Talk:University of North Carolina at Charlotte/Archive 1

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

Campuses

In reading the information provided on "four campuses", I'm not sure that two of the venues would qualify as a "campus". The South Charlotte or "Ballantyne Campus" is defined as "space in an office building" that offers "offers a limited number of graduate courses". Charlotte Research Institute Campus (or Charlotte Research Institute) is "attached to the main campus" which is part of the "UNC Charlotte Millennial Campus". The third campus - located in Uptown Charlotte - is "located in the Mint Museum of Craft+Design". I feel these three locations should be identified as satellite locations, as verses being identified as university campuses. Your thoughts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.30.12.163 (talk) 16:24, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

History

this section copied directly from: http://www.campusexplorer.com/colleges/EA2F55F2/North-Carolina/Charlotte/University-of-North-Carolina-at-Charlotte/


I agree that this page should be done as a separate entry.

74.235.11.226 (talk) 09:19, 20 December 2008 (UTC)Marc S. Asbill, 2006

You do know that many websites go out and cache Wikipedia and use its contents on their pages, don't you? It is open source. I wrote this section many years ago myself and it was copied over to this other page you reference. Wikipedianinthehouse (talk) 03:16, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Bonnie Ethel Cone, founder

this section copied directly from:

http://74.125.45.104/search?q=cache:mIOeJw-b2ZgJ:www.celebratebradford.com/unc_charlotte.html+Miss+Bonnie+as+she+was+known+to+students,+was+chosen+to+lead+the+Charlotte+Center+in+1946,+and+she+was+instrumental+in+convincing+the+state+to+keep+the+school+open+in+1949.+She+was+the+leader+that+chose+the+current+site+of+the+school,+and+helped+plan+the+original+campus+master+plan.+Until+1965,+she+served+as+president+of+Charlotte+College.&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=us&client=firefox-a


UNIVERSITY LEADERS :

Bonnie E. Cone (1907-2003), or Miss Bonnie as she was known to students, was chosen to lead the Charlotte Center in 1946, and she was instrumental in convincing the state to keep the school open in 1949. She was the leader that chose the current site of the school, and helped plan the original campus master plan. Until 1965, she served as president of Charlotte College. She stated that March 2, 1965 was the "happiest day of her life"; it was the day the North Carolina legislature voted to bring Charlotte College into the UNC system. She served as an acting Chancellor of the university until 1966, when Dean Colvard was selected as permanent chancellor. Even though she had led the college since 1946, the State wanted a leader with experience of running a 4-year, public university. Cone and the university were profiled in the July 16, 1965 issue of TIME Magazine. In the article, she stated, "we are not here to elevate ourselves but the institution", when asked about the chancellor position. She served in various official positions until her retirement in 1973, at which time the main campus's student union was renamed the Cone University Center. Cone continued to work on behalf of the school in unofficial capacities until her death in March of 2003. She is interred in the Van Landingham Gardens on the east side of the main campus, and a non-denominational meditation center is planned near the site. She is posthumously known as the founder of the school, a title which she rejected during her lifetime because she felt many people had a hand in creating and building the university. During her lifetime, she received 10 honorary degrees from various colleges and universities and was inducted posthumously into the Order of the Long Leaf Pine in recognition to her contributions to North Carolina history. In 2004 the stretch of U.S. Highway 29 near the main campus was officially renamed the "Dr. Bonnie Cone Memorial Highway." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.30.12.163 (talk) 01:11, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

You do know that many websites go out and cache Wikipedia and use its contents on their pages, don't you? It is open source. I wrote this section many years ago myself and it was copied over to this other page you reference. Wikipedianinthehouse (talk) 03:16, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Improvements

Excellent job to whoever has been editing this page recently -- the page is MUCH BETTER and very extensive! -- A UNCC student, written on 07-07-05.

