User talk:DMB112
TALK PAGE
DMB112, you are invited to the Teahouse
|
Hi DMB112! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. |
endowment data
Hi there. I've reverted a couple of changes you've made to university articles (like Dartmouth College and Stanford University) as regards the endowment data. You've switched those articles to using NACUBO data for the endowment, but all of that data seems to be from 2011. Some articles have data that is more recent. Why would we want to use outdated data? Esrever (klaT) 08:05, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
I too have reverted some of your endowment changes, to UCLA and UC Berkeley. Not only is NACUBO data a year older than the UC Treasurer's report, it's incomplete because it does not include the endowments managed by the UC Regents on behalf of the UC schools.Contributor321 (talk) 20:50, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello to both of you,
I use the NAUCBO data because it allows people to easily access a comparison of the school's endowments compared with other universities. It also shows percent change which is very important information when looking up universities. Endowment information is usually inflated by having different methodologies to count in the endowment. Some consider external physical plant profits, patent accumulation and holdings and even non-traditional athletic revenue. Often times there aren't any sources at all. NAUCBO standardizes the data. It's considered the official source. I feel it's just a better source for us to use rather than a standalone link or US News as I have seen.
Here is the source link. 2012 values are slated to be released in late January 2013. I'm assuming next week. http://www.nacubo.org/Research/NACUBO-Commonfund_Study_of_Endowments/Public_NCSE_Tables.html
The 2012 dataset will be released next week. I will update the values then.
Thanks, DMB112 (talk) 20:55, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for explaining your reasoning. I too agree NACUBO is a very useful source because it standardizes the data, but believe it should only be the "official" source for private colleges and universities and should be used with caution for public universities. In the case of the University of California system, NACUBO seems to report only the endowments managed by the UC schools' Foundations, and does not include the endowments managed on behalf of the UC schools by the UC Regents (see p.4 of http://www.ucop.edu/treasurer/_files/report/UC_Annual_Endowment_Report_FY2011-2012.pdf for details). Therefore, I believe the UC endowment data reported by the UC Treasurer's Office is relevant and should be shown in Wikipedia articles for UC schools. When NACUBO releases its updated report for 2012, please do not update the UC schools endowments with NACUBO's incomplete data. Thank you.Contributor321 (talk) 21:46, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
February 2013
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Georgia State University. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
- Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
- Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. ElKevbo (talk) 11:34, 11 February 2013 (UTC)