Revision as of 01:30, 3 June 2009 editNeslgrad09 (talk | contribs)100 edits →Inappropriate editing← Previous edit |
Revision as of 01:31, 3 June 2009 edit undoNeslgrad09 (talk | contribs)100 edits →Inappropriate editingNext edit → |
Line 20: |
Line 20: |
|
::::Well I guess I will list each of my grievances one by one. For starters, you removed the ranking section altogether and instead placed NESL's fourth-tier USNWR ranking in the academic section. I believe this is an error. The USNWR rankings take into account much more than the school's academic program, and associating the school's ranking with "academics" is misleading. Take a look for yourself: http://www.usnews.com/articles/education/best-law-schools/2009/04/22/law-school-rankings-methodology.html. The rankings consider twelve different areas of quality, including peer assessment scores, lawyer/judge assessment scores, LSAT scores, undergraduate GPAs, acceptance rates, employment rates, bar passage rate, expenditures per student, student/faculty ratio, and library resources. The ranking category should be a stand-alone category, representing how the school is ranked based on a variety of criteria, not merely its academic program. |
|
::::Well I guess I will list each of my grievances one by one. For starters, you removed the ranking section altogether and instead placed NESL's fourth-tier USNWR ranking in the academic section. I believe this is an error. The USNWR rankings take into account much more than the school's academic program, and associating the school's ranking with "academics" is misleading. Take a look for yourself: http://www.usnews.com/articles/education/best-law-schools/2009/04/22/law-school-rankings-methodology.html. The rankings consider twelve different areas of quality, including peer assessment scores, lawyer/judge assessment scores, LSAT scores, undergraduate GPAs, acceptance rates, employment rates, bar passage rate, expenditures per student, student/faculty ratio, and library resources. The ranking category should be a stand-alone category, representing how the school is ranked based on a variety of criteria, not merely its academic program. |
|
|
|
|
|
You also removed any reference to the fact that "New England School of Law" became "New England Law, Boston" in 2008, the school's 100th anniversary. This is misleading because a majority of people, including the school itself, still refer to the school as New England School of Law. In fact, the Misplaced Pages entry is listed under the school's former name. While acceptable to refer to the school under its new identity, there should be some reference as to why and when the school underwent the name change. |
|
::You also removed any reference to the fact that "New England School of Law" became "New England Law, Boston" in 2008, the school's 100th anniversary. This is misleading because a majority of people, including the school itself, still refer to the school as New England School of Law. In fact, the Misplaced Pages entry is listed under the school's former name. While acceptable to refer to the school under its new identity, there should be some reference as to why and when the school underwent the name change. |
|
|
|
|
|
You also removed the section which listed the school's cost of attendance. I am not sure why you thought this was necessary, as the figure was properly credited directly to the school's financial aid office, and is extremely relevant to the school's overall description. |
|
::You also removed the section which listed the school's cost of attendance. I am not sure why you thought this was necessary, as the figure was properly credited directly to the school's financial aid office, and is extremely relevant to the school's overall description. |
|
|
|
|
|
You also removed any reference to the school's student body and admission statistics. Again, I question how this is not a properly cited source. |
|
::You also removed any reference to the school's student body and admission statistics. Again, I question how this is not a properly cited source. |
|
|
|
|
|
You also removed any reference to the school's bar exam and career statistics directly pulled from the school's website. Again, I question why this was removed. |
|
::You also removed any reference to the school's bar exam and career statistics directly pulled from the school's website. Again, I question why this was removed. |
|
|
|
|
|
You also removed both sections describing the location of the school, its resources, and its faculty. Again, I question why this edit was made. These seem like extremely relevant pieces of information that establish the identity of the school. |
|
::You also removed both sections describing the location of the school, its resources, and its faculty. Again, I question why this edit was made. These seem like extremely relevant pieces of information that establish the identity of the school. |
|
|
|
|
|
I will be more than happy to discuss these changes with you on a case-by-case basis, or alternatively with a second editor, but I do find it extremely alarming that you would unilaterally remove many relevant and properly credited pieces of information about the school with little justification at all, effectively stripping down the school's Misplaced Pages page and providing a misrepresentative picture of the school. |
|
::I will be more than happy to discuss these changes with you on a case-by-case basis, or alternatively with a second editor, but I do find it extremely alarming that you would unilaterally remove many relevant and properly credited pieces of information about the school with little justification at all, effectively stripping down the school's Misplaced Pages page and providing a misrepresentative picture of the school. |
Given the Law School's current constant re-editing, I would like to endorse the current page, and request that it be locked, to be re-examined ONLY when new rankings, cost, and employment data are made generally available.
I disagree with the way this page is being edited. Completely relevant and unbiased statistics, many of which are cited directly to the school webpage, are being removed without justification. I am requesting that the edits made by Averniking be discussed here. If no one is willing to discuss, then I will seek an editor's third opinion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Neslgrad09 (talk • contribs) 21:11, 2 June 2009 (UTC)