Jump to content

Talk:Lutheran Theological Seminary at Philadelphia

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

Deleted for no reason

[edit]

Not sure what went on previously with the deletion and blocking recreation of this article. Most articles about colleges cite their own website for information, rather than citing newspaper articles or other independent sources. In this case, the school's existence is shown by citing the ELCA website and its accreditation is shown by citing the website for the accrediting body. Given that it is an accredited college, then the best source for details about the campus organization and arrangements is the school's own site. Even unaccredited blatant diploma mills get an AfD rather than a speedy delete, which gives interested editors a chance to improve the article if it is a stub (or less) or to substantiate its notablity. Edison 20:28, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This wasn't originally speedied for notability at all, and I imagine it likely is notable. However, the article was "The Lutheran Theological Seminary is a theological seminary in Philadelphia" or the like, which qualified under the no-context speedy criteria. This version of course does not. Seraphimblade 21:32, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ha! You added the tag that said it was "not notable"!!! 2gether4ever 20:56, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thre seems to be more heat than light with respect to the edits of this article. Will any concerned editor please lay out herre the problems with what has been added or removed, or what is lacking, so that the article can be improved? Thanks. Edison 14:58, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
From looking through the history on this page, and going through some user pages, archives, etc., it appears that, back when this page was a very teeny stub, the author of that stub and some veteran Wiki folks were arguing about whether it should have been deleted or not. While that argument was going on, three editors (Sonrise whatever, Edison, and then I) worked on creating a real article such that deletion would not be necessary, etc. The original "author" of the stub, who was too busy arguing about its deletion than actually contributing anything to the article itself, was apparently offended by the work done by others and tried to get it deleted? At least, that appears to be the case. More experienced wiki folks than I seem to have the situation somewhat under control related to the very angry original "author." Those of us actually interested in this particular author should probably just keep working on it and making sure that vandalism does not take place. Merry Christmas, everyone! --Apostlemep12 20:58, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Philly

[edit]

After review of the wikiproject philadelphia rating guidelines, etc, I have adjusted the rating on this article to a "start" class rather than a "stub" class. The article is relatively well-cited, drawing from three separate reputable sources. It is coherently organized. It contains at least an in-depth description of the campus and campus buildings, as well as the academic offerings of the school, meaning that it has appropriate depth of content in at least two areas. The article could use some good images, to be sure. I promise to try to add some good ones in conjunction with content in the Northeastern Lutheran Archives in Philaelphia, as well as adjust and add depth to the history section. More certainly could be said on this. But it is important that the class-ratings fairly and accurately represent the content on the page and not some cursory examination, as seems to have been the case. So far as I can tell, the class might even reasonably be assessed as higher than "start," too, but I will leave that open for discussion here on the talk page. Perhaps people can help--like, maybe the folks from the Philly project--in identifying areas that are missing or underdeveloped, so that we can work together to create an even better article. But just labelling something without offering advice is extremely unhelpful, especially when the rating/label doesn't match the content.--Apostlemep12 16:46, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:LTSPlogo.gif

[edit]

Image:LTSPlogo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 11:00, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Lutheran Theological Seminary at Philadelphia. 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) 08:13, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]