Talk:Mid-Eastern Athletic Conference
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] School type/religious affiliation
The religious affiliation or designation as "non-sectarian" is not so clear cut. For example, Duke University describes its ties with Methodism as "formal, on-going, and symbolic" [1] while Wake Forest maintains "a dedication to the values rooted in its Baptist heritage" [2]. Both schools can be considered "non-sectarian" in that they are no longer under the direct auspices of their founding religious organizations. Likewise, Boston College maintains its Jesuit identity in spite of the fact that it severed its formal ties with the Jesuit Order (and thereby the Catholic Church) in the 1960s when it was independently incorporated under a lay board of trustees. Unlike the Catholic University of America, which is under the direct auspices of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, or the University of Notre Dame, which is governed by "fellows" who must be priests of the Congregation of Holy Cross, The Trustees of Boston College (BC's governing body) operate independent of any religious jurisdiction. This arrangement is probably similar to that at Duke or Wake Forest, except that the BC trustees have voluntarily chosen to elect members of the founding religious organization to the presidency (though they are not required to do so). In fact, similar arrangements exist at other Jesuit colleges and universities, where both women and non-clerics have been elected to presidency (most recently at Georgetown). All of this is to say that I think the nature of a school's religious affiliation is beyond the scope of this article, and that "public" or "private" suffice in the context of the members table.--24.63.125.78 10:10, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
- 24.63.125.78 has coppied and pasted this on almost every college conference discussion board. Please refer to Talk:Atlantic Coast Conference so we can keep all the discussion in one place. Thanks. -- Masonpatriot
[edit] Winston-Salem State
Since when did they join the MEAC? I've found absolutely nothing anywhere regarding them moving up. --fuzzy510 06:21, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Winston Salem State Has Been Offically Voted Into The MEAC and will have a Full MEAC Schedule in the 2007-2008 Season.
http://www.meacsports.com/artman/publish/article_2300.shtml
[edit] Logos
There is a discussion to clarify our policy/guideline on the use of sports team logos. Please see Wikipedia_talk:Logos#Clarification_on_use_of_sports_team_logos if you wish to participate in the discussion. Johntex\talk 16:41, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] UCF
I've removed the Central Florida references here again, after having tried to contact the user who inserted them several days ago with no response. Unfortunately, I'm forced to try and prove a negative here, and I can only do that by demonstrating an absence of source. So, in that vein, four things:
- UCF's web site's football history page does not reference having been a member of the conference, despite a somewhat detailed timeline of the program's history.
- The MEAC's website, in listing its historical membership, does not include UCF.
- The annual NCAA Official Football Records Books for the years in question have printed standings for all conferences in all divisions; Central Florida is, in each of the years in question, listed as "Division I-AA Independent." Further, the books list the annual schedules and results; the only MEAC team Central Florida played during those years was an annual game against Bethune-Cookman. When a team is in a conference, it does not just play one game a year against another conference member.
- I've been unable to uncover any source whatsoever to verify the claim that UCF was in the MEAC; google searches on "Central Florida" or "UCF" in conjunction with "Mid-Eastern Athletic Conference" or "MEAC" come up with nothing.
Especially insofar as all evidence suggests the assertion is false, if there is no verifiable source backing the assertion, please don't put it back in. Thanks. JFMorse 20:27, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:NewMEACLogo.png
Image:NewMEACLogo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 16:52, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Copyright violation
Sadly the history section was an almost exact copy of this page of the MEAC Official Website, so has been removed. —Yellowspacehopper (talk) 02:08, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

