Talk:Eastern Mennonite University

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

Virginia High‑importance

	Virginia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Virginia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Virginia 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.VirginiaWikipedia:WikiProject VirginiaTemplate:WikiProject VirginiaVirginia articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Christianity: Anabaptist Mid‑importance

	Christianity portal 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.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Anabaptist work group (assessed as Mid-importance).

Advertisement & POV

Someone has clearly put a lot of work into this article because he or she loves EMU. I think that's wonderful, and there are clearly references to their sources. However, the article itself does not seem to be written from an objective point of view - rather it highlights only the disctinctives and positive attributes of the college. I am interested in someone changing the article to a more neutral point of view, or at least, adding in some balance the article.

Looking at other institutions' pages like Harvard or University of Virginia, for example, would give a better idea of how to edit this piece. In reading this, EMU seems like the Garden of Eden. Has there been any controversy on campus? What do students fight/ or what historically have they fought about (there has to be arguments)? For example: As a church school, how has EMU's stance on homosexuality played out? As a peace school, how has not playing the national anthem played as to who the university is? How are community relations? Has anyone gotten injured on a cross cultural? Asking more probing questions makes the article more relevant and ties it into historical context with larger issues/ themes within the city of Harrisonburg. My current opinion is that the citations make it read like a persuasive essay rather than an objective document. (Hochstetler51 (talk) 15:36, 7 October 2011 (UTC))[reply]

I tagged this as reading like an advertisement ("beautiful Shenedoah Valley" &c). Nothing personal; I'm about improvement. I'll probably end up editing it myself because I love it so much, haha. Aepoutre 23:37, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

did some editing and removed tag; hope it's better now. let me know what we think. Aepoutre 19:41, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As of September 2012, this article is still pretty comical in its own right. Just read the section on "Values" which opens with rhetorical questions. It's nice writing, but not encyclopedic writing. Most of the sources are by the school itself as well. --Bobak (talk) 15:19, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Official Logo

The current logo is reversed: white on a blue background; the official logo is white with a blue graphic element and gray text. Somebody should replace it with http://www.emu.edu/marketing/identity/images/EMUlogo-color.jpg —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikimenno (talk • contribs) 20:38, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. ✤ JonHarder ^talk 20:58, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Recent Edits

This article is still clearly in need of work. I personally question the merit of it's current "B" rating compared to others I have seen. So perhaps I am over reacting because I have invested some time to cleaning it up, but the article was subject to recent edits or cuts, that in the name of removing "a bunch of unsupported info and subjective language", cut out a large, as well as very relevant and important, part of the story of this institution.

The whole story of EMU's reversal in course on its stand over the issue of homosexual relations/marriage and the resulting controversy it created in the Christian world and particularly within the CCCU (of which it was a founding member) is not simply an inconvenient truth to be stricken or whitewashed out of the story of EMU. Rewrite it - perhaps - but to expunge this information entirely from the record does the reader a disservice. Experienced editors, please weigh if I am wrong on this. Jsniessen (talk) 15:04, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am going to begin to carefully restore much of the material recently deleted by User:Ronnyspock, all of which is very well documented. Jsniessen (talk) 18:38, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have completed re-instating much (but not all) of the recently deleted content concerning the schools change in stance on it's views of marriage and sexuality and the ensuing controversy with the CCCU. Certainly, there are still organizational and editing tasks left to be done here. User:Ronnyspock and others, please kindly dialogue here next time before gutting 1/4 of the article's diligently sourced content. Jsniessen (talk) 17:55, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Eastern Mennonite University. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 08:24, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem removed

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, provided it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Trikekus (:3) 01:37, 28 January 2023 (UTC) Trikekus (:3) 01:37, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]