Jump to content

Talk:Eastern Nazarene College/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Infobox University

I added a date under the founded category in the university infobox. I wasn't sure of the date myself. According to educationUSA, the founding date is 1900 and the college moved to Quincy in 1919. According to the Encyclopedia Brittanica Online, the founding date is 1918. Since I know that ENC recently celebrated it's centennial anniversary, I find educationUSA's date to be more credible. However, whoever next gets their hands on a copy of Dr. Cameron's ENC history books should confirm this date. JephSullivan 19:34, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Confirmed :-) -- Alain E. Poutre

Citing sources

71.254.10.35 recently changed

  • All members of the ENC community agree to uphold a set of lifestyle guidelines. As part of this expectation, all students are required to sign a lifestyle covenant.

to

  • All members of the ENC community are required to agree to uphold a set of lifestyle guidelines. As part of this expectation, all students sign a "lifestyle covenant," the expectations of which have not been approved by the student body in recent memory.

and

  • Drinking is not permitted, as well as the use of tobacco products, Premarital sex or cursing. There are neither fraternities nor sororities associated with the college.

to

  • Drinking is not permitted, as well as the use of tobacco products, premarital sex or cursing. Though these are the official rules, it is widely known among the student body that all of the above occur both on and off campus. There are neither fraternities nor sororities associated with the college.

Young people being what they are, I have little doubt that both revisions are correct. And, according to Wikipedia's neutrality policy, when more than one body of opinion is widespread, all must be fairly represented. In other words, this article should not be restricted to Eastern Nazarene College's official point of view.

Nevertheless, WIkipedia has another core policy, verifiability, which says "Facts, viewpoints, theories, and arguments may only be included in articles if they have already been published by reliable and reputable sources. Articles should cite these sources whenever possible. Any unsourced material may be challenged and removed."

This means in this case that it is important to cite a published source to the effect that the student body, though required to sign the lifestyle covenant, has not in fact approved it, and also that " it is widely known among the student body that" [premarital sex, etc.] "occur both on and off campus."

If no published source is available, than, however true these statements may be, they cannot appear in the article. Dpbsmith (talk) 23:02, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

P. S. For the record, my only connection with Eastern Nazarene College is a recent trip there in order to see the Gravity Monument, because I was curious to see one of them. Dpbsmith (talk) 23:03, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

71. etc says: If published data is the standard than the neutrality and factuality of the original article is called into question.

Published data is indeed the standard.

To state that a certain set of behaviors is not permitted implies very strongly that it does not occur, while there is no published data to support that contention either, so how about: "Drinking, the use of tobacco products, premarital sex and cursing are all violations of the rules of the institution; however published data do not exist that would indicate the levels at which these behaviors occur." Kinda wordy, but I feel it's important to point out that what is not permitted doesn't necessarily not happen. As to the lifestyle covenant, now that I think about it, it probably is a controversial issue that shouldn't be gone into here so let's leave it at: "All members of the ENC community are required by the administration to agree to uphold a set of lifestyle guidelines and to sign a "lifestyle covenant" to that effect." I know of no published research which would support my alterations, but they are accurate.. When published, official, "truth" contradicts direct truth it becomes all the more important to point out the realities. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.254.10.35 (talk • contribs)

