Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Higher education/COTM

WikiProject Higher education
Main pages
Main project	talk
Participants
Participants category	talk
Project category	talk
Infobox	talk
Manual of style
Article guideline	talk
Templates
Higher education stubs	talk
Departments
Assessment	talk
Collaboration of the Month (inactive)	talk
Outreach (inactive)	talk
Articles
List of articles	talk
Accomplishments
Articles for Deletion
Archive
Clean-up List
Popular pages
Task Forces
Student Affairs	talk
Statistics
Higher education pages by quality Quality Total FA 45 FL 60 FM 13 A 1 GA 229 B 1,253 C 4,411 Start 17,233 Stub 15,667 List 1,975 Category 29,515 Disambig 131 File 5,268 Project 48 Template 2,072 NA 2,176 Assessed 80,097 Unassessed 2,120 Total 82,217 WikiWork factors (?) ω = 202,024 Ω = 5.20
Things To Do
Work on articles that need cleanup. Create a page for every university and college and add {{infobox University}} for it. See the missing list for those institutions still awaiting articles. Place {{WikiProject Higher education}} on every related talk page. Combat boosterism wherever it appears Ensure all articles, including Featured articles, are consistent with the article guidelines.

About COTF

So, I based most of this off of Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Congress/COTW. Now, I'd ask them about how they originally coded everything and how they managed the past collaboration topics, but it turns out they haven't updated since March 2007, so I have decided to just take what we have agreed on in the discussion on the WP:Uni/Talk Page instead. - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ contribs} 06:13, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Very nice! Is there a way to make the COTF box at the top of the page reflect the start and end dates for the current COTF? Esrever ^(klaT) 16:32, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I'll see if I can put that information in :-) - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ contribs} 22:51, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

How does that look?  :-) - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ contribs} 23:02, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Very nice! Esrever ^(klaT) 23:05, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Clarification on work

This is a great part of the project, but it would help to have more clarification what editors can do with articles that are selected for COTF. Do they just focus on them? Are there specific things that need to be improved? The easier we make it for new contributors the more likely they are to help. —Noetic Sage 04:29, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, the point of having three articles to focus on in the period of 14 days is to basically get into the mood, get into their niche, and start editing. We have a B-Class improvement drive to improve B-class articles to GA or even FA grade. We have a start/stub class improvement to at least push the article to a B-class article. And in case the random selections get boring, we try to focus on what the general consensus wants to edit next by having the ENT (Editor Nominated Topic) so that if the editor does not feel comfortable or does not feel motivated in editing random articles, at least he/she could participate in improving an article that a majority of the active editors in the WikiProject has interest(s) in.

What we're looking for:

• Upgrading Start-Class or Stub-Class articles to B-Class: (Borrowed from WikiProject Florida)

1. Referencing and citation
2. Coverage and accuracy
3. Structure
4. Grammar
5. Supporting materials

• Upgrading B-Class articles to GA/FA grade:

1. NPOV
2. Well-structured and written
3. Well-Rounded Coverage of University/Subject area
4. (See GA/FA requirements)

• General guidelines

1. Help verify/supply new sources
2. Update figures. (Enrollment figures and number of awards fluctuate every semester/year. It drastically affects the accuracy of this encyclopedia to make sure the data displayed in the article is up-to-date.
3. Check to see if the article is following the suggested WikiProject Universities article structure breakdown
4. Make sure the article is NOT an advertisement. The last thing we need is a misplaced online university trying to solicit to students through our services. If it is written like an advertisement, fix it. If you cannot, notify us on the appropriate subject header on this talk page.
5. Be Bold

And most importantly...

• Have fun! - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ contribs} 08:13, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

COTF 1 Talk Topics

Beijing Institute of Technology

• I'll need some help going over the translations. Google translate did very little in terms of translating Chinese to English, so I pretty much had to re-translate it myself. Since I've spent so much time on this thing, I'd like a couple pairs of eyes to look over just so we don't leave behind random grammatical/word choice errors. If someone can take a look, that'd be great. Thanks! - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ contribs} 09:28, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

General Discussion

So how effective is this COTF program? Please list the faults and room for improvement here. I'd like to hear your feedback as well as possible ways to attract other editors to join the bandwagon. - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ contribs} 07:14, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Active COTF editors?

