Talk:INSEAD
Appearance
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Archives (Index) |
This page is archived by ClueBot III.
|
Promotional editing
[edit]User:SerAntoniDeMiloni, it is just as incumbent on you to discuss on the talk page if you are inserting promotional content by a COI editor. At least you could have cleaned it up some. User:GuardianH, thank you. Drmies (talk) 20:02, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- It is clearly not promotional editing to talk about A) how they don't admit more than xyz percent of students and B) what their alumni do. These are rather standard to include, and are important measures. I completely disagree with the process of removing the entire section, rather than cleaning it up, so I reverted so that they could be cleaned up. SerAntoniDeMiloni (talk) 20:09, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- These were recent, explicitly promotional additions. You go to the talk page to discuss what can be salvaged from the COI additions after they have been dealt with. Not the reverse. The onus was actually on the original editor to make his case in the talk page from the beginning for these promo additions, then proceed. But that isn't what they did, so the WP:PROMOTION has been rightly removed, and now we can go over what can be added neutrally, just as it should have been from the start. GuardianH (talk) 20:22, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- I understand where you're coming from, but prefer a method where the section is tagged as promotion, and then worked on. It's more challenging to go into the article history to salvage bits than it is to work in the moment. SerAntoniDeMiloni (talk) 22:17, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- SerAntoniDeMiloni, that may be challenging for you, but GuardianH and I were working on it already. Of the content you restored, half is gone, and that's actually something you could have done. If you were so concerned with valid, verified content, you could have been a lot more judicious in your revert. Drmies (talk) 00:30, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- Clocked that I reverted this quite close to it being removed. Didn’t spot that these edits were happening today - had assumed they were old reverts. My mistake… SerAntoniDeMiloni (talk) 02:19, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- SerAntoniDeMiloni, that may be challenging for you, but GuardianH and I were working on it already. Of the content you restored, half is gone, and that's actually something you could have done. If you were so concerned with valid, verified content, you could have been a lot more judicious in your revert. Drmies (talk) 00:30, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- I understand where you're coming from, but prefer a method where the section is tagged as promotion, and then worked on. It's more challenging to go into the article history to salvage bits than it is to work in the moment. SerAntoniDeMiloni (talk) 22:17, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
Ranking / Reputation Section Deleted
[edit]It appears the rankings and reputation section has been recently deleted after having existed for so long. Can someone include the ranking table of major publications that exists for all other business schools on Wikipedia? 43.249.66.4 (talk) 11:09, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
Categories:
- C-Class WikiProject Business articles
- Mid-importance WikiProject Business articles
- WikiProject Business articles
- C-Class France articles
- Low-importance France articles
- All WikiProject France pages
- C-Class Singapore articles
- Low-importance Singapore articles
- WikiProject Singapore articles
- C-Class Higher education articles
- WikiProject Higher education articles
- Start-Class articles with conflicting quality ratings
- Start-Class Western Asia articles
- Low-importance Western Asia articles
- Start-Class Abu Dhabi articles
- Mid-importance Abu Dhabi articles
- WikiProject Abu Dhabi articles
- Start-Class United Arab Emirates articles
- Mid-importance United Arab Emirates articles
- WikiProject United Arab Emirates articles
- WikiProject Western Asia articles