You're welcome. Wikipedianinthehouse (talk) 03:17, 17 August 2013 (UTC)


Does somebody have an authoritative story behind the school's athletic teams being called the 49ers? 49er says it's because of a gold rush in the Charlotte area, but I read several years ago it has to do with highway 49 in the area, and I see in this article that the school was founded in [[1949]. RickK 07:30, Jan 23, 2005 (UTC)


It is from the founding of Charlotte College in 1949. Although Hwy. 49 runs along side of the school, and the first major gold find in the US (Reed Creek) is nearby, these are _not_ the reason for the '49ers nickname. -Rick (UNCC class of '92)

Actually I don't know if that is true. The school was actually founded in 1946. I believe we are the 49ers because we were saved from being closed in 1949 or it had something to do with us have a pioneering spirit, like the gold miners, for knowledge that kept us afloat. I'm pretty sure its somewhere in "Growing Up Together" but I have yet to read the book. -Charlottedude

Towards the end of the blurb about Dubois, the article reads, "Dubois is expected to oversee the process of the University becoming the third research-intensive university in the State." Is this a mistake? Perhaps it should read "...research-extensive...". -Jim, UNCC class of 2003


Someone should put a picture up of the new entrance, it would look good here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.68.51.131 (talk) 21:54, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

It is because the University was saved in 1949. - UNCC student —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.132.235.56 (talk) 15:01, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Removed Section(s)

Copied/pasted below are sections that I took out of the article because most if not all of these people are not very notable. Best to leave this stuff out until the list(s) can grow substantially. --64.12.116.138 16:44, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Notable alumni and faculty

Alumni

(with year of graduation in parentheses)

Faculty

Reinsertion of Removed Segment

I put this section back in on 7/13, as I see no reason for it to have been removed. Regardless of whether they are nationally known or what-have-you, they are still notable 49er alumni.

Removed the link to a football site

I removed a paragraph with a link to a site promoting football at UNCCharlotte--edgester 23:31, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Why would you do that? It's not an ad or anything. People who are interested have a right to be informed and it also serves as a citation. --Charlottedude 12/06/06

Notable Alumni Independent Page?

Why does the notable alumni section have its own page? We have like 20 people on our list. I think we should leave the section on the page until we have a larger number of notable alumni. Right now, the independent page looks a little pitiful, especially with all those empty subsections. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Charlottedude (talk • contribs) 06:12, 6 December 2006 (UTC).

Going Forward/Future Colleges section

I'm not sure whether anyone else agrees, but I can't see any way to justify adding a section on what someone thinks the university needs to do in order to be successful. If there is some sort of plan to actually do these things then it makes sense, but an un-sourced statement about what a newspaper thinks the school should do (I searched the archives of the paper and found no such article) isn't enough. JCO312 03:33, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

TO JCO312: 

   Obviously you haven't used the right keywords on your search, here it is:

http://www.publicrelations.uncc.edu/default.asp?id=30&objId=36

Football Section

Can everyone please stop messing up the football section? Every time I come back there is some ridiculous mistake or error made when someone attempts to change it.

First of all, the entire section is not about Charlotte 49er Football Initiative (CFI) nor is it about the struggle in general. The section is simply about the fact that we do not have football. Paragraphs which talk about what is currently going on are only parts of the section but not the main topic. Therefore, the title should not be "UNC Charlotte 49ers Football Initiative/Drive" or anything to this effect. It should be titled something like "Football Issues" or something similar in meaning. A title like the aforementioned one conveys the correct message about the section and will not lead people to feel the section is a shameless advert for CFI, which I have seen it turned into several times.

Secondly, I don't know why this was put at the top of the section: (in code format)"*UNC Charlotte Football Initiative" but it makes absolutely no sense being at the top or anywhere for that matter. "*UNC Charlotte Football" doesn't even link anywhere, "UNC Charlotte Football Initiative" isn't the correct name of the organization I assume you are trying to talk about, there is already a link to said organization's web site, and, again, the article is not mainly about the campaign or initiative for a football team.

