St. John's Wikipedia page

Amazingly, there seems to be at least one person on Wikipedia who edits the STJ page to highlight every negative fact they can find, no matter how dated, obscure, or trivial it might be.  (You don't generally see people doing this to other schools). For example, a Sylvan landesberg quote:  "chose UVA over STJ because their academic programs are superior to STJ's academic programs", should not be a part of an encyclopedia article.  Someone once sued STJ for discrimination.  This is an obscure fact, and what University has not been sued?

These posts get taken down from time to time but then reappear verbatim sometime later.  Other times they reappear in a different form.  The one that gets me is the one about Tony Jackson being proven to have taken bribes.  In the old form it said he was proven to have taken bribes, and then they give a footnote which itself says "At no time was Tony Jackson ever accused of taking a bribe".  So the page contradicts the very  footnote that they themselves provide.  In the latest version of the lie, they say that three SJU players were proven to have taken bribes.  They then provide a different source which says at no time was Tony Jackson ever accused of taking a bribe, which is another self contradiction.  The footnoted source then goes on to say that SJU players Parenti and Chrystal were once accused, but not proven, to have taken a bribe by someone testifying against gamblers in court.  This is a far cry from "three SJU players were proven to have taken bribes.

 

Would you rather urban dictionary?

A school that will accept anyone who is willing to pay the high tuition and or is fortunate enough to pay out of pocket without one of their generous scholarships that 90% of the student body is on. A school, which tries to act like a University but, in the end, they really are an average college in Queens pumped up on steroids. At the most random places throughout the campus, there will be Indians bowing down on the floor as if they are visually seeing Christ’s body. People on campus think it is normal to be have a Redneck, African American, Asian, and Indian sit at a lunch table together and be friends. Coming to class slightly sweaty in a t-shirt and workout pants is considered classy. The only place in all of NYC were wearing all red does not signify that you are part of the Bloods. Completely possible to not show up to class in a 50-person classroom and just come in on the last day of class to take the final and end up passing the course when class participations consist of 25% of the overall grade. Every student thinks they must be part of an organization that is related to their major or they will never land a job after graduation. Students are amazed at how spectacular the DAC is, when in reality, it is a giant building that is 2 years old, with white slate floors that have already turned completely black due to the cleaning service only cleaning once per week.

Would you rather urban dictionary?

A school that will accept anyone who is willing to pay the high tuition and or is fortunate enough to pay out of pocket without one of their generous scholarships that 90% of the student body is on. A school, which tries to act like a University but, in the end, they really are an average college in Queens pumped up on steroids. At the most random places throughout the campus, there will be Indians bowing down on the floor as if they are visually seeing Christ’s body. People on campus think it is normal to be have a Redneck, African American, Asian, and Indian sit at a lunch table together and be friends. Coming to class slightly sweaty in a t-shirt and workout pants is considered classy. The only place in all of NYC were wearing all red does not signify that you are part of the Bloods. Completely possible to not show up to class in a 50-person classroom and just come in on the last day of class to take the final and end up passing the course when class participations consist of 25% of the overall grade. Every student thinks they must be part of an organization that is related to their major or they will never land a job after graduation. Students are amazed at how spectacular the DAC is, when in reality, it is a giant building that is 2 years old, with white slate floors that have already turned completely black due to the cleaning service only cleaning once per week.

Wtf was that

Would you rather urban dictionary?

A school that will accept anyone who is willing to pay the high tuition and or is fortunate enough to pay out of pocket without one of their generous scholarships that 90% of the student body is on. A school, which tries to act like a University but, in the end, they really are an average college in Queens pumped up on steroids. At the most random places throughout the campus, there will be Indians bowing down on the floor as if they are visually seeing Christ’s body. People on campus think it is normal to be have a Redneck, African American, Asian, and Indian sit at a lunch table together and be friends. Coming to class slightly sweaty in a t-shirt and workout pants is considered classy. The only place in all of NYC were wearing all red does not signify that you are part of the Bloods. Completely possible to not show up to class in a 50-person classroom and just come in on the last day of class to take the final and end up passing the course when class participations consist of 25% of the overall grade. Every student thinks they must be part of an organization that is related to their major or they will never land a job after graduation. Students are amazed at how spectacular the DAC is, when in reality, it is a giant building that is 2 years old, with white slate floors that have already turned completely black due to the cleaning service only cleaning once per week.

Oh my God!  Was that really you Baldi?  Or did someone appropriate your keyboard?  There's only one or two lines there that even make any sense.  Tell whoever wrote that to stick to one liners, because I know you didn't write that.

Quote from: Marco Baldi on April 22, 2016, 08:35:03 PM

Would you rather urban dictionary?

