the James F. Jones page? K95 18:11, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
I went to and love trinity, but this was clearly written by someone from the university as a promotional piece. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.199.89.116 ( talk) 03:34, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
This page should not be speedy deleted as an attack or a negative unsourced biography of a living person, because... (your reason here) -- 75.140.89.50 ( talk) 06:09, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
This article should NOT be "speedy deleted." The citations used and the information conveyed is well-cited: Over 50% of the citation for Jones come from Trinity College's own website or newspaper, 10% come from YouTube video's of Jones speaking, and two articles are sourced from Forbes and the WSJ. While the article does show his time at Trinity as contentious, this is because it was a contentious time in reality. This is supported by the copious use of college-based citations.
This article has likely been requested to be deleted due to Jones' current place in the spotlight, not due to the lack of truthfulness or sourcing of the Wikipedia entry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.146.106.131 ( talk) 22:38, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
This page should not be speedy deleted as an attack or a negative unsourced biography of a living person, because... this person deleted their profile because he is now in the news. No other reason. -- 2607:F470:22:13:2168:9F5A:4E13:6234 ( talk) 04:33, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
It is clear the only reason this article has been nominated for a 'speedy deletion' is that Jones is, once again, in the news for funding/endowment concerns that have caused the imminent closure of his current place of employment (Sweet Briar College). All of the information on this page has been well-cited and should stand as written. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.45.139.81 ( talk) 03:12, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
This page should not be speedy deleted as an attack or a negative unsourced biography of a living person, because... this article is well referenced and neutral on the controversial aspects. Simply because this person is falling under current scrutiny because of news events does not warrant any further suppression of their documented and referenced job history. Doug ( talk) 01:40, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
In looking over the article, I've noticed that quite a bit of it is directly copied/plagiarized from the Trinity College and other websites. Any idea as to the procedure here? I'm fairly new to Wikipedia so I'm not sure if I can just remove it for future re-writes or leave it as it is for the time being? Winner 42 - I see that you also have been concerned with original + non-biased content here, thoughts? Ladysif ( talk) 05:18, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
Somebody has put a bunch of largely positive stuff on the page, all of which lacks any citations, and removed much of the material which was previously there and which was very well documented. Gee, I wonder who that could be? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.197.54.209 ( talk) 15:43, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
I appreciate there's been lots of work -- and lots of contests -- on this article. I'm here in the role of passer-by/momentarily interested/minor cleaner-upper. I do what I call Wikipedia talk:Bare URLs/Archive 1#Minimal upgrades. This was one of the worst I've encountered. One can see what I did here, mostly 'minimal upgrades'. It looks a little better, gives a little more info. I hope someone(s) who care(s) more about this article will work harder to get full footnotes into it; including retroactively. I view my fix as 'hopefully interim'. Cheers. Swliv ( talk) 21:13, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on James F. Jones. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 17:10, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on James F. Jones (educator). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:10, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
I have just removed the claims that Jones aimed to effectively shut down the Greek system, and that his stay there was untenable. Neither is supported by the sources given. The claim about the Greek system, the closest thing was that some members of houses said that they would be forced to shut down, but the article is only citing them as saying it rather than saying it was true; even if it was true, the closure of certain houses is not the same as ending the whole system; and even were that not the case, we cannot assume that was the effect that Jones intended.
The statement that his stay in the position was "untenable" was not a claim that the source made... and even if it had been, it's a point-of-view, not a fact.