Why the need for a list of active COTF editors? Why need they be contacted? Wouldn't it make more sense to just ask us to include this page on our watchlist and have discussions and questions posted here? --Midnightdreary (talk) 13:20, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I tend to agree. Rather than messaging everyone they should be checking the COTF page anyway if they really want to participate. Important happenings can go there. —Noetic Sage 19:43, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

COTF 2 Talk Topics

COTF 3 Talk Topics

Florida Institute of Technology

• Post discussion/questions here.

Franklin W. Olin College of Engineering

• Post discussion/questions here.

Norfolk State University

• Post discussion/questions here.

General Discussion

• Post general discussion/questions here.

COTF 6 Talk Topics

University of Phoenix

Archived Comments from Nomination (blanked when selected for ENT)

Comments

• (A school with 280,000 students deserves an article worth its size and impact on adult education) --17reasons (talk) 21:32, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
• Actually, for a school without proper notable accreditation is questionable, especially one of their most popular programs (MBA) is not even accredited by a professional organization like the AACSB. And for a user without a user page and without a proper talk page to bring this up, is also questionable. I will not remove this nomination as stated in nomination documentation, but the level of collaboration on this particular subject may be lower than usual. - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ contribs} 23:16, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

You know, I don't necessarily see a problem with focusing on University of Phoenix - but the editor who nominated should understand that the controversy surrounding it will be one of the most important elements in its article. Considering U of P's prevalence across the country, its (inflated?) number of enrolled students and the nation-wide controversial attention it has garnered, it might deserve a larger article... it just might be a bitter pill to swallow when it's all done. --Midnightdreary (talk) 23:31, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

I guess it's just a classic case of "Be careful of what you wish for"... - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ contribs} 05:25, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Exactly, lol. --Midnightdreary (talk) 14:37, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

• This article is looking much better than it did two weeks ago. Talk about a hot topic, you have to tread lightly with the editors as edit wars and vandalism are common. There was a lot of erroneous information on the page leading to confusing and conflicting thoughts about the content. Referencing and citation, is improved, a little more work to be done on the formatting. Other start class issues have been improved. Attention needs to be given to B class issues, specifically NPOV, and well-rounded coverage. I did not even begin to look into the heart of the Criticism and Controversy sections, other than obvious and false information about the schools accreditation. As to the accuracy of any of the other sections, I have no idea. The regular editors guard this information so much, trying to change any of it is challenging. I think at the heart of the problem that this University is the prime property of a major publicly traded company and some people do not think profit and education should go together. (See Discussion question below). There are editors on the site that seem to focus a lot of editing efforts on for-profit educational institutions like this one and their contributions do not always have a neutral tone. Medicscout (talk) 15:37, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
• Post discussion/questions here.

Since this school has inherent difference from traditional colleges, (working adult education, large online student body, no research focus, profit/shareholder return orientation), should the outline used be modified from the structure in WP:UNIGUIDE? Working NPOV into this article will be challenging and will find resistance.Medicscout (talk) 15:40, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I do not believe UOP should receive any special treatment, especially when many other universities offer online courses and degrees in their respective distance learning programs. NPOV should be in every article. Resistance will be greeted with the standard Wikipedia treatment. I don't think we'll have any problems. - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ contribs} 09:22, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

United States Military Academy

• Post discussion/questions here.

Rollins College

• I think this school will be much more enjoyable to work on than UOP. Referencing and citation needs some work, there is a Notes section randomly in the middle of the article. I am working on the structure to comply with WP:UNIGUIDE.Medicscout (talk) 15:39, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

• Post discussion/questions here.

General Discussion

• Post general discussion/questions here.

Sorry

Sorry I am late in choosing the next COTF. My birthday was on the 30th and the 31st I was sick all day. I'll work on this when I get back home. (I'm in the middle of a lecture at the moment...lol) - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ contribs} 20:12, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Next COTF

When's it coming? :)—Noetic Sage 05:04, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

I am assuming after March 14th, when spring break is over. PGPirate 14:12, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

On March 5th (yeah I posted it a little late, but) I did post this message on top of the COTF page.

