Talk:Southern Nazarene University

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Oklahoma (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Oklahoma, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Oklahoma on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Christianity / Holiness (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Holiness movement (marked as High-importance).
 
WikiProject Universities (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Universities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of universities and colleges on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 

NPOV dispute[edit]

This criticism section is not balanced in stating that the alumni have a choice to where they donate their funds to. This section sounds like a meaningless rant rather than a constructive criticism. This needs to be fixed or removed.Computernoob 00:50, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Men's Tennis[edit]

What happened to the Men's Tennis program? Why did they cancel it around 2002? I found a site, but it's 5 years old almost. It sounds like a mystery to me, or a cover-up. Moonraker0022 12:23, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
The mens tennis program was cancelled for 5 years after the coach took the team to a off-color location when they were away at a meet. It should start up again in the next year or two. Computernoob 00:55, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

hasn't it been 5 years already?Moonraker0022 (talk) 04:26, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

From the office of Sports Information in an interview conducted it was learned that the Men's Tennis program recieved the "death sentence" by SNU Athletic Director. Meaning there will never be a revived Men's Tennis program at the school.Moonraker0022 (talk) 21:20, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

History[edit]

This page need a section on the formation of SNU. Like the 14 schools merging into one. And maybe notable people who have graduated from SNU. Moonraker0022 10:26, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Good call. I cleaned up some of it, but I'd love more history. This might take a while... -- User:Aepoutre 19:20 June 14, 2007 (EST)

Student-Body Size[edit]

The article states that Southern Nazarene has the second-largest student body of any private school in the state of Oklahoma, but this is not true, if the numbers cited here are even close to correct. Tulsa, Oklahoma City, Oral Roberts, and Oklahoma Christian are all private and all have larger student bodies than SNU (with the exception of Oklahoma Christian, these schools have significantly larger student bodies, to the point that it is not even questionable). I can't say with any certainty for Oklahoma Baptist, but I would not be surprised to find that it also has a larger student body. I am deleting the offending sentence. When someone has more information, please, feel free to add the appropriate number here, if you so desire.

Cleanup tag & note about lists[edit]

Much of this page is very good, but there is also a great deal that reads like a promotional brochure for the school. Also, I didn't put this tag up there, but the article is list heavy. Some things, like the available majors could probably go (they could still be linked, but some thing like "SNU offers 500 majors, among them X, Y, and Z" would be more wikipedia-friendly than the entire list.). -steventity 20:12, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I tried to make it a bit more concise and do away with some unnecessary listing. I'll work on it some more... -- User: Aepoutre 19:21 June 14, 2007 (EST)

Degree counts[edit]

Need to check the # of grad degrees, etc offered. Off the top of my head, I can think of masters degrees offered by the School of Theology and Ministry, School of Nursing (2?, Nursing and Nursing Ed), School of Education (maybe 2 there, EdLeadership, MEd (does it still exist?)), Psychology (MSCP and I think there is a non-thesis masters there, too), Business (2? MBA and MSB).... 03:19, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

affiliation[edit]

I like the extra regional explanation being put into the note. It is confusing to people unfamiliar with our regions. thanks.Moonraker0022 (talk) 04:25, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Notable Alumni?[edit]

I noticed that this page lacks a "notable alumni" section. I think it would be interesting to see if any "notable" people have graduated from SNU (assuming that we use the same general criterion for notability as other Wikipedia articles). I've heard that Boyd Matson (ex-National Geographic anchorman) is an SNU alum. Another would be Gary Hart (a U.S. senator involved in a 1980s sex scandal). Any others?

Radical Robert (talk) 18:28, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Boyd Matson and Gary Hart would both be great additions, as well as Robert Hale(world-renowned opera singer). If I think of anymore, I'll add em to this list we've got going on, and then we can see about getting a real section made.

Not so much Alumni, but Jim Lehrer of The News Hour on PBS might be considered notable, as his grandfather was president of the university, J.B. Chapman.

