Talk:Augsburg University
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Augsburg University article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The following Wikipedia contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view. |
History
[edit]Does anyone know the various names of the school in it history. I mean did it start out as Augsburg Seminary ? when did they change it to Augsburg College and anything between the twoSmith03 20:39, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
I think this is the correct listing of church affiliation for the school but am not sure so I have not added to the page
- 1988-now ELCA
- 1963-1987 ALC
- 1897-1963 LFC
- 1890-1897 United Norweign Lutheran Church
- 1870-1890 Conference of the Norwegian-Danish Evangelical Lutheran Church of America
- 1869-1870 Scandinavian Augustana Synod
Smith03 20:39, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
I found a book in the library called "From Fjord to Freeway" 100 years Augsburg College by Carl H.Chrislock 1969 published by Augsburg College Smith03 20:34, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
List of university presidents
[edit]What do readers gain from reading a list of university presidents with no context or explanation? "University has had presidents" is not helpful or interesting information. ElKevbo (talk) 03:10, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
- I agree with your point that, what do we intend? To remove all such lists from all the bloated University pages? However, I'd suggest that this section be demoted toward the bottom of the article. Like others place it. Jax MN (talk) 04:08, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
- I think It would also help to convert the table to a bullet list. Tables are more intrusive and draw more attention to themselves. Indyguy (talk) 14:05, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, it would be good to remove similar lists of names that have no context or explanatory power from other articles. No, if there is a consensus to keep this information in the article then it should not be relegated to a disparate section at the end of the article; this (disconnected and unexplained) is clearly part of the institution of the history so it belongs in that section. ElKevbo (talk) 03:52, 6 September 2020 (UTC)