A school that will accept anyone who is willing to pay the high tuition and or is fortunate enough to pay out of pocket without one of their generous scholarships that 90% of the student body is on. A school, which tries to act like a University but, in the end, they really are an average college in Queens pumped up on steroids. At the most random places throughout the campus, there will be Indians bowing down on the floor as if they are visually seeing Christ’s body. People on campus think it is normal to be have a Redneck, African American, Asian, and Indian sit at a lunch table together and be friends. Coming to class slightly sweaty in a t-shirt and workout pants is considered classy. The only place in all of NYC were wearing all red does not signify that you are part of the Bloods. Completely possible to not show up to class in a 50-person classroom and just come in on the last day of class to take the final and end up passing the course when class participations consist of 25% of the overall grade. Every student thinks they must be part of an organization that is related to their major or they will never land a job after graduation. Students are amazed at how spectacular the DAC is, when in reality, it is a giant building that is 2 years old, with white slate floors that have already turned completely black due to the cleaning service only cleaning once per week.

Oh my God!  Was that really you Baldi?  Or did someone appropriate your keyboard?  There's only one or two lines there that even make any sense.  Tell whoever wrote that to stick to one liners, because I know you didn't write that.

That's not mine, I just copied and pasted here.

I would never post anything longer than 3 sentences. Lose interest

Amazingly, there seems to be at least one person on Wikipedia who edits the STJ page to highlight every negative fact they can find, no matter how dated, obscure, or trivial it might be.  (You don't generally see people doing this to other schools). For example, a Sylvan landesberg quote:  "chose UVA over STJ because their academic programs are superior to STJ's academic programs", should not be a part of an encyclopedia article.  Someone once sued STJ for discrimination.  This is an obscure fact, and what University has not been sued?

These posts get taken down from time to time but then reappear verbatim sometime later.  Other times they reappear in a different form.  The one that gets me is the one about Tony Jackson being proven to have taken bribes.  In the old form it said he was proven to have taken bribes, and then they give a footnote which itself says "At no time was Tony Jackson ever accused of taking a bribe".  So the page contradicts the very  footnote that they themselves provide.  In the latest version of the lie, they say that three SJU players were proven to have taken bribes.  They then provide a different source which says at no time was Tony Jackson ever accused of taking a bribe, which is another self contradiction.  The footnoted source then goes on to say that SJU players Parenti and Chrystal were once accused, but not proven, to have taken a bribe by someone testifying against gamblers in court.  This is a far cry from "three SJU players were proven to have taken bribes.

The quote  "chose UVA over STJ because their academic programs are superior to STJ's academic programs" does not appear on this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._John%27s_Red_Storm_men%27s_basketball

Neither does it appear anywhere on the internet according to google.

Your search - "chose UVA over STJ because their academic programs are superior to STJ's academic ... - did not match any documents.

Neither does this: No results found for "At no time was Tony Jackson ever accused of taking a bribe".


In any event, wikipedia is crowd sourced. Why not just change the article so that it says whatever you want.

Quote from: WillieG on April 22, 2016, 07:06:19 PM

Amazingly, there seems to be at least one person on Wikipedia who edits the STJ page to highlight every negative fact they can find, no matter how dated, obscure, or trivial it might be.  (You don't generally see people doing this to other schools). For example, a Sylvan landesberg quote:  "chose UVA over STJ because their academic programs are superior to STJ's academic programs", should not be a part of an encyclopedia article.  Someone once sued STJ for discrimination.  This is an obscure fact, and what University has not been sued?

These posts get taken down from time to time but then reappear verbatim sometime later.  Other times they reappear in a different form.  The one that gets me is the one about Tony Jackson being proven to have taken bribes.  In the old form it said he was proven to have taken bribes, and then they give a footnote which itself says "At no time was Tony Jackson ever accused of taking a bribe".  So the page contradicts the very  footnote that they themselves provide.  In the latest version of the lie, they say that three SJU players were proven to have taken bribes.  They then provide a different source which says at no time was Tony Jackson ever accused of taking a bribe, which is another self contradiction.  The footnoted source then goes on to say that SJU players Parenti and Chrystal were once accused, but not proven, to have taken a bribe by someone testifying against gamblers in court.  This is a far cry from "three SJU players were proven to have taken bribes.

The quote  "chose UVA over STJ because their academic programs are superior to STJ's academic programs" does not appear on this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._John%27s_Red_Storm_men%27s_basketball

Neither does it appear anywhere on the internet according to google.

Your search - "chose UVA over STJ because their academic programs are superior to STJ's academic ... - did not match any documents.

Neither does this: No results found for "At no time was Tony Jackson ever accused of taking a bribe".


In any event, wikipedia is crowd sourced. Why not just change the article so that it says whatever you want.

Foad, the quotes might not be word for word, but the meaning is exactly the same as the quote that has been taken down many times and put back up by the "crowd". It has been taken down.   As you say, you can say anything you want because it's Wikipedia, and it's "crowd sourced". (good term, by the way).  If one goes to the Wikipedia page, and clicks on the footnote, one can see that Tony Jackson was never accused of taking a bribe.  It says he did not report an offer of a bribe which was broached to him, seemingly in jest.  But he was never accused of taking a bribe.  ( The previous footnoted article had said that he "was never accused of taking a bribe". I mentioned that above.)

The broader issue is why does someone want to make STJ look so bad by reporting obscure minutiae about the school, and what can be done about it.  People look at the Wikipedia page for STJ.  A colleague, whose son was considering STJ, told me about the page, that's how I found out about it.  So what if someone went to UVA because they had better academics. That's been said about every school in the country that someone went somewhere else because they thought the academics were better.  That's not legitimate material for an encyclopedia article.