SNU History[edit]

I propose that a new page entitled "History of SNU" be created to cover, and go more in depth on the schools, locations, mascots, ext. of all things SNU prior to SNU circa de 1988 (When the school changed from BNC to SNU). That date could get moved back, a good place would be the all things before they all merged onto the present location here at 39th and College. (Make sense?) I beleive that date was in the 40s or 50s. So that the SNU page would be 95% of SNU now, and 5% history in summary form with a main article link to "History of Southern Nazarene". What are ya'lls thoughts? Moonraker0022 (talk) 21:19, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

More appropriate than a separate "History of SNU" article might be separate historical articles for each of the defunct educational institutions. One already exists: Central Nazarene College. See Barrington College and St. Viator College for more examples. That way, the SNU page can then keep the short history it already has, which is appropriate to both an encyclopedic article and its level of notability (I know it might seem mean, but no Nazarene school merits a separate article for its history if we base any of what we do on standards of notability). I would love more history and better coverage, only disagree in the sense that there are now separate articles with information that could easily be part of the main SNU article (example: Southern Nazarene Crimson Storm, for which I might formally suggest a merger with the main article). Articles full of headings and a lot of redlinks are normally the kind to which I'd add a cleanup or non-notable/unencyclopedic tag to (though I'd like you and I to maintain this healthy and collaborative Wiki relationship, MoonRaker, so I've avoided doing that!). Let's talk more about this. Aepoutre (talk) 21:52, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Merger proposal[edit]

I've proposed mergers from SNUPY Awards, Sawyer Center, and Southern Nazarene Crimson Storm into this article. The first two aren't likely notable enough to warrant their own articles, nor are they long enough or even sourced articles (the third point contributing to the first and would probably affect the second if properly addressed). Please weigh in! I'll also post on Wikipedia:Proposed_mergers so that it isn't just Moonraker and myself, haha. Aepoutre (talk) 15:16, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I would say that the SNUPY Awards page could get merged back into Southern Nazarene Crimson Storm. But the Sawyer Center is notable because has been used by the NBA. Also many Oklahoma arenas have there own pages. (See [[Category:Sports venues in Oklahoma]], and [[Category:Buildings and structures in Oklahoma City]].) Many schools, big and small, have a pages for there sports facilities (such as Sonner Stadium). Also any school can have an athletics pages reguardless of size or notablitely as long as it follows college name then nickname (such as Kansas Jayhawks, Oklahoma Sooners, Southwestern College Moundbuilders). The Crimson Storm page is important because it takes all of SNU athletics off the regular SNU page, which is customary on many college's pages. (Thus keeping the SNU page neat and clean and evenly balanced between academics, campus, sports, student life, etc.) The Crimson Storm have won many national championships. The one of 3 schools nation wide NCAA or NAIA to win 4 straight women's basketball national championships is something of note. And the Crimson Storm page was developed out of a the WPP:CBB to highlight basketball at SNU. (Which I believe falls under the mission statement of the project)

Overall, the goal of the WikiProject on College Basketball is to provide detailed information on teams, players, and arenas, as well as the history of a college's program. We strive to provide factual, straightforward writing on a university or college's basketball team. By organizing all the colleges' basketball pages to a certain format, we hope to achieve our goal.

So far I believe that having the info on the Crimson Storm page is sufficient. When the need arises, it can be moved to Southern Nazarene Crimson storm men's basketball (such as Indiana State Sycamores men's basketball) The pages are growing, and will eventually provide information about all sports at SNU.
Comment I'd recoomend that you carefully expand. If you've got notability and sources, then go for it! However, I would caution against the making of pages just for the making of them. I'll check some of the pages you're speaking of here and if I see anything, I'll comment there. Good job at being bold!--Paul McDonald (talk) 19:31, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Wow, great timing, Paul! I had just written to Moonraker, having heard nothing from anyone else, and said that I think we could keep Sawyer and the Storm, but I still thought SNUPY needed to be merged. Awesome. I agree with a quality vs. quantity approach, and I'm glad to hear more about the Storm. I'm from New England and I haven't heard any of this, but I'll admit that I don't follow sports very closely. Excellent, I hope that you'll be free to offer more input in the future. So far it's mostly just Moonraker and I who have been working on these, so you're more than welcome to join in, haha! --Aepoutre (talk) 20:57, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Let's try the SNUPY Awards into the 'Storm instead, since they're both athletics. --Aepoutre (talk) 21:42, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

On the issue of SNU colors[edit]