I am a firm proponent of the addition of a football team to Charlotte and a supporter of CFI, so if you question where my opinions on this matter come from, maybe that will clear things up. If you are also hoping to help out the campaign, then please take seriously these suggestions because I want only whats best for the movement. If the section gets all messed up or turns too much into an advert for CFI or the movement, it can only hurt us. If, on the other hand, you are against the movement and keep messing up the section to hurt us, then that is pretty pitiful and classless don't you think? Let's keep this fight clean. Thanks. Charlottedude 10:24, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Just so you know, I have made changes to the areas I complained about. I changed the section name to "Football Issues" but if you can think of something more appealing, feel free to change it, just as long is still conveys the correct message. Maybe if people are going to keep changing it every week, we could just discuss it in here for a bit and finalize the pick. Charlottedude 10:40, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Traditions Section

Did somebody comment the traditions section out on purpose? When I was editing the football section it was in that section commented out for some reason. I uncommented it so it is showing up again now. Charlottedude 10:44, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Attention pep-rally editors

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It is not for unverifiable or opinionated information that cannot be proven like pic axe hands, "our beloved Lutz", an advertisement to get people to sign a football petition, for unrealistic lists of colleges you wish would be added to the university, cutesy, poetic things that state every student is a member of the alumni association in place of the list of notable alumni. Please keep your bias out of the article. Wikipedianinthehouse 02:22, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Hey dude, what the hell is wrong with you? Removing the entire football section? Who the hell do you think you are? Do you even go to Charlotte?? Pick axe hands is something we do. It's not biased or pep rallyish. The football thing is a real deal. There was no advertisement for football. It was just a segment about our longstanding desires for a team and the fact that some people are trying to get a team. I wrote two whole freaking paragraphs about why I thought that section should stay and how it should be done, and you come in here and take the whole thing out along with other stuff without so much as a legitimate argument??? Charlottedude 03:17, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Photos?

I've got quite a number of photos taken while roaming campus, would any of those be appropriate to supply, eg., of points of interest or academic buildings? -MalkavianX 01:30, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I will take photos this weekend and post them as soon as I can. The new entrance, the Student Union area, etc. need to be shown for prospective students and the like. 69.132.126.135 (talk) 20:02, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Colbert

when uncc sga gets around to naming its offices after Stephen Colbert, please include it where you see fit. WillC 02:56, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

This resolution was rejected. 70.61.100.232 05:55, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

User: 70.61.100.232, in response to your comment made while changing the first paragraph of the page, are you a psychic? How do you know it will 'never be called' University of Charlotte? I would be willing to wager quite a large amount of money that it will one day be called that. Charlottedude 07:27, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, Charlottedude, you would owe me a large sum of money. Student Government is against it. The Chancellor is against it. The only person for it outside of the athletics department is Mayor McRory. 65.82.104.120 14:32, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Yea right. SGA is not against it. The bill has been passed but then vetoed by our lame "prez" Ben Comstock because he knew the Chancellor was against it. Everyone I talk to in our student body wants the name changed, so there is no question about that. The Chancellor does not want it, but he didn't want to mess around with football either and look at how that ended up.Charlottedude 16:49, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but you're wrong again. SGA voted against it. I should know, because I am a member. 65.82.104.120 18:12, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, the most recent time it was voted on it did not pass. Before that it had been passed.Charlottedude 10:25, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

I was speaking about the SGA, not the former SGA. The current SGA is against it. 71.71.202.183 23:01, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Well in any event, SGA is pretty powerless so I could really give a crap if they are against it. They didn't do jack for the football campaign and look how that turned out. But anyways, just wait. I promise you the name will be changed... eventually.Charlottedude 09:38, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

You would be surprised at how much power the SGA has. Also, the SGA was the group who provided the Chancellor and Board with the numbers needed to make the decision as well as assisting in the feasability study. With the resources we had, we did all we could for football. We had to wait for a group like CFI to come along and lobby. Also, as a side note, no deans want the university name changed either. Thanks. 65.82.104.120 18:52, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

You guys put on the vote. Someone had to. If you did all you could then I doubt I'd be surprised how much power SGA has.

The deans probably didn't want football either. People in those positions are generally only worried about academics. The big problem with our name is predominantly about confusion in the community and athletics. Most professors and such don't care about our public image as far as getting fans and spirit behind this school.Charlottedude 17:01, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Every dean I spoke with about the issue (3 or 4 out of the 7 academic deans) was in favor of football. Some thought now was a perfect time, some believed we needed to wait a few years while finances would grow. There is little, if any, confusion in this community about our name. UNC Charlotte doesn't have a prestigious reputation in this community, no. Maybe not even in this state. But nationally, quite a few people I know from out of state know our school and are amazed at how quick it's growing. I was speaking with Dean Lilly of the Belk College of Business and he said when he visits countries overseas they don't know Chapel Hill or Duke. What they know is the UNC system and how strong academics are in this system. In his domestic travels, he says, people know UNCC and are very impressed with our school. Most professors DO care about our image. The better our school looks, the better their resumes look, and the higher their pay in future jobs. Even if you take this argument down to the lowest level of self gratification, professors NEED us to have the best image possible.