I agree with you about the wording. I'm assuming that the existence of the "lifestyle covenant" is easily verified from published College material and probably on its website, although I haven't looked. The wording of the article needs to make it clear that students are required to sign such a covenant (or verbally express agreement or implicitly agree to it by registering or whatever it is they do). The wording can be carefully restricted so as to say or imply no more than that. It should not be worded in a way that implies that the covenant is closely adhered to in practice.
I'm saying that a source is needed for the assertion that students frequently depart from it.
Does Eastern Nazarene have a student newspaper? Does it ever refer, even elliptically, to truths which might be different from those college officials wish to publicize? Have Eastern Nazarene students ever gotten into the local papers for bad behavior such as e.g. the Scarsdale High School "homecoming bacchanal"?
My first post on Wikipedia, but I am an ENC Alum, and would like to improve this page. The campus newspaper is the "Campus Camera," with recent issues available at ENC Campus Camera --JA 19:20, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
As for Wikipedia policy, the verifiability policy, linked under every page, is core... and quite interesting. Note in particular the explanation of "verifiability, not truth." Dpbsmith (talk) 09:57, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
P. S. I'm no theologian, but I expect there might be a belief on the part of the officials that it is somehow beneficial for students to express agreement to such a covenant, even knowing that many of them will fail to keep it. It's possible that they may have said such a thing in a published source. Who knows? One very crass speculation is that maybe having students agree to such a covenant makes it easier to expel the ones who misbehave egregiously and have the misfortune to be caught. Do those books by Professor James Cameron say anything about the covenant? Do they describethe background and debate that lead to the adoption of the policy? Maybe there's other published material tucked away in the ENC library somewhere. Dpbsmith (talk) 10:02, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
For what it's worth, requiring students to sign a lifestyle covenent (and many students subsequently ignoring that covenant) is nothing unique to ENC. My own alma mater of Trevecca Nazarene University had one as well, and I'm pretty sure that all of the other Nazarene colleges require one too. It's pretty normal for Christian colleges to have relatively strict rules and guidelines, although they may not necessarily call them "lifestyle covenants" (for an extreme example, see Bob Jones University). Violations of the rules usually aren't notable enough to get published anywhere except in extraordinary circumstances. --Cswrye 15:24, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Announced move to Pennsylvania in 1977?

Eastern Nazarene College Leaving Massachusetts for Pennsylvania
New York Times March 20, 1977, p. 5:

Quincy, Mass., March 19 (AP): Eastern Nazarene College plans to mark its 60th year here by moving to Pennsylvania.

College officials said Thursday that the school had picked out a 125-acre parcel in Newtown Square, Pennsylvania, near Philadelphia, and probably shift to the new site after the 1977-78 school year.

....The school, with an enrollment of 800, has occupied a 15-acre campus just south of Boston since 1918.

So, anyone know what happened? Presumably the move did not occur.... Dpbsmith (talk) 23:03, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Lifestyle covenent "expectations not approved..."

I edited

  • All members of the ENC community are required to agree to uphold a set of lifestyle guidelines. As part of this expectation, all students sign a "lifestyle covenant," the expectations of which have not been approved by the student body in recent memory.[citation needed]

to read simply

  • l members of the ENC community are required to agree to uphold a set of lifestyle guidelines. As part of this expectation, all students sign a "lifestyle covenant."

No citation has been provided regarding to the degree to which the student body "approves" the "expectations" of the lifestyle covenant. Doubtless there is a wide range of student attitudes. My assumption is that nobody attends Eastern Nazarene in the belief that it is a party school and that it is likely that many students sign it in perfect sincerity.

If there is a citable source, e.g. editorials or letters in the student newspaper that suggests that "the student body" as a whole rejects the covenant and signs it cynically or hypocritically, the source should be quoted. Dpbsmith (talk) 18:37, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I recommend that the following two quotes be removed from the Student Life section.
  • All members of the ENC community are required to agree to uphold a set of lifestyle guidelines. As part of this expectation, all students sign a "lifestyle covenant."
  • Drinking is not permitted, as well as the use of tobacco products, premarital sex or cursing. There are neither fraternities nor sororities associated with the college.
These two topics are addressed thoroughly and with citation in the Lifestyle Covenant section. Their wording seems to be a source of contention, so since they are redundant, I reccomend their removal. Any objections?JephSullivan 16:48, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

COI Tag

I just added the {{coi2}} tag to this page, since this articles main contributor Aepoutre admitted here that he is paid employee of the college (1). While I doubt any harm has been done to this article, I added the template as a matter of procedure. I would, however, like someone to look at the page to make sure it is written from a neutral POV. Black Harry (Highlights|Contribs) 17:27, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I will remove the the {{coi2}} tag from this page soon if no one disagrees, as most of the information is cited and comes from "official" documents, there does not seem to be any information that is not independently verifiable. That being said, I am a student of the school and I see no conflicts between my observations regarding the school and the current state of the article. However it would be nice to include more information on notable alumni and current programs. Joseph J. Cox 12:32, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Policies at ENC

