Jump to content

Talk:Clayton Spencer

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

Sock puppet alert

[edit]

Please be informed that that users Trenta5, Odwallah, Yorkshiremany, FirstLordofDowningStreet, Wentworth Washington and more were all sock puppets of the now banned DonSpencer1 As these accounts appear to constitute the majority of edits to this page in recent months, you may wish to consider reverting this page to a state prior to their undue influence on content as sock puppetry often results in boosterism and bias. I sincerely do hope that DonSpencer1 is not a relation of the subject of this article.74.70.116.187 (talk) 04:25, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Seems as though an IP already took care of that. Thank you. DancingTruce (talk) 19:59, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Spencer's response to Trumps gutting of the DACA

[edit]

Currently the article sates that she signed an letter with other other university presidents to the U.S. Congress regarding the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. However, I don't believe she did. According to the Lewiston Sun Journal, after Donald Trump announced that he was gutting the program, Spencer said she wrote a letter independently of college presidnts' letter. This article says that she wrote something with the other NESCAC presidents... where is that letter mentioned? This Bennington open letter her signature on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 40dies11 (talk • contribs) 22:01, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

40dies11, what are you asking? The article says the following [with citations removed]:
On November 21, 2016, Spencer signed along with 250 other university presidents, a statement to the U.S. Congress and other elected officials to continue the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) Program at universities. The statement was prompted after Donald Trump asserted that his administration would terminate the program‍—‌Spencer noted the DACA as "both a moral imperative and a national necessity."
Is there something wrong with this statement? I don't understand why you're saying that you think she didn't. DancingTruce (talk) 02:42, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Statement in Support of the DACA Program

[edit]

Are you referring to this statement? This is different from the letter. She signed both according to the California Institute for the Arts. The text says:

The core mission of higher education is the advancement of knowledge, people, and society. As educational leaders, we are committed to upholding free inquiry and education in our colleges and universities, and to providing the opportunity for all our students to pursue their learning and life goals. Since the advent of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program in 2012, we have seen the critical benefits of this program for our students, and the highly positive impacts on our institutions and communities. DACA beneficiaries on our campuses have been exemplary student scholars and student leaders, working across campus and in the community. With DACA, our students and alumni have been able to pursue opportunities in business, education, high tech, and the non-profit sector; they have gone to medical school, law school, and graduate schools in numerous disciplines. They are actively contributing to their local communities and economies. To our country’s leaders we say that DACA should be upheld, continued, and expanded. We are prepared to meet with you to present our case. This is both a moral imperative and a national necessity. America needs talent – and these students, who have been raised and educated in the United States, are already part of our national community. They represent what is best about America, and as scholars and leaders they are essential to the future. We call on our colleagues and other leaders across the business, civic, religious, and non-profit sectors to join with us in this urgent matter.

If you're saying that because Spencer did not write this herself, it shouldn't be on her article, I disagree. But I'm still confused as to what you're saying. DancingTruce (talk) 02:49, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

According to that article, she wrote a letter in response to the DACA comments by Donald Trump. All I am saying is that it should be included as well becuase it is markedly different from the letter by the other 250 college and university presidents. 40dies11 (talk) 23:48, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

RfC on infobox image

[edit]

Which of the below images should be used in the infobox of this article? The current one seems blurry and the second one seems more fitting imo, thoughts? 40dies11 (talk) 22:07, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Option 1 (Current image)
    Option 1 (Current image)
  • Option 2
    Option 2
Images of living persons should not be used out of context to present a person in a false or disparaging light. This is particularly important for police booking photographs (mugshots), or situations where the subject did not expect to be photographed. Images of living persons that have been generated by Wikipedians and others may be used only if they have been released under a copyright licence that is compatible with Wikipedia:Image use policy.
I think the one that is currently up is perfectly fine for the article. Perhaps if there was another alternative with better lighting, there would be something to consider. Take a look at: WP:OI. Option 1 shows Spencer in her capacity as president of this college and is more than fitting for her article which is primary geared toward her presidency. DancingTruce (talk) 02:38, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The second one is also of her giving a speech and is of higher quality. 40dies11 (talk) 23:50, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Voter suppression of Bates students

[edit]

I would like to remove the sentence in the section about the 2016 voter suppression at Bates College that gives legal context to the incident. I don't think it needs to say "Under 2016-17 Maine State law it is not required to complete anything described on the flyer, which lead Spencer to label the situation as "clearly a deliberate attempt at voter suppression,"[5]. It doesn't say that it was specifically Maine law that lead Spencer to make those comments. For all we know she doesn't know diddly on Maine state law. 40dies11 (talk) 23:54, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Clayton Spencer. 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) 05:46, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:Clayton_Spencer&oldid=1257938736"