Jump to content

Talk:Canadian University Press

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

Any CUPpies wandering through here? You may notice that the Varsity doesn't really have its own Wikipedia entry at the moment. Krupo 03:47, Nov 18, 2004 (UTC)

So create one? Spinboy 08:24, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Lists

[edit]

Maybe separate the list and the article is the way to go. Bobanny 22:38, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Conferences

[edit]

CUP has pulled their support for hosting the 2007 conference... I dont have a source, but I'm taking it out for now. --Adamfreeland 03:11, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citations

[edit]

I deleted a large portion of lists due to them not being cited, and the fact that we're not a directory. I also put on an unreferenced tag. GreenJoe 04:54, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The historical information *should* be put back in! This is the history and is relevant to CUP. Perhaps GreenJoe should review the not a directory definitions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.6.27.95 (talk • contribs)

I'm happy to have it go back in, once someone can cite sources for it. GreenJoe 15:03, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've restored the lists of CUP conferences, national office staff and boards of directors. This information is historically significant and of future use to researchers. Two masters papers on Canadian University Press have been written in the last 20 years and such lists can help track down sources for researchers to interview. Also, some CUP alumni have gone on to distinguish themselves in a number of areas, including professional journalism and of course, politics. As a former chairman (CUP 66) I can verify the accuracy of most the information. -NBJournoNBjourno 23:26, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia isn't a directory and what you put in isn't cited. Please don't do that again. GreenJoe 00:18, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Listen, listing important figures to the organization's history isn't using Wikipedia as a directory. Other pages, for example, the page on the President of the United States, allows for such lists. (Albeit formatted a bit more, which I'd be glad to do for this page). So knock off the broken record routine. As for citation, I don't need to link to some external website when I can verify the historical information. Now, if you want to verify my identity, if that makes you feel like a wikipedia god, we can do that. NBjourno 01:06, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The President of the US is notable, your former board members, etc are not. An exception can be made if they are notable outside of their involvement with the CUP. You independently verifying it doesn't work. That's original research which is contrary to Wikipedia policy. We have to verify stuff that is included, but listing every Board member oor every member paper doesn't help the article, or improve its quality. GreenJoe 01:09, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And listing ministers of the The Universal Life Church is?

As their entry states the ULC "is a religious organization that offers anyone semi-immediate ordination as a ULC minister free of charge". I note that you created the page listing the ministers. Now seriously, get a grip. —Preceding unsigned comment added by NBjourno (talk • contribs)

Great, list it for deletion if you want. As for what you said on your talk page, yes listing it on the website would help somewhat since it would then be verified, but that doesn't solve the immediate problem that it's not notable. See also WP:WAX. GreenJoe 01:44, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Listen, I'm not interested in deleting your wikipedia page. That'd be lame. Now as for the "immediate" problem that the list isn't "notable." Here's a few facts: 1) CUP is North America's only student press cooperative. That makes it unique. It also makes its leadership, whether that's the executive or the board, important. (Because you like citations, here you go: http://www.cup.ca/about.php). 2) CUP is also the oldest student news service in the world. (See above reference). Again, unique and it's leadership both historical and current, is interesting and notable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by NBjourno (talk • contribs) 01:52, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't make a list of every member or board member required, or notable. Yes CUP is notable itself, but a list of Presidents or Editors is not. GreenJoe 01:56, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the people on the list of Presidents/Editors/etc haven't done anything notable outside of CUP, so they're nobodies. At least the people on the ULC list are all famous outside of their activities in the church. GreenJoe 01:59, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know that for a fact or are you doing "original research?" Also, their participating in the world's oldest student news service is notable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by NBjourno (talk • contribs) 02:24, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Evey person on the ULC list is cited. No, participating in it isn't notable, unless they've done something to make them notable outside of their involvement with CUP. GreenJoe 02:39, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'll start a requests for comment over this, and have others tell you the same thing. GreenJoe 02:41, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Guys, I've noticed there's currently a dispute over the content of this article. I'd like to take a moment to look over the diffs and make an unbiased third party comment. I'd suggest for the moment, that we leave the article as it currently stands, and I'll make my suggestions once I've finished looking over the diffs. Cheers! Pursey Talk | Contribs 02:48, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

At this point, I'm going to be reverting the page once more. I believe that the information added is largely listy, clutters the article, and overall irrelevant to the article. It is also completely unreferences, has no citations. I'd request that those involved not revert this any further. If this is done, I'll be making a request for an Administrator to review the 3RR situation and be requesting protection of this article. Thanks! Feel free to contact me on my talk page with any concerns. Pursey Talk | Contribs 02:51, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Presidents, Editors, etc.

[edit]

Please leave them out of the article. They are not notable, and Wikipedia isn't a directory. GJ (talk) 23:15, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Until Recently"

[edit]

As of today the first sentence under "CUP Board of Directors" begins "Up until recently..." - misleading and bad wording. Based on some quick research, my best guess is that the change to a Board took place around 2001, so I replaced the wording with "Until the early 2000s....". If somebody can pinpoint the correct year, it would be a good thing. PKT 13:52, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lists of past and present staff

[edit]

They are not encyclopedic, and Wikipedia is not a directory. If the point is that some past members have gone on to achieve success, the article should list those past members specifically in the form of a "List of Notable Past Members". Otherwise we have a long, unwieldy article.

For those defending, please also consider declaring any conflicts of interest you may have in the list being placed here.

-Addionne (talk) 15:07, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Canadian University Press. 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).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:55, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Canadian University Press. 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).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:56, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Canadian_University_Press&oldid=1206528894"