I have removed "in the presence" of statement about alcohol, the school has previously penalized students for being in the presence of alcohol (but I would agree that those have always been "iffy" situations themselves), and as I currently understand it still is the current policy: see [[1]] Principles and Policies, Section 3.2. Although, I really think this information hasn't been updated to the current set of disciplinary standards. (Note to User:Aepoutre: Maybe you could talk to someone about getting this information updated.) Joseph J. Cox 01:35, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Joe. I'll re-add it when you or someone else with more clout can convince people to update regulations and policies on the web site. Based on a conversation I had with Vernon Wesley, VP of Student Development at ENC, what I wrote is correct, but you're right in that I can't cite it yet. Disciplinary policy has been under revision since his appointment. In reference to your request that I make web updates, you'll have to talk to someone with authority on that one; my hands are tied at the moment, but I'd love to, given the opportunity. Aepoutre 01:46, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

state of this article

Hello! User:Aepoutre asked me to take a look at this article before it's submitted to the GA process, and I was happy to do it. As I read through the article, I made some pretty minor corrections throughout (fixing caps usage when it was all localized, fixing punctuation, etc.). For the most part, the article's in really good shape. It's thorough and well cited. There are just a few minor usage points that need to corrected throughout, but there were enough such changes that I was too lazy to do them myself. :)

  • Caps usage throughout the article is inconsistent with standard English usage (and with the Manual of Style). Throughout, it should be "The college is…", not "The College is…". Likewise for things like "the Association" or "the Institute". In their whole form (e.g., Eastern Nazarene College), they are proper nouns and need caps for each word. As single words, though, they are common nouns and shouldn't be capitalized. You also don't need to capitalize Bachelor's degree or Master's degree.
  • The same goes for italics usage. Italics should only be used to set off the names of major works (Shakespeare's Hamlet) or words used as words (my favorite word is cat). One doesn't need to set off the names of buildings in italics or anything like that (including quotation marks).
  • Speaking of, one thing that probably needs another once-over to make sure I got it all is the use of periods inside quotation marks. Wikipedia mostly adopts the British usage of punctuation, meaning that things like periods and commas only go inside the quotes when it's part of the thing that's being quoted (He said, "I like dogs." is right, but so is He thinks she's "funky".).
  • The notable people stuff is good for the most part. There's a sentence there about ENC attracting professors with degrees from highly-ranked universities; that needs a citation from a reliable source. I know that many professors are listed farther down with their Ph.D. information, but that's not sufficient to justify the above sentence. I'd probably take the Ph.D. stuff out regardless, and then try to find some sort of source talking about the highly-ranked universities stuff. If you can't find a source for it, just let the notable people stand on their own without the vaguely boosterish "highly-ranked universities" factoid.
  • I think the POV of the article is generally pretty good, but one might argue that it's unbalanced. I say this only because I didn't see any criticisms or controversies mentioned anywhere (forgive me if I overlooked them). Does the Christian lifestyle stuff provoke any criticism from outside groups or from students? Has ENC ever had a bad town and gown relationships? I'm not saying you need to look for controversy where none exists, but it might be worth adding if there are reliable sources for it.
  • Finally, I'd suggest cleaning up the references. I think references generally should be converted to citation templates, rather than left in plain-text form, and the templates should have as much information filled in as possible. I'd also separate out the "notes" from the "references" (meaning stuff like "This is the founding date of the Pentecostal Collegiate Institute. There was once ambiguity regarding the founding date, as Eastern Nazarene first became a college in 1918." should go in its own section). There's room for disagreement here, of course, but it just looks neater in my book. I did the same thing over at Vanderbilt University.

