Talk:Gene Nichol

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Comment[edit]

This page is entirely untrue. Neither the University of Colorado or the University of North Carolina suffered in the rankings as a result of Nichol's leadership. In fact, their standing in the rankings was increased; Nichols improved both schools dramatically, leaving both in a better position than when he arrived. Moreover, in his short time as president of the College of William and Mary, he has already increased the endowment by almost $50 million. This article was almost assuredly modified by someone who opposed Nichol's controversial decision to remove the cross from the Wren Chapel, which was placed there in 1940. The cross did not TRADITIONALLY occupy a place in the chapel, and early leaders of the American republic would have been greatly offended if it had--considering crosses in churches at that time were considered a vestige of the Roman Catholic Church. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.96.212.221 (talkcontribs) 00:59, 5 April 2007 (UTC).

Question[edit]

I wanted to ask you if an administrator would insert the following bolded language to the Gene R. Nichol page:

He was the dean of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Law from 1999 to 2005 as well as the dean of the University of Colorado Law School from 1988-1995.

Thanks, Cka3n 04:51, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

{{editprotected}}

I made the change. It is recommended that you put the editprotected tag just beside your request. CMummert · talk 12:11, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Page protected[edit]

See also Gene R. Nichol section on WP:BLP Noticeboard.

After weeks of disruptive editing by three users (fourth began identical edits today), this BLP article has been protected from editing. All four have been reported on WP:AIV as well. — Athænara 05:01, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

This is vitriole.[edit]

Whence you've finished this edit, will the administrata class of this Web System (WKIPDIA) remove the edit-blocker? Is it to be discussed? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.96.212.147 (talk) 21:57, 17 April 2007 (UTC).

And well deserved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Omggnhgyag (talkcontribs) 03:28, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Remove Link[edit]

{{editprotected}} I propose the first link in the External Links section be removed. It links to a propaganda website for an issue that has basically been resolved. ~~ Meeples (talk)(email) 20:09, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

This page has been unprotected. CMummert · talk 23:21, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

No controversy on the queen[edit]

The section on the queen's recent visit contains a typo ("the Queen Elizabeth II")--no, the ocean liner did not come to Williamsburg. Moreover, there have been a couple of letters to the editor in the local press concerning an alleged breach of protocol, but nothing from the British embassy or Buckingham Palace, two entities who are not shrinking violets when it comes to protocol. This concern surrounding the queen's visit to William and Mary does not rise to the "controversy" level or anywhere near it. Please delete heading and edit. 71.50.128.211 15:18, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

NPOV[edit]

I've added the POV tag to the Wren Cross section. Most of the section is poorly written, and heavily POV-laden, with many unsourced (or incorrect) statements.

Also be watchful: an interest-group looking to fire Nichol has been editing the article, and currently link to it from their website.

I'm going to do my best to clean it up, and remove unsourced or emotionally-laden statements. --Orang55 08:30, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

I've made the edits. The Flat Hat's website is down, and was therefore unable to adequately explain the issue without adding more unsourced statements. I'm going to leave the NPOV tag up until more work can be done, and until somebody checks over my edits. --Orang55 09:02, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
One thing that stood out is -- "After complaints were made, Nichol quickly amended the policy so that the cross would be displayed on Sundays, and other Christian days of observance." Can anyone find a date on this? Quickly is pretty relative. There should be flat hat and DSJ articles. Hendo1769 17:32, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Quick is relative, yes. It took him about two months, as I recall, to amend the policy; the lack of DSJ/Flat Hat articles is because he dropped the change in at the end of the semester. I can provide a copy of the email upon request, but the lack of sources stems from the fact that the announcement was on December 20, near the end of exams; by the time the new semester started up, it was old news.Young Skywalker 05:01, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

A couple of troubling things[edit]

A sentence about Gene Nichol being considered for UNC chancellor is in the entry twice. In the first case, it is (properly) tagged with a "citation needed." But such an unsupported assertion need not be repeated. I hope both references will be deleted, unless someone can come up with a citation. I've been able to find a couple of "draft Gene for chancellor" posts on UNC-related blogs, but nothing else. Is there a time limit for citing sources? I hope the clock is ticking.

In any case, please delete the repetition.

The section on the Wren Cross controversy is shot through with point of view. Most troubling, in the context of Wikipedia, is the inclusion of William and Mary in what the writer calls "colonial colleges." This category seems to be have been made up for the sole purpose of bolstering the poster's point. I may be wrong, and there may be such a group. If so, it can be supported by a citation. Can you at least mark the reference to "colonial colleges" as "citation needed." And, of course, start the clock ticking? 68.230.194.147 (talk) 12:46, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

There's a lot of troubling things with this article. Let me know if you have any other suggestions and I'll work on editing it. --Banime (talk) 00:31, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

My copyedits[edit]

I just spent the better part of two hours going through this page and making it as NPOV as possible. I fixed every single reference, added refs that needed to be included, added pictures and just made copyediting corrections in general. I'm not finished cleaning this article up yet, but I hope that I alleviated some of the broader complaints I was reading about on here. Hope everyone approves. Jrcla2 (talk) 04:25, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

I like the changes so far. Are any of the images actually necessary? --Banime (talk) 13:02, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
I think so. It makes the page easier to read and is more aesthetically pleasing to look at. It also helps clarify what the old NCAA logo looked like (as well as the Wren Cross and Nichol himself). Let's keep the pictures. Jrcla2 (talk) 02:19, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
I spoke with numerous members of the Board of Visitors @ W&M throughout his tenure and dismissal. This article is the most accurate version that accounts for his actions, only countered by the silence of the more conservative and wealthy members who refused to accept calls. I'm an alum from '07.:::[[User:gravityalways|gravityalways] (talk) 08:59, 17 October 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.63.15.62 (talk)

JRCLA2 It appears that you have a POV. Your edits are definitely illustrating a POV. Nichol was a disaster at UNC, U COLO and W & M. the data exists to support this statement. It is not opinion, rather fact, cold and hard. His substandard performance belongs to him. Let him wallow in it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Omggnhgyag (talkcontribs) 03:32, 19 October 2011 (UTC) Perhaps you should keep your nose out of things you are not competent to discuss.