As for the stabs at SGA: We are a government (a student government, but a government nonetheless). We need the private sector, in this case a student organization, to create demand. Our job is to represent our constituents on the issues facing our campus. Our constituents want football, so we poll the student body. I am not positive, but I believe our first poll in September 2006 was prior to CFI becoming a student organization. Correct me if I am wrong. Thanks, 65.82.104.120 13:08, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

University Name

I saw what 65.82.104.120 added and I think it is unnecessary. I understand you are against the name change and trying to get that side in there, but I think that is getting too argumentative. This is supposed to be an encyclopedia and be about facts. The fact that our name causes confusion and that many people are unhappy with it is pretty big and common knowledge. Your addition is more of an argument against the name change and not even backed up by a study or anything. If you add that then why not add all the pros and cons, ya know? I'm honestly trying to be unbiased, thats why I left your addition in there but I really think it's got to go.Charlottedude 09:51, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I also have to mention that that is a TERRIBLE argument against a name change. The University of Memphis changed its name from Memphis State University in 1994. They would now go by the abbreviation UM. The list of other major universities that use that abbreviation is larger and more substantial than UC. University of Michigan, University of Massachusetts, University of Maryland, University of Missouri, University of Miami, University of Miami(Ohio). All prestigious institutions with great athletic programs. The University of Memphis certainly seems to be doing fine not getting confused with anybody, and I would also add that they are quite comparable to our own University. If you were going to include a random argument against a name change, I would suggest you use a stronger one than that.Charlottedude 11:54, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to add back the cons of the name change section until you or someone else can put in independent references that show there is confusion of a name. And not an article that says someone THINKS there is confusion. 65.82.104.120 18:46, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Honestly now, where could I even find a source? It is common knowledge that there is a confusion. Ask most students and at some point they have met people who have misunderstood who we are because of our name. I have a large documentation of these events but I don't know if it could be viewed as credible. I keep it up on a message board and half of it is testimonials which could be viewed as uncredible. You can have a look and tell me if you think it is credible enough. The organizational mistakes are all backed up by reference except for two or three. http://www.ninernation.net/forum/showpost.php?p=205520&postcount=2

Now as far as what you added goes, I think it is still too much. The initial article is almost all facts and not biased for one side or the other. I'll go through it line by line. Line 1: FACT Line 2: FACT Line 3: FACT, but after the comma you could say it is undocumented, even though it is common knowledge. Line 4: UNCITED ARGUMENTATIVE FACT, however the part about the mayor is a fact. Line 5: FACT

The initial paragraph is only trying to explain what the issue is and that it exists. Your addition lists several arguments against the issue while the initial part only tries to explain that the issue exists. I understand you want your side in, so I will make what I see as a fair change and let you see how you feel. I'll try to be as unbiased as possible while doing so.Charlottedude 16:49, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

That looks much better and more encyclopedic (Is that a word?). Thanks for working through this issue with me. 65.82.104.120 18:06, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Certainly. Thanks for your cooperation. This place would be a mess if people just changed stuff back and forth all the time haha. However, I have to make one small change. In coming back and reading it again, I have found that the last part of the last sentence reads like we would not be a part of the UNC System anymore if we changed the name. If you are familiar with name change issue, you know that this a common misconception that we would be leaving the UNC System if we changed our name. I will make one more edit but it will be very minor. Oh, and encyclopedic is a word. You should get the web browser Mozilla Firefox. It has an automatic spell check. Very handy.Charlottedude 18:47, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I have that at home, but we can't put it on our work computers. They get angry. And that's another reason I'm only an IP Address at work, because Firefox is the only thing that knows my Wiki password.  :) As for the article, it looks good. I do know that is a common misconception, and now the article looks much more NPOV. Thanks man. 65.82.104.120 14:29, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Just to elaborate on the reason for changing back what 24.74.57.104 did, the use of the word "strong" is okay because it vague. "Strong" doesn't necessarily mean that they are large. It is common knowledge, however undocumented, that people who want the name to stay are in the minority. So saying "small" is not wrong, we just need to find proof.Charlottedude 02:29, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I would have to disagree. It's a small number of people who WANT the name to change. 65.82.104.120 14:43, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Honestly, how may people have you asked? I have asked many people and they almost all want the name changed. I would not champion the idea so fervently if I thought it was a small number of people who wanted the change.Charlottedude 10:02, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Section Splits

It has been suggested that the "Athletics" section and the "Leaders of the university" section be split from the main page and given their own pages. Discuss here.