Anyway, like I noted above, I think the article's in really solid shape, and, with a bit of fine-tooth combing, could pass the Good Article process. You've covered much of what is needed for a good university article. Cheers! Esrever (klaT) 21:16, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

My 2 Cents

Article looks decent. A couple spots should be split into two columns: list of presidents and principals and the list of societies. Other than that, it looks good to me. I'll read over the article in closer detail in a little bit. - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 23:26, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

I appreciate that. I'll have to teach myself how to split columns, but it can be done. That said, you're welcome to do it yourself, instead, haha :). Aepoutre (talk) 05:44, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
checkY Done. :D - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 05:53, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Que maravilla! Muchas gracias, compadre. Let me know if you have any further observations, please. I'm somewhat concerned because of the fact that most contributions are mine, and I fervently wish for it to be NPOV. Aepoutre (talk) 06:23, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

FYI I just fixed a ref tag that had improper syntax in the notable people section. - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 06:59, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
Food for thought: The images in the article are somewhat low resolution. If replacement pictures that are higher resolution can be used that would enhance the article. The Shields Hall picture's what the pictures should be like. High resolution with clear focus. - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 07:02, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do. Aepoutre (talk) 23:52, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

School Colors?

Does anyone know what the school colors are? From the time when I was at ENC, I thought I remembered the colors being red, white, and black? The school website doesn't mention it...anybody know? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.67.152.196 (talk) 16:57, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

They're red and white, no black. Northwest Nazarene University is red and black. People sometimes use black because, as I learned in high school art, white and black are "values" not "colours" and go with pretty much anything. Most marketing material in the past few years has used some black, but 1) it looks awful IMHO and 2) I'm pretty sure the people in charge of making those pieces were either not as well-informed as one might hope or weren't going for the "official" scheme. Historically and officially, the Red & White hasn't changed, but Sue Ramey doesn't put her current marketing specs on the web, as you've seen. --Aepoutre (talk) 00:08, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

TOC

Why isn't there a table of contents for this talk page? --King of the Arverni (talk) 19:53, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

I've forced a TOC and left a note at Template talk:WPBannerMeta#/Comments subpages bleeding through to talk page TOC to see if someone can figure out the problem. –xenotalk 19:07, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Resolved
 – Apparently comments subpages can't have headers. –xenotalk 19:26, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Wow. You are awesome. --King of the Arverni (talk) 19:41, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Lyman C Pettit's role

I was concerned when I read this article a few days ago and saw no reference to Lyman C. Pettit, who was the first president of PCI, the entity that became ENC. I edited the article to more accurately reference his role and to replace the following: "several come-outer Methodist clergy and laymen affiliated with the 19th century Holiness movement...", which I found vague and inaccurate. The founders of PCI were not Methodists, they were members of the Asssociation of Pentecostal Churches of America (APCA), a quasi-denominational entity that was coalescing into a denomination. While Pettit had been a Methodist (until 1895), and Hillery had been a Methodist (until 1887), and Reynolds had been a Methodist (until 1895), none were Methodists when PCI was founded. They were each members of independent congregations or single-church denominations. Additionally, not all were come-outers. Hillery was "put out". The three prime movers were all clergy, not laity. They were NOT affiliated with the 19th century holiness movement, but active participants.

Further, I feel the article as now written minimises the role of Pettit. He was more than just the first president. He was the prime mover behind the decision. The centennial history, Our Watchword & Song, indicates: "Pettit was one of the main advocates for starting the Pentecostal Collegiate Institute" (see page 70). Among Pettit's contributions were: He was the one who chose Saratoga Springs, where his family had lived for decades, as the location. It was a short walk from where he already lived.; it was Pettit who purchased the original permanent building, the Kenmore Hotel. He was the prime reason for its near demise and the subsequent decision to sell and relocate. Read the WP article on Pettit and the section on PCI to see his role. (smjwalsh (talk) 15:57, 15 December 2009 (UTC))

Additionally, the article currently indicates erroneously that Hillery was the prime mover or source of the idea for PCI/ENC: "Having been the originator of the idea for establishing PCI...Fred Hillery...". While Hillery was involved, it would be inaccurate to credit him as the one who had the germinal idea. I do not have easy access to Cameron's History, but neither Smith nor Cunningham et. al. give Hillery this honour, but rather credit Pettit.(smjwalsh (talk) 16:16, 15 December 2009 (UTC))

Further research indicates that Hillery had little involvement with PCI until after Pettit was dismissed and the NY school was disowned.(smjwalsh (talk) 09:15, 16 December 2009 (UTC))

There are various and sundry issues here with some of the most recent edits to this article. Some are procedurally inappropriate and others are tendentious content-wise.
As you have taken the time to catalogue the "various and sundry issues" with all of the edits that I have made to this article in recent days, I will respond. Perhaps I have unintentionally stepped on your toes as you seem to have a strong sense of connection to not only the article but also the precise verbiage. If so, then I apologise.(smjwalsh (talk) 17:08, 23 December 2009 (UTC))

First, it's intentionally vague -- overspecificity is undesirable for an article of this length.

