Talk:York Vision
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Website out of date
[edit]Anyone know why the york vision website is so out of date? It's not been updated this accademic year by the looks of things... -- Tomhab 11:56, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
The last revert to the article on 29th July
[edit]Much of what was removed from the article in that revert does appear to be truew if my memory serves me corrctly, however, I do think the way it was written was not suitable. Also, even some of the bits which were true probably don't need to be incldued. Can someone with a better memory than me varify that the 'Lecturer: my child porn shame' stuff and the media awards stuff is all true? I know the paper won the Guardian aweard thing for at least 3 years in a row and there was at least one lecturer arrested over child pornography which I read about in the paper. Evil Eye 17:04, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
Turns out you were right about the media awards stuff! Maragil (talk) 15:27, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
Assessment comment
[edit]The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:York Vision/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
.
|
Last edited at 20:53, 12 May 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 11:06, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
Undoing of revisions
[edit]As per WP:COI I note that I have undone the revisions throughout March referring to 'controversy'. Whilst factually accurate, it was very poorly written. Further, I note I am the author of the article which was referred to, and the person who did the research that the article was based off. I also believe the author themselves had a COI, as they identified themselves to me, but naturally will not identify them.