Don't Worry, i am working on this. - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ contribs} 15:26, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Next COTF

I'm interested in starting this back up. As stated on WT:UNI, if you are interested in this as well, please let me know so I can try to make this work. Thanks. - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ guestbook ♦ contribs} 17:36, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

I'd be interested in taking a shot on a COTF. Samwisep86 (talk) 20:11, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

As would I. I really think that we ought to limit the collaboration to just one article per fortnight (or even per month), with the stated goal of getting some piece of B-Class (or lower) article ready to pass the GA process at the end of the collaboration. Esrever ^(klaT) 20:26, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm in... let's do this!--Dabackgammonator (talk) 23:48, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Cool

Next part: COTF or COTM? - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ guestbook ♦ contribs} 07:17, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

COTM. I think a fortnight is not enough to get a B-class article to GA. However, as long as we collaborate toward specific goals, we should be fine.--Dabackgammonator (talk) 08:51, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

• I'd go for a COTM as well, it will help in times of low participation rates. - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ guestbook ♦ contribs} 09:21, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Cool

I've moved the COTF stuff into the new COTM stuff... I know... not very specific, but I'll be putting up the ten articles for you guys to work on pretty soon, and make sure the new page is on your watchlist... :) - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ guestbook ♦ contribs} 20:48, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Please go vote. Also, if you are interested in updating the University Portal, please express your interest in the list below: Thanks - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ guestbook ♦ contribs} 21:56, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

1. - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ guestbook ♦ contribs} 21:56, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

I've been waiting for a tiebreaker

someone please break the tie so i can pick the topic please? thx, - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ guestbook ♦ contribs} 22:22, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Edition I of COTM has been extended by one month

As indicated by Madcoverboy, COTM program was not launched properly when I had my WikiBreaks. I have therefore extended Berkeley's COTM period until the end of this month. If you have any questions, please discuss it here. Thanks. - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ guestbook ♦ contribs} 04:27, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

NEXT COTM ??

It's been past "spring break" and there's still no activity.

I'm also disappointed in the selections. Nearly all the previous COTMs have been American schools -- I would like to see Canadian, Australian, and British ones added to the nomination list as well.

The last 10 picks by the moderator were all exclusively American (except one). That is disappointing, and shows an Americentrism where there ought not to be. Keitherson (talk) 06:11, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

A couple of things I'd like to point out. I am no longer the moderator for the COTM due to time conflicts. I have stated that in WT:UNI months ago. The program had picks from all over the world, including HKU, University of Kent, King's College London, and other universities in India, China and Thailand. This does not include nominations which did not receive enough votes to become a topic for the old COTF program or the COTM program. Please thoroughly review the selections before you start attacking random people you have not worked with, you have no background on, and probably will not work with. Have a good day. - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ guestbook ♦ contribs} 08:26, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm interested in reviving COTM. If you don't have the time, I'd gladly take stewardship over it until you'd like to spearhead it again. Since the "current" COTM from Dec/Jan still hasn't been nominated for GA status, perhaps we could add a secondary objective to future COTM announcements that is easier to attain, like improving some stub or start class articles. That would be particularly useful for editors who would like to participate but just happen to know very little about the one big article that's on its way from B to GA status. Let me know what you think. -Mabeenot (talk) 02:18, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Jameson L. Tai has entrusted me with the Universities COTM. The Nov/Dec 2009 edition is up and ready for editors to contribute. We've also added a second article (start-class) for anyone who prefers working on improving less-advanced articles. Also, be sure to vote for the next COTM. -Mabeenot (talk) 09:55, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Vancouver

		WikiProject Vancouver
		You have been invited to participate in Operation Schadenfreude to restore the article Vancouver back to featured article status.

- Mkdw^talk 20:46, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Cornell University

It is unfortunate that nothing really happened on the Cornell University article in August 2010. Could you please put it back into the nomination line up? Thanks. Racepacket (talk) 02:42, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

University of Virginia's College at Wise

This article needs a lot of work. More experienced hands are welcomed. Racepacket (talk) 01:37, 15 November 2010 (UTC)