I was not aware that this was either a WP rule or even desirable. I can understand the lead/introduction being somewhat vague, but I cannot fathom the virtue in being deliberately vague in an encyclopedic entry of any length. I believe the first sentence in a paragraph - the topic sentence - ought to be a declarative sentence.(smjwalsh (talk) 17:08, 23 December 2009 (UTC))

Second "come-outer Methodists" means that individuals have left (or been ousted from -- a distinction with little difference here) the Methodist denomination -- that some of the main figures were come-outers and originally Methodists is notable (none came from, for example, a Baptist or Unitarian tradition).

I agree with your understanding of "come-outer" Methodists, but question the wisdom of this as the description of the founders. There is a precise distinction between those who "came out" = voluntarily withdrew and those "out out" - those expelled. This is the thrust of the so-called Church Question that dominated the Holiness Movement from 1880 to about 1910. One of the apologetics of those who founded the COTN and APCA was that they were "put out" - they had not chosen to leave but were expelled from their denominations. In the case of PCI, there were both involved.(smjwalsh (talk) 17:08, 23 December 2009 (UTC)).

Third, it doesn't matter if the prime movers where clergy or not if there were lay persons involved at all.

It does if it says there were laity involved, and there was not. Vague is one thing, but an inaccuracy is another. If it is inconsequential why not just say these were former Methodists - thus avoiding both the come out/put out dichotomy and the clergy/laity distinction?(smjwalsh (talk) 17:08, 23 December 2009 (UTC)).

Fourth, Walsh is simply being contentious, not adding information or improving the article, by arguing that "They were NOT affiliated with the 19th century holiness movement, but active participants."

You may call me Steve :) I am not being contentious for the sake of it. I did add specific and accurate and referenced material. My propensity is to create rather than critique (although am capable of either). I did not just revert/undo. I endeavoured to improve the article after waiting 5-6 days after I raised the issues on the Talk page before making the necessary corrections and additions. The distinction between affiliation and active participation may be overly pedantic, but it was made on the Talk page not in the actual article.(smjwalsh (talk) 17:08, 23 December 2009 (UTC)).

Fifth, there was a blanket revert that undid proper reference formatting.

True. I apologise. I understand either Cite or text notes are appropriate. I prefer the latter as I am unfamiliar with the WP Cite methodology. I apologise for removing those Cite changes that were made to my original text notes. However, as blanket removal is an anathema to you, I am surprised that used this device to eradicate all vestiges of my changes. It would have been better for you to post your thoughts here before you reverted. My changes were not vandalism and deserved some engagement before being expunged.(smjwalsh (talk) 17:08, 23 December 2009 (UTC)).

Sixth, "references" are being added without the required information.

I am not sure what you mean, however it sounds serious, so I apologise.(smjwalsh (talk) 17:08, 23 December 2009 (UTC)).

Seventh, there were already sources for this information now in discussion, and some of the language seems taken straight from those sources, so to dispute the language is entirely uncalled-for.

If language was take from sources (I assume you mean Cameron's 1968 tome) without direct attribution, that would constitute plagiarism. The material I changed was so clumsily written I did not recognise it as coming from an external source. If it was the language found in the source, then it is still open to critique and change. I have used sources that are more recent and better researched than Cameron's rather dated book. The Centennial History (Our Watchword & Song) by Floyd Cunningham, Stan Ingersol, David Whitelaw, and Harold Raser, takes into account Cameron's account (as well as Smith and Redford), but accesses primary materials from the Nazarene Archives.(smjwalsh (talk) 17:08, 23 December 2009 (UTC)).

