User talk:BatesMotel6/Washington Institute for Graduate Studies
Latest comment: 12 years ago by Orlady
 | This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
, I am trying to correct outdated information on a Wikipedia article. I was told that "shoehorning" was not the way to do that. I'm not prepared to begin a whole article about the information in question, but feel it is important to correct misinformation with a valid and current citation, rather than the outdated citation used in the article. What is the best way to do that?
Thank you
BatesMotel 6 (talk) 19:29, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
- You edited National Association of Private Nontraditional Schools and Colleges by adding a statement that Washington Institute severed its ties to the NAPNSC and is seeking other accreditation. This all may be true, but the source you cited doesn't say anything about the NAPNSC -- and the article you edited is supposed to be about the NAPNSC, not about the Washington Institute. The best place to tell about the Washington Institute would be in an article about the washington Institute.
- I erred in my comment on your talk page. The right place to start an article about Washington Institute is not this page, but the related page User:BatesMotel6/Washington Institute for Graduate Studies. Use that page to write down what you know about the Washington Institute -- and identify the published sources you have for your information. It's OK to start out with raw notes. Some of us more experienced users can help with encyclopedic wording, format, etc., as needed. --Orlady (talk) 20:08, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
- Additionally, please note that the information in the article National Association of Private Nontraditional Schools and Colleges is verified. As of 2006, the NAPNSC listed the Washington Institute as one of the institutions it accredited. That's what the article says. It does not say that the Washington Institute is still affiliated with the NAPNSC (which probably would be impossible, as the NAPNSC seems to be defunct). Historical information may not describe the current situation, but that does not make it inaccurate as history. --Orlady (talk) 20:30, 11 April 2012 (UTC)