Talk:Anchor housing

This is the discussion page for "Anchor housing". This page is where editors and readers discuss what content should and should not be in the article, and respond to others' questions and comments. Unlike articles' content pages, editors should only add material and respond to others' postings, and never make deletions. This page is intended to record the history of any debate, as well as work towards resolving it.

All commenters here should take credit for their words. When you make a change, suffix your posting with --~~~~ This will automatically record your username and the time of posting. Doing this helps seperate comments, and is consistent with Wikipedia guidelines.

---

Edits to Seek NPOV

Article was begun with: Evillllllll. Though I appreciate the sentiment, we can do better on this, and ought to.--Plaidfury 22:52, 13 October 2005 (EDT)

Kudos to 07dab for most of his/her edits, which cleaned up some unjustified slam rhetoric (ie, saying the "unitiated and CUL members" dont know the odd quad is called the odd quad). I have, however, restored two items of content in ways I believe are more fact than rhetoric.

1) saying the WSO blogs were saturated after the initial anchor housing announcement

2) restoring mention of AA's objections after 2005's plan's unveiling in the spring.

--Jlandsma 22:01, 1 December 2005 (EST)

In my experience, saying that the vast majority of the blog commentary was negative is factually correct as well. --06jps 00:44, 2 December 2005 (EST)

The NPOV preface

Deleted: Since the page is currently factually accurate, if one-sided, it would be appreciated if material on this wiki be only added rather than subtracted until a neutral point of view is reached. An article should never claim it is "factually accurate." Users will determine this for themselves.--Jlandsma 22:39, 1 December 2005 (EST)

"CUL is seeking names of editors"

There is text here that the CUL is trying to figure out who has contributed to this wiki. CUL members have corroborated that statement. I have to wonder just what they plan to do with that information, and why they want to know. Yes, obviously, this wiki was not written primarily by CUL members...but none of the information contained here is false. It is true that opinion polls indicate that anchor housing is severely unpopular; it is true that students joke about the Harry Potter books--see any recent CC minutes for written evidence of that; it is true that anchor housing has gone through several name changes; it is true that the CUL report on the Williams House System does not properly explain the transition to free agency; et cetera, et cetera. Furthermore, other statements are linked to corroborating Record articles, and the CUL views the Record as an accurate source. Yes, some of these facts do not reflect well on the CUL plan...but the problem is not that the facts are being presented! The Williams community has been given much information on anchor housing from the CUL bias, and this article allows Williams students to write their own definition and explanation of the new housing system. Honestly, the CUL should not be surprised at any of the information presented in this article. Finally, this wiki is constantly edited by members of the Williams community, primarily students. It is an evolving thing, and eventually will reflect an unbiased explanation of anchor housing. It must be remembered that a truly unbiased explanation will include both the new housing system's shortcomings as well as its merits.

And there is nothing stopping anyone, including members of the CUL, from adding content about its merits.