Eighth, Hillery's involvement is cited in sources, and the "further research" comment seems to indicate OR.

Hillery was involved but after the initial founding as I pointed out in the discussion on this Talk Page. OR does not preclude consulting other sources, which I did. The fruit of my research is backed by those sources. You deleted a quotation that clearly indicates Pettit was one of the primary instigators, and reverted back to a position that Hillery had the germinal idea (which cannot be backed by the sources).(smjwalsh (talk) 17:08, 23 December 2009 (UTC)).

Ninth, we try to stay away from using titles here at the encyclopedia, and you need to use the definite article when referring to a reverend in writing anyway.

I have been involved on WP for almost 4 years and created more than 20 articles, and worked on dozens of others. Your point here seems a little condescending. There are guidelines for using titles with which I am familiar. First use of a title or honorific is permissible and afterwards use of the Family name where to do so would not create ambiguity. Both the use of the article (especially in British/Commonwealth contexts) or the Americanised abbreviation would be permissible.
Lastly, the institution doesn't recognise the president of PCI, and only begins with the presidents of ENC -- other institutions pick and choose the same way, from Northwest Nazarene University to Quincy College, just as each institution chooses its own founding date.
You raise an interesting point. When you say ENC does not recognise the president of PCI, what is your source for this assertion? I have ordered a copy of Cameron's books on ENC, but seem to recall that there is a list of presidents in the appendix. Further, ENC points to 1900 as its founding date. It therefore owns its pre-MA history, including PCI (NY) and PCI 2.0 at RI, in the same way that the COTN accepts the APCA, COTN (California) and Holiness Church of Christ, and other antecedent groups as part of its heritage. Legally there have been at least three corporate entities, and 3 geographical locations for PCI/ENC. This article accepts the PCI story as part of the history of ENC. To be consistent it must also include the presidents and principals pre-1918. There may be some merit in creating a new WP article on PCI rather than just have a re-direct. If so, I would relocate some of the material in the Pettit article to it.(smjwalsh (talk) 17:08, 23 December 2009 (UTC)).

If the concern here is the inclusion of Lyman Pettit, as the section heading and first sentence suggest, then the problem is fixed with the addition of a his role as first president of PCI and a wikilink to the article. --inquietudeofcharacter (talk) 15:01, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

As stated in my initial post on this page, I was surprised by Pettit's omission. I have no axe to grind or vested intertest in Pettit or his posterity, but as I see him as the ad fontes of the institution, I believed that was a better way to recount the origins than what was there previously (and is now there again).(smjwalsh (talk) 17:08, 23 December 2009 (UTC)).

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Eastern Nazarene College. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:45, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Eastern Nazarene College. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:28, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Eastern Nazarene College/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)Press [show] to view →
;B-class

As a member of Wikipedia:WikiProject_Church_of_the_Nazarene, I rated this article as a B. I did so because it has over 30 references and footnotes, information on location, affiliation, history, academics, student life (including residency, activities, and lifestyle), a growing list of distinguished related individuals (more than a list of self-promoting non-notables), a good infobox with transit access, seal/shield, global coordinates, etc. At present, it is the most NPOV, sourced, and informational Nazarene college article. Longer articles are overly detailed and unsourced, and some are just stubs. The only other B article, formerly SNU, was more of an advertisement than a true B article. Once I have more input and sources, this article can be nominated for something above B-class. I encourage everyone to work on the other school articles, according to appropriate standards. I certainly request help with ENC, too. Aepoutre 16:18, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

This is staying a B because it now has over 80 footnotes and I've tried to conform it to the guidelines of the Universities Wikiproject. I've been urged to nominate it for GA status, so please weigh in! Aepoutre (talk) 22:55, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Last edited at 19:25, 16 June 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 14:02, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Eastern Nazarene College. 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) 20:34, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Eastern Nazarene College. 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) 08:31, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Eastern Nazarene College. 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) 10:01, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Eastern Nazarene College. 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) 09:52, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Eastern Nazarene College. 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) 01:58, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Eastern_Nazarene_College/Archive_1&oldid=1179978188"