The material underneath that about Sweet Briar is also problematic, in that the listed source is this document, which has the usual problems of WP:BLPPRIMARY and more, as there is no verification that the unsigned document is what it is assumed to be. It's just a file on a government server, no verification that this is a final draft that was signed. -- Nat Gertler ( talk) 13:09, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
I tried to fix some of the most egregious problems. Wording implying that he committed criminal acts, or that a judge ordered him to resign, implying criminal acts, requires strong sourcing, indeed. Someone should fix the Greek part as well. Collect ( talk) 23:01, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
This article is being discussed for deletion, but somehow the notice that the article is being discussed for deletion was removed from the article itself. Could someone more knowledgable than I restore that notice to the James F. Jones page? K95 18:11, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
I went to and love trinity, but this was clearly written by someone from the university as a promotional piece. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.199.89.116 ( talk) 03:34, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
This page should not be speedy deleted as an attack or a negative unsourced biography of a living person, because... (your reason here) -- 75.140.89.50 ( talk) 06:09, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
This article should NOT be "speedy deleted." The citations used and the information conveyed is well-cited: Over 50% of the citation for Jones come from Trinity College's own website or newspaper, 10% come from YouTube video's of Jones speaking, and two articles are sourced from Forbes and the WSJ. While the article does show his time at Trinity as contentious, this is because it was a contentious time in reality. This is supported by the copious use of college-based citations.
This article has likely been requested to be deleted due to Jones' current place in the spotlight, not due to the lack of truthfulness or sourcing of the Wikipedia entry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.146.106.131 ( talk) 22:38, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
This page should not be speedy deleted as an attack or a negative unsourced biography of a living person, because... this person deleted their profile because he is now in the news. No other reason. -- 2607:F470:22:13:2168:9F5A:4E13:6234 ( talk) 04:33, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
It is clear the only reason this article has been nominated for a 'speedy deletion' is that Jones is, once again, in the news for funding/endowment concerns that have caused the imminent closure of his current place of employment (Sweet Briar College). All of the information on this page has been well-cited and should stand as written. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.45.139.81 ( talk) 03:12, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
This page should not be speedy deleted as an attack or a negative unsourced biography of a living person, because... this article is well referenced and neutral on the controversial aspects. Simply because this person is falling under current scrutiny because of news events does not warrant any further suppression of their documented and referenced job history. Doug ( talk) 01:40, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
In looking over the article, I've noticed that quite a bit of it is directly copied/plagiarized from the Trinity College and other websites. Any idea as to the procedure here? I'm fairly new to Wikipedia so I'm not sure if I can just remove it for future re-writes or leave it as it is for the time being? Winner 42 - I see that you also have been concerned with original + non-biased content here, thoughts? Ladysif ( talk) 05:18, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
Somebody has put a bunch of largely positive stuff on the page, all of which lacks any citations, and removed much of the material which was previously there and which was very well documented. Gee, I wonder who that could be? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.197.54.209 ( talk) 15:43, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
I appreciate there's been lots of work -- and lots of contests -- on this article. I'm here in the role of passer-by/momentarily interested/minor cleaner-upper. I do what I call Wikipedia talk:Bare URLs/Archive 1#Minimal upgrades. This was one of the worst I've encountered. One can see what I did here, mostly 'minimal upgrades'. It looks a little better, gives a little more info. I hope someone(s) who care(s) more about this article will work harder to get full footnotes into it; including retroactively. I view my fix as 'hopefully interim'. Cheers. Swliv ( talk) 21:13, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on James F. Jones. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 17:10, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on James F. Jones (educator). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:10, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
I have just removed the claims that Jones aimed to effectively shut down the Greek system, and that his stay there was untenable. Neither is supported by the sources given. The claim about the Greek system, the closest thing was that some members of houses said that they would be forced to shut down, but the article is only citing them as saying it rather than saying it was true; even if it was true, the closure of certain houses is not the same as ending the whole system; and even were that not the case, we cannot assume that was the effect that Jones intended.
The statement that his stay in the position was "untenable" was not a claim that the source made... and even if it had been, it's a point-of-view, not a fact.
The material underneath that about Sweet Briar is also problematic, in that the listed source is this document, which has the usual problems of WP:BLPPRIMARY and more, as there is no verification that the unsigned document is what it is assumed to be. It's just a file on a government server, no verification that this is a final draft that was signed. -- Nat Gertler ( talk) 13:09, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
I tried to fix some of the most egregious problems. Wording implying that he committed criminal acts, or that a judge ordered him to resign, implying criminal acts, requires strong sourcing, indeed. Someone should fix the Greek part as well. Collect ( talk) 23:01, 5 January 2018 (UTC)