I personally am for both splits.Charlottedude 23:26, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I proposed both. Most schools have athletic pages, and many have pages for specific sports. Given the size of the athletics section, it would be a good move, as you would be able to summarize the athletics program and have a more balanced article. The "Leaders of the university" section reads like a well-written "History" section, so I proposed that it be moved to its own article. Some of that content can then be reintegrated with the article in the form of an improved History section, much in the same way that I wrote History of Georgia Tech and then used that article to improve Georgia Institute of Technology#History. —Disavian (talk/contribs) 00:56, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
CharlotteDude and I agree for once!  :)

65.82.104.120 19:00, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Removed list tag

I removed the list tag, as that appears to be a standard across all university articles. As for the trivia tag, could someone please prose-itize it? 65.82.104.120 14:48, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Is it standard across all FA-class university articles? —Disavian (talk/contribs) 16:30, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
It is standard in the first FA Universities article, Cornell. 65.82.104.120 18:42, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Nicole Atkins

Would Nicole Atkins be considered a UNCC alumni? — aegreen (talk • email) 02:31, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Okay, scratch that. She is, according to the UNCC Alumni Magazine. Will go ahead and add her. — aegreen (talk • email) 02:44, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Students

The AVG SAT is not that high. Even Harvard isnt that high... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.79.170.194 (talk) 14:50, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

This is under the new scale. 143.165.8.50 (talk) 15:56, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Use of "UNCC"

Please quit adding in the reference to 'UNCC' as a name for the university. That is not an acceptable name. It appears nowhere in the school's media guide. http://www.publicrelations.uncc.edu/resources/pdfs/factsheet_feb09.pdf 143.165.8.50 (talk) 15:55, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

The references in the media to 'UNCC' are incorrect. I now see your comment on my talk page, but let's have the discussion on here. I know it is cited in the media incorrectly often, however, incorrect information does not have a seat reserved 'in this house'. 143.165.8.50 (talk) 16:08, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

The official names of the schools in the UNC system are set by the North Carolina General Assembly in Section 116‑4 of the North Carolina General Statutes. "The" is clearly not capitalized and is therefore only used as an article and not part of the official name. Therefore, the official name of the university is "University of North Carolina at Charlotte". However, the individual school gets to determine the official abbreviation(s). I have heard (though I have no source for it) that UNC Charlotte has deprecate the use of "UNCC" as an abbreviation. If this is true, then "UNCC" should not be included in the article as an official abbreviation. Rreagan007 (talk) 21:02, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

I concede the 'the' part of this discussion. However, there is no mention of 'UNCC' in the media guide, therefore the acronym is improper. Unless you can find a place on the UNC Charlotte website that shows the 'UNCC' acronym is still acceptable, it needs to stay off the article. 69.132.28.236 (talk) 15:15, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
Why don't you type in uncc.edu and see what comes up? Why don't you send an e-mail to someone at the University and see what their email ends in? I typed in unccharlotte.edu and charlotte.edu and uncc.edu. Only one brought me to the University's website. Enough said. Besides, the University called itself UNCC for decades, and the acronym is still widely used by the public and the media. In fact, the University's own student publication (both in print and on its website) still calls it UNCC. 166.82.206.146 (talk) 01:18, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Please check anything from the PR department. Nothing will say 'UNCC' aside from the URL. How about a compromise? "(or UNCC, although deprecated)". I will put that in for now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.199.171.210 (talk) 00:30, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Anyone who has lived in Charlotte for more than ten years or so will frequently refer to the school as UNCC, it's just what it was called until the decision was made to push the UNC Charlotte name. The old logo from the 70's is nothing BUT the letters UNCC. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.222.136.182 (talk) 15:18, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

