Talk:Carnegie Mellon School of Design

{

Are any students or faculty willing to help?

I believe that this Wikipedia page could be a valuable resource but only if updated regularly with pertinant information. Not being a student of the School of Drama, I can only go by what I find on their website or on the Carnegie Mellon University website. Information on the School of Design would probably best come from someone actually involved in the program. 06:12, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Editors need to consider conflict of interest WP:COI issues when contributing to Wikipedia. --DThomsen8 (talk) 14:48, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Reference and Linking Tags

Originally, there were two tags placed on this article.

• The first was to add a tag for sources outside of primary sources. Given the subject matter, this article should be an exception, particularly considering that all information about the school would come from the school itself. Even if I were to find a newspaper article about the school, it would almost certainly be referencing the same information from the school itself. I think that this primary source is reliable, and that the subject matter is neutral enough that there is no reason to require additional sources. If this tag was to continue I think there ought to be a discussion about what specific information in the existing article is inaccurate or requires a third party verification.
  • All information in Wikipedia requires reliable secondary sources. This article is no exception. Valrith 03:26, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
    • "This page is considered a guideline on Wikipedia. It is generally accepted among editors and is considered a standard that all users should follow. However, it is not set in stone and should be treated with common sense and the occasional exception. When editing this page, please ensure that your revision reflects consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on the talk page."
    • The above quote is from the reliable secondary sources. Putting this tag on this small stub like article is not using common sense. At the very least, this shows that "All information in Wikipedia requires reliable secondary sources", as you stated above, is inaccurate. Why don't we have a discussion about whether the content of this article is such that it requires a secondary source? —Preceding unsigned comment added by PadreNuestro (talk • contribs) 12:31, May 5, 2007
  • First, if no secondary sources are writing about the school, it's not notable enough to deserve an article in the first place. Second, until you get someone to change the consensus you quoted above, all article are expected to cite WP:RS. Valrith 21:29, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

• Second, there was a tag to say that the article does not link enough other articles. This school is a smaller branch of a larger school, and it links to the larger school. There really aren't too many other places where it should link. If you can think of another place where this should link (appropriately) let me know and I'll make the changes, but as I feel this article is linked appropriately in its current state, I have removed the tag.PadreNuestro 00:56, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
  • No. The {{Orphan}} tag points out that there are few or no other articles linking TO this article. When that condition is amended, this tag can be removed. Valrith 03:26, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
    • Again, common sense. I don't have a problem with someone pointing out that few articles link TO this one, but the tag also says that we should "introduce links in articles or related topics". I do not think that this subject matter HAS any more areas where it can be appropriately linked. Again, if you have a suggestion about where something like this article can be linked, let me know and I will make the changes and keep the tag until the changes have been made. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PadreNuestro (talk • contribs) 12:31, May 5, 2007
  • If the subject were sufficiently notable to exist there should be a number of other articles linking to it. Valrith 21:29, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
    • Using your logic, then reliable secondary sources would be a rule and not a guideline. Fact is that it IS a guideline and not a rule. I am giving you 24 hours to give me a common sense reason why this SMALL article needs a secondary source (again, emphasis on common sense). If you cannot come up with a good reason other than continuing to insist that all articles need secondary sources, I am removing the links. I'll later take it to arbitration if I you continue to revert (btw, I'll win). Your assertion that all articles need secondary sources is wrong. This is PadreNuestro, having trouble signing into my account. 69.19.14.41 17:42, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

A design school in a research university which is a technology pioneer

Several design schools are stand-alone institutions. This differentiates the design school as a unique one, as it is situated to borrow from other disciplines and reflect that in the way students learn and pursue the field of design. Especially in an era where experts strive to make AI more accessible and explainable, what is the role that the school of design must play? Do you think the article must cover how this school os uniquely positioned because of this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soopersonic124 (talk • contribs) 14:44, 3 April 2021 (UTC)