Jump to content

Talk:Central Washington University/Archive 1

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

Untitled

  • Established in 1996 by the Drama Teacher's Summer Institute, the program is specifically designed for teachers. More than 500 teachers, representing 28 states and four nations, have attended the Institute, learning new skills to take back to the classroom, making life-long friends and networking with other theatre artists and educators from across the nation and the world.


  • Central Washington University is distinguished by having a strong centre for primate studies, and I believe the famous chimpanzee Washoe spent her last years here. I think they have also worked with gorillas - but I don't know all the details.

If someone can verify this it could make a useful addition to this page.

User talk:David Martland

More academics

From reading this article, people would assume we don't offer anything worth attending for four years of our life, aside from mediocre athletics. I think we should put more information regarding the academic programs that this university offers. For instance: the William O Douglas Honors College.

Athletics

Shows bias with regard to the extended detail regarding the wrestling program. It fails to mention that the swimming program was also cut, and does not present both arguments for and against cutting the programs. We have an awesome sports program including football, volleyball, and mens/womens basketball.

Should we give so much emphasis to non-sanctioned sports? Aside from the sports which were cut (wrestling and swimming), sports that are not sanctioned as team sports should not be discussed here. And the amount of detail in athletics is enormous in weight to the rest of the article. Slyfield 11:44, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Should our football national championship be listed? Also maybe the many Basketball conferance titles, I also know that they played for the title in the 60's or 50's in the NAIA. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.84.244.99 (talk) 20:38, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Removal of material

According to Wikipedia policy, there is not timeline for removal of uncited material, and the material only should be removed if it results in the steady and consistent improvement of content for the benefit of Wikipedia readers, which it does not. In Addition it is not the call that contributors should make on unfamiliar topics. U.S.Route66Draw (talk) 03:42, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Apologies for reverting your edit before seeing your post here.
Except for commonly known fact, sources aren't optional especially when another editor has requested them. I agree that it's courteous to give editors time to find sources especially when the material isn't particularly contentious. But three years is more than enough time for someone to provide them and it's perfectly reasonable to remove the material. If you'd like it to remain, feel free to replace the material with some appropriate, reliable sources. ElKevbo (talk) 04:19, 10 April 2013 (UTC)