This article is within the scope of WikiProject Higher education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of higher education, universities, and colleges on Wikipedia. Please visit the project page to join the discussion, and see the project's article guideline for useful advice.Higher educationWikipedia:WikiProject Higher educationTemplate:WikiProject Higher educationHigher education articles

United States: Washington / Seattle High‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Washington.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Washington - Seattle.

Requests

Neutrality of Article Title

In Switzerland the authorities have filed a law suit for fraud against the local headmaster of the CityU, alleging that there were irregularities with the tuition fees and in irregularities in junction with the bankruptcy of the local CityU subsidiary. The facts are quite clear and well documented in reliable sources. But now there seems to be disagreement of how to set the title of the corresponding paragraph.

One opinion is as follows: the central point of that paragraph is to inform on this very issue (the allegations of fraud), so the title should be something like "Allegations of Fraud in Switzerland". When you choose another title like "Activities in Switzerland" then you hide the central information under a non-descriptive title, which makes it more difficult for the reader to find all the relevant content. Wikipedia writes in the explanations to non-judgemental descriptive titles: These titles should reflect a neutral point of view, rather than suggesting any editor's opinions. Avoid judgmental and non-neutral words; for example, allegation implies wrongdoing, and so should be avoided in a descriptive title. (Exception: articles where the topic is an actual accusation of illegality under law, discussed as such by reliable sources even if not yet proven in a court of law. These are accurately described as "allegations".) The latter is exactly the stated case here, so the title "Allegations of Fraud in Switzerland" complies with the neutrality policy of wikipedia and is the most clear indication of what follows in the paragraph.

The other point of view is that one should be more subtly about how to set the title. This opinion regards something like "Allegations of Fraud in Switzerland" as to be judgemental and not neutral. Words such as "allegations" and "fraud" are loaded and should be avoided especially in titles. When one uses these words that would mean such a title would not comply with the neutrality rules of Wikipedia. So one should put the information under a more neutral title like "The Swiss Branch of the CityU". The point that there has allegedly been a fraudulent activity should be stated in a cautious manner in the content of the paragraph.

I'm siding with opinion one and totally disagree with opinion two, but my opinion my be biased because I have written much of the stuff in the mentioned paragraph. So what does the neutrality requirement mean in this case? Saintcyr1 (talk) 11 July 2012 —Preceding undated comment added 04:37, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

it might be possible to find a section title which gives an indication of the content more specifically. I chose the most neutral I could think of, but I did not mean to be definitive. Suggestions are welcome here. Here, not the article page. I don't think it can possible include the word "fraud". We normally do not accept the judgement of a trial court as a fully reliable source for negative information; it can be reported, but only in context. (as contrasted to an appeals courts, or a judgement confirmed by such a court)

but the significant problem is that the extremely negative section heading gives disproportionate attention within the article. It is fairly common for an article about an organization to give some brief routine facts, and then a large part of the article deals with one particular problem. That's basically not fair. NPOV is fairness.

I am not naive about universities, and their often problematic attempts to form connections with other schools, and to over-extend themselves; I know very well that sometimes it is good faith expansion, and sometime exploitative. I have been revising a number of such articles, in order to include this material. I rely to a considerable part upon professions magazines in higher education. I normally do it by adding one or two sentences, with references. People will see it, and then they can read the references. It is very difficult to add negative material fairly. I have sometimes received complaints from a university that there is negative material, and found it perfectly justified but written somewhat inappropriate, and ended up by revising the material to make it more appropriate --and more readable and better referenced. And sometimes longer, because I can find additional material and additional incidents.

A very easy thing for me to have done here was to remove the material altogether, or leave only a single sentence, and then protect the page. Many admins would have done this. I try to do better and make at least a first attempt at actually resolving the problem, and trying to provide a guide for further editing. DGG ( talk ) 18:05, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

Needs editing... sounding like its been edited by their p.r. department.

Be WP:Bold. Llamabr (talk) 14:56, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on City University of Seattle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:16, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

Campus CityU.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:52, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]