Talk:Brigham Young University–Idaho Student Activities

Notability

The information contained in this article has been verified and provided by Brigham Young University-Idaho University Communications and Student Activities. Camrow (talk) 23:36, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for putting it together, but I'm concerned for a few reasons. First is notability. Is the BYU-Idaho Activities program really notable outside of the school? I have a hard time defending it as truly notable and I WENT to BYU-Idaho. The fact that ALL of the sources here are from BYU-Idaho does nothing to help establish its notability and gives the page an advertisement or promotional feel to it, which isn't what Wikipedia is about (see WP:NOT). Second, if the info was "provided by" BYU-Idaho, then it borders on a conflict of interest. While info from the school can and should be used, it is best to include as many third-party, neutral sources as possible to give the article credibility and establish notability and neutrality. I don't know; I felt like it is an important aspect of the school to mention in the article, but not notable or unique enough to stand on its own. I would be interested to hear other experienced editors' thoughts! --JonRidinger (talk) 00:08, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

I appreciate your feedback on this article. One of the concerns I have is that so many parts of the BYU-Idaho culture have come out of the development of this program. Things like the student-leadership model, the learning model, student-student communication. If it would be more appropriate to find a way to get this into the main BYU-I page, I think that is ok, I am just concerned with it being too much for that page. Should we just cover the history and organizational overview? This is the only documented record of the creation of this program and it was acquired firsthand in an interview, so I would hate to see it deleted. What do you think is the most appropriate course of action? --Camrow (talk) 07:55, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Also, I've just been reading some of the links in your comments, and I must admit, I am a novice. This is my first time and I am both a current student at BYU-Idaho and an employee of University Communications. Should I not be involved in this at all? Should I allow other editors to determine how to merge or move the "About Student Activities" section into the main BYU-I article. I want to maintain the integrity of Wikipedia and help however I can. --Camrow (talk) 20:06, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm SO glad you're willing to discuss this. I am by no means a "final authority," but I do know some of the guidelines. I tagged it with a notability tag so we (myself, yourself, and others) can find other references to the Activities Program that are third party and neutral. If we can't, then merging it back into the main BYU-Idaho article would be best as it is certainly a definining characteristic of BYU-Idaho. The goal of Wikipedia isn't to be a promotional page or a mirror of another website, but to be a well-written and supported encyclopedic website. What we have to decide is whether or not the BYU-Idaho Activities Program is notable enough outside of the school (and church) to stand on its own in an article. Things that would make it notable on its own would be some sort of extended media coverage or exposure or some sort of awards or other accolades. My personal opinion is that having a more lengthy section on the Activities Program in the main article on BYU-Idaho would be more appropriate; not a detailed explanation of the entire program, but a thorough explanation (like the history, background, purpose, and scope). But again, that's my opinion. Perhaps other editors would disagree!

As for your involvement, just be careful when editing so the page doesn't become an advertisement or promotional page; in other words, it shouldn't LOOK like someone from University Communications wrote it (which is what the school website looks like). When you are editing any articles, even ones on BYU-Idaho, you should always be doing it as an individual, NEVER as an employee or agent of the school. That creats conflict of interest I mentioned the other day. As an editor you are trying to create and develop well-written, balanced articles. University Communications is designed to promote the school and establish good relations with the "outside world" and their writing reflects that. It is OK to have references from UC, but it definitely hurts this article right now to only have references from them since the Activities Program is virtually unknown outside BYU-Idaho. For now, try to find other references and notable features that separate BYU-Idaho's Activities Program from other schools, because I know there are other schools who do have extensive activities programs even competetive intramural leagues (the U.S. service academies and the University of Notre Dame come to mind). Also keep in mind the audience this is designed for: a worldwide audience, not a BYU-Idaho or LDS audience or even an American audience. Think "what important points about this school and this program would I stress in an article read by people who likely know absolutely nothing about the school, its culture, or the LDS Church?" and "would they care about this?"

I did look on Wikipedia for examples that might be similar to this and found a few that could help us out: Traditions of Texas A&M University, Rutgers University traditions, and Traditions and student activities at MIT. So, perhaps a larger article on BYU-Idaho culture or traditions, which includes the Activities Program, could also work. --JonRidinger (talk) 21:02, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

← :I haven't read your guys' whole conversation, but if this article wants to avoid deletion, it needs some independent, third-party sources that are reliable and verifiable. See WP:N and WP:RS. --Eustress (talk) 22:53, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

AGREED...that's why I'm worried it will get deleted. However, if it were worked into a "traditions of BYU-Idaho" article or something like that, more info could be found. --JonRidinger (talk) 01:23, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

The problem with the historical section is that that information hasn't been published or recorded. It was an internal process (the creation of Student Activities) and the story was put together after interviewing the persons who were involved in its creation. I have noticed that primary sources are allowed in some circumstances. Is this one of them? Because this program is highly relevant to the culture at BYU-Idaho, it might be useful to have it as a part of that main article. Should the history of the program be removed entirely? I can concede that there was not any major news outlet present at the meetings that developed this program, only the people I interviewed. --Camrow (talk) 00:01, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Did the Scroll print anything about it? I have a hard time believing there is no published record of this happening, especially in a church that keeps track of EVERYTHING. Granted, using the Scroll as a source is still hardly 3rd party, but it is a start. The best places to look would be the local newspapers and TV stations. Here is one article I found that may provide some sort of start: [1]. It was written by someone from the Deseret News, so I would question its neutrality, but it may have some useful info. I think the fact that there is so little information available about the Program attests to the fact that it is not yet notable. In this article, stick with the items that can be verified with sources and leave out anything that really can't be. Who knows, maybe a history of the program will be published soon. --JonRidinger (talk) 01:23, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

That was what I thought too when Garth Hall told me the school hadn't recorded it. We might be waiting for the Church to send an oral historian for that. The thing is, all this came about from my desire to produce a media kit for the Scroll since they were doing such a bad job of reporting on Activities programs and events. I kept a book of clips from the last two semesters, and Activities made anywhere between one and six articles every week, but without attribution. It's a problem. Maybe you're right and it doesn't belong yet. It just seems like a shame to me because most of the stuff talked about in the Student Life section is actually a part of Activities. Thanks for finding that one article by the way. I think this will probably take some time. The archiving of the Post Register and Standard Journal is atrocious. --Camrow (talk) 22:20, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

what a shame...newspapers can be such valuable tools in researching history, but it doesn't surprise me one bit that those papers have such awful archiving. As for your efforts, I don't think they have to go to waste. If this article is deleted, you have other options. I noticed Eustress already moved the text to your Sandbox, so that would be a good place to build it up or store it for "safe keeping." You mentioned you had plans to assemble a media kit for the Scroll. Honestly, if the Scroll would publish something, like a history of Activities or a guide, it could be used as a source without the original research problem. And having gone to BYU-Idaho I know for a fact that the Scroll could publish something like that without having to forego a major news event. Even if the University decided to publish something, it would help this article. The information you have collected is valuable for sure. What's interesting to me is how the University tends to market and promote the Activities Program as very unique yet has very little information available about its history and background other than it being the result of ending intercollegiate athletics. As for the Student Life section, there wouldn't be anything wrong with reorganizing that section into subsections (including activities) since Activities is a pretty integral part of student life at BYU-Idaho. --JonRidinger (talk) 02:45, 5 December 2008 (UTC)