|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
After seeing the documentary Frat House, which won two Sundance Film Festival awards in 1998, I was curious as to what the identity of the unnamed college was. Apparently it was Muhlenberg, as referenced here:
The article reads like a brochure. —Vespristiano 03:40, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Seems to me this is mainly because of some weasel wording without factual basis provided in the article. That's only a couple of sentences or so; take them away, and this looks like any other college stub. Johnleemk | Talk 11:34, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Clarification or revision necessary
"they created an independently-run student web publication, largely controlled by the dean." So is it independent or not? From what I can tell, its pretty independant of the College administration. This portion of the article makes no sense, and more importantly does not reflect reality, and should be revised. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 05:03, 13 April 2007 (UTC).
Re: Clarification or revision necessary
It is (or possibly was) not so independent. According to a student at the time, this was common knowledge. After the Muhlenberg Weekly had run a number of somewhat negative articles, the administration felt that it was bad publicity for the school, and created The Muhlenberg Advocate in response. Despite being labeled an independent publication, the dean still held a fair amount of influence over the content, and it became the publication that is sent to parents and prospective students.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 18:17, 11 May 2007 (UTC).
Re: Re: Clarification or revision necessary
I wrote for the Advocate in 2001. It was created by a group of students, and it is certainly not sent to prospectives--it's an ONLINE newspaper. No member of the administration was involved in its creation or administration. You've heard an old-wives tale. 22.214.171.124 14:34, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Image:Berglink.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 02:56, 26 October 2007 (UTC)