Talk:George Fox University

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

Years[edit]

"During the past 14 years" is a dangerous phrase to use, as it quickly becomes outdated. It would be better to state the actual years, if known. --Jsnow 01:51, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Quakers & cut & pasting[edit]

Since we're copying directly from the "About" page of GFU's official web site, I went ahead and added "by Quaker pioneers" back in. Kind of weird to be missing in the first place, since the rest of the article is word for word (there's no indication that it's copyrighted material). I'll probably come back soon and revamp the whole article, but if enough people care, let's discuss it.--Bltpdx 10:15, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism[edit]

Where is the criticism of its theology and incongruity with modern science? Where are the criticisms of its overwhelming conservative political stances without progressive amelioration? It should be at least noted.

Student Newspaper[edit]

Is there a student newspaper? If so, it could go here: [1].--DerRichter (talk) 23:15, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is a student newspaper called The Crescent. I'll add it to that list, thanks! Pcrackenhead (talk) 21:53, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Christian university"[edit]

This term implies an evangelical school, I think - that is to say, not simply a university affiliated with a Christian denomination, but a "Christian university" as opposed to a "secular university". Schools associated with mainline protestant groups like the Quakers should probably avoid such phrasing (as should Catholic schools). john k (talk) 22:11, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Obama incident[edit]

First, we do not allow original research, so it does not matter if you are a student and know the real story. We need citations from reliable sources, and at least the hits from the first page of a Google search tend to indicate "effigy" and not a joke.

So, eight of ten use effigy in the story title, and only the GFU press release does not use the term effigy. Thus we need to go with effigy. Aboutmovies (talk) 05:54, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, a disclosure: I am a non-traditional student at George Fox, although I am more interested in accurate representation. As another individual who removed the term "effigy" from the story (although, not the person who called it a joke), but rephrased the statement to be a bit more neutral, I will explain why I did so. Effigy is the correct term for this as it was a representation, however "in effigy" isn't (IMO). In effigy implies that the students were hanging the cardboard cutout instead of Barak, although the media outlets (starting with Oregonlive.com) did not have any knowledge of the motives, or even a photo of the hanging, as a photo was not released, and the perpetrators were not known when news broke out. Most of the news on the subject is related to the initial incident, and is more sensationalist than anything else, as the students turning themselves in and punishment are not nearly as covered or mentioned. As such, most news agencies had Oregonlive's story to begin with, and the knowledge that the wording brought in viewers. It was an interpretation. My understanding was that the cutout was attached with fishing line under the armpit and around the neck, as a means of attaching to the tree, although I have not heard any official account of how the string was attached. It was ill conceived and stupid of the 4 students, but as the FBI has not brought charges and the police didn't think any hate-crime had been committed, the term "in effigy" (which does imply a hate crime) was not as accurate, and definitely "lynch" (as said by other articles in that list) is not accurate. LifeIsPain (talk) 21:35, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Transgender[edit]

On April 8, 2014, user 208.87.107.67 (talk) added the following to the introductory paragraph for George Fox University: "In recent years the school has come under fire for biased and potentially illegal treatment of LGBTQ students, including a 2014 incident where a transgender student was denied appropriate on campus housing." The source that was cited was PQ Monthly: http://www.pqmonthly.com/trans-student-denied-campus-housing-george-fox-university. I have moved this edit here to the talk page for discussion on the questions of verifiability, objectivity, and notability. Although the fact that a transgender student has made a legal complaint about the school is verifiable, the statement "In recent years the school has come under fire for biased and potentially illegal treatment of LGBTQ students ..." is a broad and sweeping charge that rests on a single source. Furthermore, the claim of "appropriate" is a matter of opinion. If this legal complaint by a single individual is even notable enough for inclusion here, there surely is no reason to include it in the introductory paragraph for the page at this point. --Tytonidae (talk) 22:38, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

While this incident has made the news, covering it in such depth would be WP:UNDUE, as would covering it in the lede. Plus, as noted, the statement is far from neutral. Much like we treat the accused as innocent until proven guilty, anyone can file a complaint (which here is not the same as a legal complaint you file with the court to initiate a lawsuit), but unless the DOJ says they did something improper under Title IX after an investigation, it is simply inflammatory language meant to sensationalize the situation. I'm not saying what GFU was or was not correct, but Wikipedia is not some forum for an aggrieved party to air disputes or for furthering an agenda. Aboutmovies (talk) 05:21, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on George Fox University. 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) 22:32, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Internal Statements Regarding 2019 Lip-Sync Incident[edit]

Hello, I recently added a brief description regarding internal George Fox University statements stemming from the public coming-out of a gay student at a university-sponsored event. These events do not currently have publically accessible sources as of this message, but all included quotes are verbatim from internal letters. Is this a reasonable addition to make in this light? (The added text is included below:)


On November 20, 2019, the Associated Student Community (ASC) of George Fox University, the student government organization on campus, sent out an internal e-mail to students in which ASC expressed support for a student who had publicly came out as gay at a university-sponsored event on November 16. The letter specified that "We, as the ASC Executive Council, want to be as explicitly clear as possible that we affirm LGBTQIA+ students in particular and all students in general ... There is a dire need to create conversations that have been silenced for long enough." The following day, the Office of Robin Baker sent out a similar internal email to students, expressing that "...Faculty and staff serve [at George Fox] because they love all students and it is my hope that [students] have felt the consistent care of this community." This letter also expressed that "George Fox is a Christian Community that holds that God intended sexual relations to be reserved for a marriage relationship between a man and a woman ... It is my hope that this university will continue to be a place where robust and respectful conversations along with the active pursuit of God's truth will flourish."

(209.170.255.14 (talk) 01:40, 22 November 2019 (UTC))[reply]

  • In a word, no. If there's no significant coverage, the content doesn't belong here. That's what I explained in the note left at your talk page, along with the suggestion that you read WP:COI. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 01:44, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • To elaborate, it would be especially inappropriate to publish internal correspondence in an encyclopedia, until that correspondence had become public and received significant coverage from multiple WP:RELIABLE sources. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 01:50, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

George Fox School of Theology[edit]

Is it a faculty among several, or an alternative name for the entire GFU? See for instance this mention. Arminden (talk) 10:22, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have just created a redirect for George Fox School of Theology to George Fox University. You can adapt it if you know the answer to my question, for instance create a "George Fox School of Theology" section (with anchor) and refine the redirect accordingly ("George Fox University#George Fox School of Theology" as target). Arminden (talk) 10:27, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:George_Fox_University&oldid=1217869007"