User talk:Tean91

Welcome!

Hello, Tean91, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Thor Malmjursson 01:58, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Related to the Schulich School of Business

Nice effort with the editing. A couple of minor points here: Let's keep the intro as an intro. Be general in the intro. I am not even sure who did that edit of one specific ranking in the intro, but the question becomes why one and not another. An overall average seems to be appropriate in that position of the page, wouldn't you agree? Second, the rankings section itself was fine and logical and had been vetted as such. What is your rationale for changing it? It is good to have the updated info, but please revert to & maintain the world/global and Canada/specialised sections. Check out the history of the page for more info, or just go ahead and revert it. The two sections help prevent Schulich types from cherrypicking data. There is an OBVIOUS conflict of interest if one admits to being a current student or alum. Whatever. I say, your edits will speak for themselves. Don't you agree that shilling for the school is against Wikipedia rules? Those two sections served a purpose. Please revert to them with the data you have added. That would be terrific! Incidentally, the most recent 2009 stuff comes first, then the earlier 2009 rankings, then the late 2008 ones, etc... If you don't bother replying to my questions then I will just put that section as it was in November. Cheers! COYW (talk) 05:35, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I do not know who edited it but this page is shaping up nicely. Related to the rankings, I still think "global" refers to all schools compared on several criteria. Only a few bigger rankings are apples-to-apples studies of this sort. The "other rankings" are either national or limited in scope (i.e., Aspen). They are, in my view, meant to serve narrower interests. Of course, every "global" ranking has interested parties, too; surely, the school and the company publishing the rankings are interested parties! Anyhow, to mix them all together may suggest that they are all comparable. They aren't. That said, I think the two extant categories should be returned to the useful "Global Rankings/Other Rankings" division. Chronological order should be respected. By and large, copying the presentation of stocks (current level/change from last year/3-yr. moving average) is about as fair as I have seen anywhere on Wikipedia and I have visited and edited a lot of similar pages. Fair enough? What say you? COYW (talk) 19:12, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Schulich logo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Schulich logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 04:52, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:59, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]