This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A Western Seminary employee gave me permission to use the text of a Western Seminary website page ( http://www.westernseminary.edu/AboutWS/history.htm) to include the history of the school on the wikipedia page. After receiving this message from Wikipedia, I've attempted to adjust the text temp directory page to give it more of my own writing tone and I words.
Please allow me to post the info that I've submitted as of today, Friday, October 12.
Thanks, and have a great day!
PJ Pjozzies 21:03, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
"I've worked to revise the history article to remove overly editorial comments, unless cited by outside individuals. Thanks for your tips! Pjozzies 22:04, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Per Wikipedia's neutral point-of-view policy, I find the following parts to sound spammy, preachy, or otherwise biased:
CobaltBlueTony 21:17, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
With all due respect, and as I've written elsewhere, the so-called POV thing seems to be an over-played card in the Wikipedia universe. It is genuinely irritating to see a POV objection pop up not 24 hours after the initial article was posted. Really! Give the initial authors some time to review their own work for a couple of days before jumping on them over alleged POV issues. Wiki articles evolve, change, and progress. It is, seems to me, unrealistic to expect full-on so-called "encyclopedic" tone on the first day of a post. Additionally, there is incredible irony in accusing an article about a Christian seminary of being "preachy." If there is anywhere to allow a small dab of 'preachiness,' it should be in an article describing a school that takes pride in educating preachers! Look, either we take seriously the Wikipedia mantra to "Be Bold!" or we sit back and do nothing because of the annoyance factor of having to respond to over-sensitive POV-police. emesselt 19:04, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Image:Spurgeon logo journal.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 19:43, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A Western Seminary employee gave me permission to use the text of a Western Seminary website page ( http://www.westernseminary.edu/AboutWS/history.htm) to include the history of the school on the wikipedia page. After receiving this message from Wikipedia, I've attempted to adjust the text temp directory page to give it more of my own writing tone and I words.
Please allow me to post the info that I've submitted as of today, Friday, October 12.
Thanks, and have a great day!
PJ Pjozzies 21:03, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
"I've worked to revise the history article to remove overly editorial comments, unless cited by outside individuals. Thanks for your tips! Pjozzies 22:04, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Per Wikipedia's neutral point-of-view policy, I find the following parts to sound spammy, preachy, or otherwise biased:
CobaltBlueTony 21:17, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
With all due respect, and as I've written elsewhere, the so-called POV thing seems to be an over-played card in the Wikipedia universe. It is genuinely irritating to see a POV objection pop up not 24 hours after the initial article was posted. Really! Give the initial authors some time to review their own work for a couple of days before jumping on them over alleged POV issues. Wiki articles evolve, change, and progress. It is, seems to me, unrealistic to expect full-on so-called "encyclopedic" tone on the first day of a post. Additionally, there is incredible irony in accusing an article about a Christian seminary of being "preachy." If there is anywhere to allow a small dab of 'preachiness,' it should be in an article describing a school that takes pride in educating preachers! Look, either we take seriously the Wikipedia mantra to "Be Bold!" or we sit back and do nothing because of the annoyance factor of having to respond to over-sensitive POV-police. emesselt 19:04, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Image:Spurgeon logo journal.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 19:43, 26 November 2007 (UTC)