Quote from: Foad on April 23, 2016, 08:50:43 AM

Quote from: WillieG on April 22, 2016, 07:06:19 PM

Amazingly, there seems to be at least one person on Wikipedia who edits the STJ page to highlight every negative fact they can find, no matter how dated, obscure, or trivial it might be.  (You don't generally see people doing this to other schools). For example, a Sylvan landesberg quote:  "chose UVA over STJ because their academic programs are superior to STJ's academic programs", should not be a part of an encyclopedia article.  Someone once sued STJ for discrimination.  This is an obscure fact, and what University has not been sued?

These posts get taken down from time to time but then reappear verbatim sometime later.  Other times they reappear in a different form.  The one that gets me is the one about Tony Jackson being proven to have taken bribes.  In the old form it said he was proven to have taken bribes, and then they give a footnote which itself says "At no time was Tony Jackson ever accused of taking a bribe".  So the page contradicts the very  footnote that they themselves provide.  In the latest version of the lie, they say that three SJU players were proven to have taken bribes.  They then provide a different source which says at no time was Tony Jackson ever accused of taking a bribe, which is another self contradiction.  The footnoted source then goes on to say that SJU players Parenti and Chrystal were once accused, but not proven, to have taken a bribe by someone testifying against gamblers in court.  This is a far cry from "three SJU players were proven to have taken bribes.

The quote  "chose UVA over STJ because their academic programs are superior to STJ's academic programs" does not appear on this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._John%27s_Red_Storm_men%27s_basketball

Neither does it appear anywhere on the internet according to google.

Your search - "chose UVA over STJ because their academic programs are superior to STJ's academic ... - did not match any documents.

Neither does this: No results found for "At no time was Tony Jackson ever accused of taking a bribe".


In any event, wikipedia is crowd sourced. Why not just change the article so that it says whatever you want.

Foad, the quotes might not be word for word, but the meaning is exactly the same as the quote that has been taken down many times and put back up by the "crowd". It has been down.   As you say, you can say anything you want because it's Wikipedia, and it's "crowd sourced". (good term, by the way).  If one goes to the Wikipedia page, and clicks on the footnote, one can see that Tony Jackson was never accused of taking a bribe.  It says he did not report an offer of a bribe which was broached to him, seemingly in jest.  But he was never accused of taking a bribe.  ( The previous footnoted article had said that he "was never accused of taking a bribe". I mentioned that above.)

The broader issue is why does someone want to make STJ look so bad by reporting obscure minutiae about the school, and what can be done about it.  People look at the Wikipedia page for STJ.  A colleague, whose son was considering STJ, told me about the page, that's how I found out about it.  So what if someone went to UVA because they had better academics. That's been said about every school in the country that someone went somewhere else because they thought the academics were better.  That's not legitimate material for an encyclopedia article.

More critical this or "Tinygate"?

Tinygate for sure. But now we have this PSA Cardianls nut saying that's what STJ is reduced to.  Transfers and international players.  It's a conspiracy theory.  Has the prestige of STJ basketball taken a hit or what?

let's face it, the prestige has been gone for decades

Outside of the tri-state area, I doubt too many potential D1 kids know much, if anything at all about St. John's and I don't blame them.  We've not been relevant.

We're taking all the right steps again, but that prestige has to be re-earned.

let's face it, the prestige has been gone for decades

Outside of the tri-state area, I doubt too many potential D1 kids know much, if anything at all about St. John's and I don't blame them.  We've not been relevant.

We're taking all the right steps again, but that prestige has to be re-earned.

Exactly, win & forget all this other nonsense.

Paultz, you know I was mostly kidding.  But we still will need another big player before we can have a real good BE team for 17'-18' season.  One that is capable of advancing in tourney.  Harder to do that if some of the AAU guys are talking us down or hating on us.

Paultz, you know I was mostly kidding.  But we still will need another big player before we can have a real good BE team for 17'-18' season.  One that is capable of advancing in tourney.  Harder to do that if some of the AAU guys are talking us down or hating on us.

Munch Williams at PSA is the man, not Slim. Staff has a great relationship with Munch & that's all that counts.

what a nickname, munch

The broader issue is why does someone want to make STJ look so bad by reporting obscure minutiae about the school

Evidently Lavin has a lot of time on his hands now that his wife got married.

and what can be done about it.  People look at the Wikipedia page for STJ.  A colleague, whose son was considering STJ, told me about the page, that's how I found out about it.  So what if someone went to UVA because they had better academics. That's been said about every school in the country that someone went somewhere else because they thought the academics were better.  That's not legitimate material for an encyclopedia article.

Wikipedia is a sewer of bias and misinformation shat by an army of pimply faced barely literate Asperger's victims who live in their parents basements.  See

https://encyclopediadramatica.se/Wikipedia#Why_it.27s_Generally_a_Huge_Bucket_of_Pelican_Shit

for further information

what a nickname, munch

That's what she said.

what a nickname, munch

Some guys have skills that we are unaware of.