  • 1) There is a difference between the SNU VSG, (SNU VSG), and what SNU uses in real life. In reality, SNU uses a darker version of Crimson and uses white for the athletic uniforms, merchandise and such, instead of the SNU's VSG SNU Crimson and SNU Gold. (When white is not used it is usually a off-white to cream, a much bigger difference than the two shades of crimson). Additionally, SNU, in practical use-in real life, uses more black than SNU-GOLD and/or white/off-white. It is a odd phenomenon, I know, I just wanted Wikipedia to know that, point 2 is actually the more important one.
  • 2) Also SNU uses the same Crimson, Pantone as OU (Pantone 201). But there colors in the infobox are different, the reason is OU is using the web-color for OU's info box, and SNU's infobox colors aren't. In the OU VSG, (OU VSG), OU has made the same concession for adapting colors for web screens (See below). Also SNU makes a similar concession on page 6, on using web hex colors (See below). Since Wikipedia is a web-based encyclopedia, I continue to assert that SNU's color in the info box should be the appropriate color for the info box, (from page 6 of the SNU VSG), which uses web-adjusted colors.

Oklahoma's consession for web based colors

"The official colors look great in print however do not

translate well to screen. Because of this we recommend Crimson (#841617)     

and Cream (#FDF9D8)     be used in their places."

SNU's concession for web based colors

"To build Southern Nazarene University's institutional

colors on the Web, use the following Web hex

color codes..."

Visually it looks like this:

  • SNU Crimson - Print color Pantone 201 turns into hex color #A32638      which turns into web hex color #620E0E     
  • SNU Gold - Print color Pantone 139 turns into hex color #AF7505      wich turns into web hex color #FAF0D8     

Here they are again side by side: (print color on left, web color on right)