From the director of community affairs and the director of marketing: "The University wants to retire the use of UNCC in all references" http://issuu.com/unc_charlotte/docs/uncc_3q08 Page 3 of magazine. - Charlotte student —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.96.58.120 (talk) 15:03, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

We don't work for the university and they don't control this article. As long as others use the abbreviation we will include it here, too. ElKevbo (talk) 14:05, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia doesn't have to abide by the marketing or really any other dictates of other organizations. Just because UNCC has decided to rebrand itself and officially deprecate "UNCC" doesn't mean that "UNCC" is not still historically and popularly associated with the university. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an adjunct web presence for a marketing strategy. Madcoverboy (talk) 15:32, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Aside from the lack of authority of the institution's marketing guidelines, I'm not convinced that these names have fallen out of common usage. The university's own athletics teams refer to themselves as the "Charlotte 49ers" and "CHARLOTTE" is by far the most prominent word on their official website. I had to scroll down to the copyright notice at the very bottom to verify that they are indeed associated with UNC Charlotte. Even their team jerseys all seem to say "Charlotte." UNCC is less clear although it's interesting to note that "UNCC" is their official Twitter handle. (doesn't appear to be active) "UNCC" is part of several of their active Twitter accounts (UNCCCareer, UNCCIT_news etc.). ElKevbo (talk) 16:14, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

  • It seems to me that since the moniker "UNCC" has been used as shorthand for this university for some time, even if it is currently out of favor by the administration, then it ought to still be used in this article. Especially since there seem to be a number of people who still refer to it as UNCC, as evidenced by the twitter handle and the homepage. --GrapedApe (talk) 16:19, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Once again, it has been added back that UNCC is an acceptable shorthand for the University, despite what seriously bias editors try to argue. The University uses UNCC in its web URL domain and e-mail address. Therefore, it is clearly still an accepted use by the University. Multiple UNCC Twittter handles use the acronym. Furthermore, local media and many Charlotteans still refer to the University as UNCC. While it may be stated that the Director of Marketing wants to retire the name, they cannot force the change on the community. Also, they have not changed the domain name of the University. Wikipedianinthehouse (talk) 03:13, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

The lead

There are some problems with the lead:

  • "One of the largest and fastest growing in the 17 institution University of North Carolina System, the university is projected to enroll 35,000 students by 2020.[2][3] The university is ranked by U.S. News & World Report as one of the Top 10 National Up-and-Coming Universities and is the only university in the country with three Carnegie Foundation Professors of the Year on the faculty.[4][5]"
    • This sentence is problematic for several reasons. First, references 2 and 3 don't support the assertion that this the school is "One of the largest and fastest growing in the 17 institution University of North Carolina System." Second, I am uncomfortable with the lead being used to compare one school to another. That smacks of academic boosterism. Finally, reference 5 is to a facebook page that is part of the school's advertising campaign. I'm going to remove these sentences from the lead, because I don't think there's anything salvageable in them.--GrapedApe (talk) 17:43, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Academics section

I'm going to clean up this section a bit, starting with removing the Endowment sub-section, which doesn't really serve a purpose here. I'm also going to remove the long list of rankings, which appears to be academic boosterism. I'll leave in the overall U.S. News & World Report ranking, but the other rankings are just fluff. In addition to this section, I'll expand on the History section and re-write the lead a bit. --TropicalCyclone (talk) 20:56, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Copyright violations

2 sections in the article have been directly copied and pasted from UNCC media guides. I have tagged them as such. DavidSSabb (talk) 12:40, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://catalog.uncc.edu/sites/catalog.uncc.edu/files/media/Undergraduate-Catalogs/09-the%20university.pdf. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. — CactusWriter (talk) 23:12, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on University of North Carolina at Charlotte. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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 23:28, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on University of North Carolina at Charlotte. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 08:17, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://housing.uncc.edu/housing-options/buildings/greek-village https://housing.uncc.edu/housing-options/buildings/hunt-hall https://housing.uncc.edu/housing-options/buildings/belk-hall. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 03:37, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:University_of_North_Carolina_at_Charlotte/Archive_1&oldid=1170434898"