Talk:University of Virginia

TK I see you removed so content (some of which I admit was overly harsh) but I can find sources for the other information such as Jeffersons want to prevent theology from being taught, the Wahoo term and its relation to alcohal usage, and other things. I should have cited souces and I apologize.--IScott 21:03, 6 July 2010 (EDT)

Teresa Sullivan

I've looked and can find no evidence that incoming UVA president Teresa Sullivan "majored" in Women's Studies, as this article alleges. Her CV of January 2010 shows no major for her B.A. from Michigan State University, and Sociology as the field of study for her A.M. and Ph.D. degrees from the University of Chicago (http://www.provost.umich.edu/about/senior_staff/pdf/Sullivan2010vita.pdf). In any case, her undergraduate major 40 years ago has virtually no bearing on her qualifications to be president. Likewise, I uncovered no evidence whatsoever of any "questions of her ability to lead the University". HaywoodJ 22:25, 27 July 2010 (EDT)

It looks to me as if you are a registered editor here, HaywoodJ. Is that incorrect? --ṬK_/Admin^/Talk 22:33, 27 July 2010 (EDT)

Are you suggesting I just go ahead and change it? HaywoodJ 08:28, 28 July 2010 (EDT)

2 Week Block

You can explain yourself then. --Jpatt 22:45, 7 August 2010 (EDT)

Salient facts?

TK: "We don't accept censorship here. Why would you remove salient facts and make the edit comment that you made this more accurate?"

What salient facts did I remove? Are you referring to the unsupported claim that Dr. Sullivan "majored in Women's Studies", which I replaced with "true and verifiable" information for which a source was provided, as required by Conservapedia's Commandments? Or the completely unsupported allegation that there were unspecified "questions of her ability to lead the University"? Or bringing the comment about the wahoo fish more in line with what the source said? How do any of these not improve the article's accuracy? DuncanD 16:22, 17 August 2010 (EDT)