  •         
  •         


Therefore, SNU's info box colors should be the ones as stated on page 6 of the SNU VSG, and stay that way. For these are the closest colors to SNU's real life, practical colors, and they are also official because they are on page 6 of the VSG. I seen as a compromise between the hex colors, web colors, and SNU's everyday colors. Thank you. Moonraker0022 (talk) 05:42, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Are you a student athlete there? This is a pretty ridiculous conversation because point #1 is moot without sources and because point #2 is so arbitrary it's sad. A lot of it seems to be original research: you "know" that Southern Nazarene and Ohio Universities have the same colors, and use what Ohio says to justify what you do with Southern Nazarene. Next you claim what Ohio says in their visual standards guide is the same as what Southern Nazarene means to say in theirs. Then, you use a magical non-existent formula to randomly choose between six different hex codes so that they can "turn into" from the others. And you are still off because FAF0D8 is the cream hex listed in the guide, not the yellow (E7C982) or dark yellow (D6B25B) that the gold would "turn into". None of this is a compromise, it's just wrong. King of the Arverni (talk) 17:04, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
      • Well OU actually means University of Oklahoma. oops. And yes point one is moot, but i did acknowledge that near the end. But it basically boils down to using SNU's VSG's web safe colors. The VSG has been sourced. Both the University of Oklahoma and SNU's VSG's say similar things. There are two shades of crimson used on page 6 for SNU, I chose the darker one since in reality, that is closer to what SNU really uses. (Same logic on the shade of cream). But really, just plain white is commonly used. This VSG was created in 2008 and has caused people who know little of SNU to change the colors to the strict letter of the law... I mean VSG. But, neither crimson nor cream/gold/white were SNU appropriate web-hex colors being used. I would change them to that, then be told I was a vandal. Moonraker0022 (talk) 02:11, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
Oh, okay. I guess I am more Ohio-centric. Sorry for misunderstanding that. About point 1, try not to do that in the future. There are talk guidelines that specify the importance of brevity. If you are making moot points that you know have no relevance then do not make them. So my concerns:
  • Unless I am really off base, hexadecimal formats are by their definition web-based but I admit using the conversion chart was probably original research. Still, the VSG says that the web colors are the "SNU web site color palette" and does not use the same language of Oklahoma about the difference between print and computer colors, so I am not sure that they mean "use these colors for all things on the web" instead of just "this is the SNU web site color palette."
  • It was pretty obvious when you started changing a color to "cream" and made pointed edits to leave "gold" that there was some sort of discrepancy. When I checked the VSG I guess that I interpreted it differently all around. The cream versus gold dilemma still makes me wonder if you know what you are talking about....
We both know that we cannot use all six "web" colors, even if you say that the three colors from before are incorrect. The institutional versus secondary is just as weird as the collection of six so can we build consensus using other sources on how to proceed? I want to make sure that it is verifiable, to eliminate the arbitrariness, and that it is not unilateral, to resolve your cream versus gold disconnect. Since you seem to be personally connected, do you have any other sources? I do not understand your reference to being a vandal. It is true that you are a vandal if you delete cited content, re-add content that was deleted to guidelines, et cetera.... are you a vandal??!! *gasp* I am not worried -- we are talking not being vandals. King of the Arverni (talk) 03:48, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
There's been no response to this last comment for some time. Qui tacet consentire videtur.... King of the Arverni (talk) 01:19, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
Moonraker, I know you've been editing other articles (including un-sourced color information for MidAmerica Nazarene University). If you're not willing to comment, then I'll take your silence to mean that you trust me to continue fixing this color issue without your help. King of the Arverni (talk) 15:56, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Well I didn't feel like anything more needed to be said, all I would be doing is re-stating my original comment (a comment I have the right to edit; which I did to make my point clearer [i.e. OU = Ohio, Oregon, and Oklahoma] I felt strikethroughs were clutter-some and ineffective).
  • As far as colors go: again, there is a difference of how a color looks on screen, than it does in real life. SNU has given us the correct colors to use on websites (SNU.edu, as well as wikipedia.org). A web-color adjust it slightly to make it appear as if it were the same color in real life print, that's all. As well as point 1 of my original comment. There is also a difference between what SNU sells in the gift shop, has on jerseys and other official things than what is used in the newly created (2008) VSG. Were there to be no school colors posted because there was no VSG prior to the Fall of 2008? Furthermore, there is no SNU gold on ANY jersey, it is white. The VSG focuses more on in-house styling, and standardization of the "look" rather than what the athletic dept. uses, which the dept. that uses the school colors to begin with. (look at the picture of the football team.) And when do school colors need a source? People know that the sky is blue, and Mizzou Tigers are yellow and black. School colors fall under common knowledge, therefore do not need a source. It's like asking to put a source on the name Kansas City Is it really a city? It could be a village or a town? Or it might not even be in Kansas!
    • It's great that you want sources for everything, I agree to an extent. But does every sentence on Wikipedia need a source? Look at the bigger picture. I am not making claims that SNU or MNU are the Best colleges, or make the best cheeseburger in the world or are called "the Nazarene Educational Capital of the World" Those are things that I see needing a source. Not a trivial shade of a school color. Let someone who has been there adjust the shade. These schools are very low on the wikiradar. I'm assuming your only connection to them is through Eastern Nazarene or MVNU or just being a Nazarene. If you weren't a Nazarene or lived in Quincy to know what ENC was, you wouldn't know what a SNU and MNU are. So please lighten up a smidgen. Or if you see information that you believe needs a source, find it yourself or add a fact-tag too it, instead of automatically deleting all information that doesn't have a source, as is your tradition. The changes being made are trivial (i.e. Crimson to SNU Crimson and about 19 to 15 miles). Please assume good faith, I care about these articles too, and I'm not trying to rob them of anything. I am trying to improve them.
      • With that in mind, if you look at almost any other school there is a stronger lead than one sentence. So when I try to beef it up a little, in accordance with the UNIGUIDE, you deleted, in my opinion, unfairly. When you could have switched things around, assumed good faith, and corrected any errors in my interpretation of the UNIGUIDE structure for leads go, (yes, I have read it, and I did so again just before I made MNU's lead.) and the goal of having a stronger lead for MNU would have been accomplished. I think it is great to have a fellow editor on these sites, but I get frustrated when they auto-delete any and all the changes made.
        • Lastly, I know you have a connection with these Nazarene schools, as well as school in and around Boston, that is great! Honest it is a great benefit to not be the only one watching over these pages and looking out for rouge students who change names and stuff. Thank you. But as far as MNU and SNU are concerned, they are already in pretty good shape already. There are way more schools that need help major structural help to move them up from stub to B or even GA. Take that great passion of yours for the Wikiproject University, and spread it to those schools too. (which I'm still not convinced one has even visited). Check out List of NAIA institutions. Try helping out one like Ursuline College. I don't really want a reply to this. I've gotten way off topic from just SNU colors. My silence was because I was trying to move on past this.

