Jump to content

Talk:William Mitchell College of Law/Archive 1

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

Image of portrait of William Mitchell

I saw someone tried to do an image display (as an external link?). I don't know the copyright status of that portrait, but I doubt it's totally clean. Maybe I'll take a photo of the school the next time I'm in the Grand/Summit Avenue area -- Bobak 01:47, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Ranking

I've noticed that a one-sentence section regarding WMCL's US News ranking has been added a couple of times. I've deleted it for two reasons: first, because the ranking is already in the infobox; second, because it breaks up the continuity of the article and appears out of place. None of the other Minnesota law schools have a specific ranking section on their pages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adanielch (talk • contribs) 18:53, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Every other law school has a rankings section. This is relevant information and very appropriate to include. Other rankings may be included and the section may be moved to another location to make the article more fluid, but a rankings section is quite appropriate for a law school. I am putting the rankings section back into the article. If you wish to discuss removing rankings sections for law schools, feel free to make a request on wikipedia policies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.161.12.129 (talk) 19:26, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

I agree that including information about rankings are appropriate. I also think it would be silly to request that ranking sections be prohibited on all Wikipedia law school pages. In fact, I noticed that Hamline and the University of St. Thomas now have specific ranking sections. However, not every law school page on Wikipedia has one. Neither the U of M nor Harvard has one (just two examples). I believe there's a reasonable amount of latitude on the format of these pages as long as no contributor exaggerates or omits the truth. To that end, WMCL's overall U.S. News ranking is already patently obvious from the infobox. I see no added benefit to restating it later in the article. Other rankings for individual programs at the school are discussed and cited in other sections of the article, when appropriate.

Now, if Wikipedia were to create a mandated format for all U.S. law school pages, then it should be followed to the letter. But in the absence of such a policy, I feel that the latitude I discussed earlier should prevail. Adanielch (talk) 19:46, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

I understand your approach. We'll just put a sentence into the main article indicating the ranking. I agree that it doesn't need its own subheading. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.161.12.129 (talk) 14:49, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Edit warring and vandalism

This is directed at the user who continues to revert my edits on this page. I'm not sure what your objection is to them, but I can tell you that they are (1) factual, (2) verifiable, and (3) cited. I'm aware that there is a fair amount of puffery on Wikipedia law school pages, even some that are written wholly like advertisements, but this is not one of them. If you could share your thoughts with me on this, it would be appreciated. Adanielch (talk) 13:00, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I'll start. If the user reverting my edits has a problem with only one or two sentences in the article, perhaps it would be more constructive to discuss just those, and not undo whole sections tied up with those sentences. I think it would show good faith on your part and allow us to reach some sort of resolution. Adanielch (talk) 12:52, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

This article is written as an advertisement. The law school ranking is all that is needed. There is no reason for graduates to include references that their law school is better than its Tier 4 US News Ranking. Please help rewrite this article from a neutral point of view. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.63.235.168 (talk) 18:31, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

  • If you're concerned about the possible subjectivity of saying that WMCL students "may perform at a higher level," then you have no need to worry because I've removed it. The rankings from Vault should stay, however, because they're not original research and they're unquestionably verifiable (they say so right there, on the website). And for the record, it's a little disingenuous to claim that law school articles have no business editorializing; I'd say nine out of ten on Wikipedia do it already. What I had said was well within parameters of reasonableness and would hardly count as advertisement or spam. Adanielch (talk) 05:56, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

This is better. The Vault ranking is from 2007. Not sure how a ranking from a few years ago is still relevant. I'll leave it for now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.63.235.168 (talk) 16:20, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Alumni

Many of the alumni don't have wiki pages, should they be there? I propose to remove unless they are very notable (in which case a page should be started). --Muhandes (talk) 13:47, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Per WP:NLIST each member in a list needs to be notable and a source is required. For the following, no article exists, so notability is not established. Also WP:WTAF:

Regina M. Chu ('80) was Minnesota's first Asian-American female district court judge. Christopher Thao ('86) was the first Hmong lawyer in the United States. Hassan Ali Mohamud ('02) was Minnesota's first Somali law graduate. Stephen Maxwell ('48) was Minnesota's first African-American district court judge.

--Muhandes (talk) 16:29, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Merger

William Mitchell has merged with Hamline University School of Law as of December 10th. The new website can be found here:

http://mitchellhamline.edu/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:449:8301:6B84:35DE:240F:F8C8:66ED (talk) 16:50, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on William Mitchell College of Law. 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 15:10, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:William_Mitchell_College_of_Law/Archive_1&oldid=1258691356"