Moonraker0022 (talk) 22:58, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

My points in response to your (lengthy) ones:
1 - If you felt like nothing more needed to be said, then you would consent by your silence. That's all you need to say. I simply requested to continue the conversation and reach consensus. To be clear, your lack of communication didn't make you right or wrong, but it would've been inappropriate to not respond and then take issue with a unilateral decision. I didn't want to see that happen.
2 - You do not have any "right" to edit your own comments. It's disingenuous. When I offered the talk guidelines link, did you bother to read it?
3 - Very true that colors look different on "the screen" -- in fact, it's very common for them to look different on different screens, which is why I used sources to determine hex codes and guides to establish a standard, while you appeared to rely solely on your POV. The whole point of sources is to minimize POV.
4 - You mention that you have never seen gold on an SNU jersey, yet you specifically left links to gold in the article when you changed other aspects thereof.
5 - Disputes over city vs. town have occurred. Reliable sources are used to verify in these content disputes, just like any others.
6 - Respect the verifiability. It's an official English Wikipedia policy and not negotiable here -- even less under these POV-generated circumstances.
7 - Your edits are not per UNIGUIDE, which is based on the MOS. You obviously didn't read Talk:MidAmerica Nazarene University#Lead. I will reiterate: leads are summaries and introductions -- they include information already present in the body of the article and should not need references. Your last edit to MNU, for example, moved information from the body, source and all, to the lead contrary to the MOS. It also included recent non-notable and unreferenced additions to campus, which are only useful if your aim is PR.
8 - You have no right to know my connections to these articles. I'm focused on NPOV and RS, and that's all that's relevant here. A warning, in case you're not familiar: any attempt at outing may be grounds for a block or ban. That said, thank you for the kind words. I appreciate you, too (believe it or not, I really do), and would like to see you continue to edit -- but you need to take Wikipedia policy, which has been developed over a period of years by consensus among the Wikipedia community, seriously or these issues will continue to arise. I would rather not be in any sort of content dispute with you.
9 - I will reply to your last comment on your talk page now, since it's more personal than article-related. King of the Arverni (talk) 00:29, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

I just did some more article cleanup, but thought I'd propose this one: since the VSG calls crimson the "primary institutional color" and there have arisen issues with "secondary colors" & "SNU web site color", it seems fitting to make the infobox color crimson and leave it at that. Alternatively, it could just go back to crimson and black if Moonraker has such a POV issue with gold. Thoughts? Still opposed to using maroon (the "SNU web site color palette" offers two shades of crimson, one of which actually looks crimson to me on this computer and would make a crimson hex perfectly legitimate), and still have an issue with changing boxes to "cream" while leaving the link to "gold". The answer certainly isn't for Moonraker to not contribute to the discussion and instead expect this editor to not make any edits. That'd support a fait accompli. King of the Arverni (talk) 17:31, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Moonraker, in response to your initial assertion that "SNU, in practical use-in real life, uses more black than SNU-GOLD," I'd like to submit this as evidence that gold is used. It's certainly not cream, and the VSG still says "SNU web site color palette" not "color palette for all web sites featuring SNU" (even if it did, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and places less weight on "official" policy). If the above compromise isn't welcome, there is ample evidence to leave the crimson, black, and gold, and change the color boxes to reflect those. King of the Arverni (talk) 18:04, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
Look here. There are about 60 more like that, listing SNU's school colors as simply CRIMSON and WHITE... (and one even that list them as CRIMSON, WHITE and NAVY...yes, NAVY.) Reverting to CRIMSON and BLACK is fine. Or, even, CRIMSON and WHITE.
But the bigger issue is...who's site do we go off of, SNU's or 3rd parties... For even after another editor said MNU's would be more reliable you still pushed for using a 3rd party site. (i.e. 15 over 19). The current shade of RED CRIMSON for it is the same color as Oklahoma's... seeing as SNU and OU share the same pantone, why would it be a different hex? It shouldn't so please, please, please let it be! Go to CRIMSON and BLACK, go to CRIMSON and WHITE. And why are you bringing this up again,
The photo of SNU's GOLD seal...ok, there's one example, but it is surrounded by a BLACK curtain...So is there more GOLD in that photo or BLACK? (Survey says, BLACK, 98 points to the Johnson Family.) And near the top, there are also RED CRIMSON and WHITE curtains.
(And a personal note on perspective) Look brah, there are only about 1,500 people who go to SNU, and about the same at MNU, and about 600 at ENC...so the amount of people viewing there respective Wiki-pages is VERY small. check it out. So these aren't featured articles we're talking about here. (SNU only got about 500 hit in a full month in April 2009) So please relax need to revert every edit (especially mine...remember WP:OWN), it's cool you want to be editor-in-chief on every Nazarene University article, but let someone who has actually been there help out too. I know what your thinking, "But it needs to be a WP:RS!" yes, yes, yes WP:V, but there is also WP:BOLD. These things are very trivial (school colors and 19 vs 15), I have expressed all that before. But it's mostly the automatic-undo's on all my edits that annoys. I'm trying to help out WP:AGF. And most of all, remember your baptism. Moonraker0022 (talk) 05:52, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
Moonraker, you make one very good point and a handful of incorrect and/or irrelevant points. I'll start with the latter, to get that out of the way:
1) My concerns aren't in any way related to WP:OWN, which constitutes a personal attack unless you can cite diffs to show that I have issues with perceived ownership. Re-read WP:OWN before citing it again. My contributions show that I do not only edit articles associated with the Church of the Nazarene. In fact, your claims about "having been there" contribute more to WP:COI than anything else. I'd urge you to introspection on that matter. I'd also recommend reading WP:TALK, since I don't consider the shouting (caps use) and sarcastic tone (simultaneous strikethroughs with your comments) to be WP:CIVIL, either.
2) WP:BOLD does not outweigh WP:V, despite your suggestions to the contrary. "Remember that being bold doesn't mean ignoring the core Wikipedia content policies. Wikipedia must have a neutral point of view, which means that we strive for articles that advocate no single point of view. And it means whenever possible citing sources which are verifiable and reliable."
3) I've told you before that demanding one assume good faith flies in the face of Wikipedia's assume good faith policy. I've never assumed bad faith on your part; I only try to help by discussing content and citing guidelines.
4) The number of web hits does not determine featured article-status.
I'd like to end on a good note, so here is the very good point you've made: if your research is good then there are various conflicting sources. In fact, I vaguely recall an old SNU logo featuring a navy blue color, myself. In light of that, and in light of your willingness to simplify the matter -- you said that "[r]everting to CRIMSON and BLACK is fine. Or, even, CRIMSON and WHITE," and I'll ignore the incivility for now -- I re-submit my unanswered proposal to use solely the primary insitutional color of Crimson. King of the Arverni (talk) 03:53, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
Noticed more edits made without proposal. I have proposed a resolution twice now with no answer; see previous. King of the Arverni (talk) 04:58, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
Seven days since proposal. Earlier comments imply consent. Silence implies consent per even earlier comments. Will go ahead with proposal. King of the Arverni (talk) 01:31, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
No, the evidence shows that it should be White and Crimson, since there are more sources that say Crimson and White. SNU has more school colors than just Crimson.Moonraker0022 (talk) 01:35, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
That's fine with me because of this source. I wish that you could've responded to the proposal the first time instead of being inappropriate, but I'm also very glad that you were able to meet WP:BURDEN in the same breath. I'm so happy that we have a resolution! :-) King of the Arverni (talk) 01:46, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

titles and states[edit]

Must everything be an issue? Please stop reverting all my edits, I know what I'm doing here. The University Infobox Example clearly shows "Prof." used before a name. (i.e. it is that person's title.) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Universities#Example Also, locations... State are clearly spelled out. I can think of an exception not mentioned in the example, but it California would make it go to two lines use just CA. Most, and by most I mean 99% of them, have state listed out, as in in the example. And most say United States to, but I'll let ya get a third party to weigh in on that change. and again, please stop AUTOMATICALLY changing all my edits, (and yes I used CAPS because I'm getting annoyed, I've brought this up multiple times.) Moonraker0022 (talk) 07:21, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Crimson sources and research[edit]

This edit sounds like synthesis, although it's also just plain inaccurate. I'll elaborate as to both. This source was used to say "Crimson and white" with {{colorbox|crimson}} and {{colorbox|white}}. The most recent edit says "Crimson and white" with {{colorbox|#620E0E}} and {{colorbox|#FFFFFF}}. It seems to use this source, with Pantone 201, combined with this source from another institution, which also uses Pantone 201. The latter specifies that its hex version of Pantone 201 is #B30838. The most recent edit summary said that "SNU and the University of Oklahoma share the same Pantone for Crimson, so our color on here should still be the same." But #620E0E isn't #B30838. Even if it was, to use this source together with this source plus this source constitutes original research per WP:SYN. King of the Arverni (talk) 00:29, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't even know where to begin. According to both Universities standard guides, they both use the same pantone. There is no WP:SYN. It's the same thing, like the old 1/2 Price Store ads. As stated earlier, the uniforms in the photos are the darker shade. You pick the littlest things to have and edit war over. Since we are using a 3rd party source, and have thrown out the SNU VSG, the shade of crimson as you suggest, should match other evidence of SNU. Now the picture provided, and I can provide many more GNU-FREE pictures. Do you have photoshop, cuz you can use the eyedropper tool to show you that SNU uses the dark shade of crimson. Now you may think that that is WP:OR, but we are having an edit war over a shade of crimson. I would suggest focusing on the actually meat of the article. You seem to like Nazarene schools, and seem to really like ENC. (even though ENC is the smallest, and yet, has the largest article...and the rest seem like cookie cutter articles.) So put more meat on this SNU article and let people who are actually, physically, really, here worry about the actual shade of Crimson we use. So it really shouldn't be something to edit war over. If someone keeps putting bad subject matter, I have no doubt, you'll be the first one to correct it. Plus there are other university articles you could be policing. I've said my piece over and over about the darker shade. There is more to SNU than it's shade and pantone. Moonraker0022 (talk) 03:59, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
I'm sorry that you don't like my editing, but please do not comment on the contributor. Before we go any further, to make sure my understanding is clear, let me quote from WP:SYN:

Editors should not make the mistake of thinking that if A is published by a reliable source, and B is published by a reliable source, then A and B can be joined together in an article to reach conclusion C. This would be a synthesis of published material that advances a new position, and that constitutes original research.[7] "A and B, therefore C" is acceptable only if a reliable source has published the same argument in relation to the topic of the article.

I could be mistaken, but it looks as though using one source that says one thing (SNU Crimson & White), another that says another (SNU Pantone 201 with Pantone 139 & Black), and a third that says something on another topic (OU Crimson Pantone 201/#B30838) is "A and B, therefore C" without any one source actually saying "C". That seems to be WP:OR. "No original research" is one of Wikipedia's core content policies. More to the point, neither this edit nor this edit used #B30838 but #620E0E, which doesn't seem to be used in the OU source, making the OU reference of little relevance, the edit summary somewhat misleading, and the intended rationale fairly poor. As for asking me to look at whatever "the picture" means, I thought we'd established that colors look different on different computers, and that does seem like more OR to me. That said, it looks much closer to me using the actual "crimson" than using #620E0E. I therefore must have a different POV, which is the whole point of having WP:V, instead of WP:OR -- to establish WP:NPOV. King of the Arverni (talk) 04:57, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Based on what I have seen in the above comments, I would have to say that the phrasing which should be used is "crimson and white". And, believe it or not, removing unverified content is not engaging in an edit war. It is in fact what good editors are supposed to do. Unless unambiguous information regarding the use of other terminology is found, then the content should remain with "crimson and white", which seems to be, based on the available evidence, the best supported. And I would also request that editors refrain from casting any sort of aspersions on others, or, basically, telling them to go away. That is not acceptable behavior, particularly when the editor in question is actually acting in the interests of wikipedia. If one side or another wishes to have some sort of discussion regarding which terminology to use, I would suggest that a request for comment be filed and the various opposing options be presented. John Carter (talk) 14:38, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
This whole dispute just sucks. If we use an "eyedropper" as Moonraker0022 suggests, we get #990000. If we use graphics editors to convert the RGB from the SNU VSG we get #990033. If we use the same editor to convert the CMYK from the SNU VSG we get nothing because it won't accept the specified quantities. If we use any number of conversion charts to convert Pantone 201 from the SNU VSG we get #A32638. If we use the OU VSG, that same Pantone 201 should be #B30838. That is, unless we're talking about how the "official colors look great in print however do not translate well to screen" and then it's #841617. There are two different options from the SNU VSG if we use the "web site color palette" to "build Southern Nazarene University's institutional colors on the Web"': #620E0E for "light crimson" and #AA2727 for "dark crimson". If we use Wikipedia's crimson from X11 then we get #DC143C. This is ridiculous. Let's just leave it as-is. You're right, Moonraker0022; no one except the two of us even cares about SNU enough to contribute, and the school has multiple conflicting sources of its own, never mind the third-party sources. I definitely concede this to your judgement for now, since you're obviously a die-hard SNU "alum" and I've always assumed good faith on your part. I just hope any future disputes can be more civil and free from personal attacks. Until next time! King of the Arverni (talk) 22:26, 1 June 2009 (UTC)