Talk:Biola Media Conference

Mr. Beback, as a former student, attendee, and an individual involved in the producing of this event, I am unsure as to why you think this is a POV. For the sake of making this article not appear to look like a POV, I've included sources from what others have said about this Conference, and those who have continued to support this conference over the past 13 years. If you would like to confirm with the sources I and those who have contributed to this article, I can have them personally email you there feelings on the Biola Media Conference. As well, I can assure you this is the "PREMIERE" event for "Christians" who are interested in the entertainment industry, we get participants coming to the event as far away as New York. Before I even attending the school, or new of the school, I knew of the event and I originate from Chicago, 2000 miles away.

Please inform me of what we can do to change this article to suit the needs of wikipedia. I'm not sure how this article can come across like an Advertisement, as I've had the university, several speakers, and outside readers view this article to make sure it does not come across as an advertisement, but that it comes across as information of a conference that is very highly respected within the industry.

Thriveformore 09:30, 7 August 2007 (UTC)Thriveformore

• Predominantly, what needs to be done is the removal of weasel words which sadly haunt the article throughout. For example "acclaimed industry pro’s who are at the top of their craft" could become "respected people within the industry" and to back up this information give references and a couple of example to back up this notion. Also it is said that "according to"; back this up with references and make it a quote otherwise it seems like it's selling the Conference rather than citing fact. The "About The Conference" section is rife with things that could be perceived as point of view and needs a complete rewrite to maintain its palce within the article - for example "have we hit the mother lode or discovered fool's gold" is not suitable for Wiki and "we celebrated" is the same. It's better to mention the details of the conference without offering an opinion on the contents. "This year's Biola Media Conference was more than a networking opportunity, it was an educational experience" for example is totally unsuitable for Wiki due to its point of view. Also as opposed to having a quotes section, to verify these quotes please place references (online ideally) for where these quotes can be found. Also I'd recommend only having about 2 or three as any more could be seen as trying to promote the Conference rather than stipulate facts about it. I would suggest the same of the Speakers Who Support section too - if it's unverifiable it might be deleted. The "Objectives" section also needs a rewrite as "Participants will leave the conference with a clearer vision of their gifted place in the media" for example is completely point of view. As I say, the article does need a complete rewrite with removal of weasel words, removal of point of view and pure stipulation of facts. As it stands, it could actually be removed from Wiki altogether. I'd rather it not come to that as it seems an interesing piece and certainly warrants a page on Wiki. It's just that in it's current form it can't remain. Drivenapart 10:00, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Please review the corrections and advise on any problems that are currently still an issue. Thriveformore 08:37, 9 August 2007 (UTC) Thriveformore.

• Hello. rather than keeping going back and fore I've rewritten the article myself to make it more Wiki-fiable, added references, removed unnecessary information and generally cleaned it up a whole heap. It should be a-okay now, hopefully you'll approve of what I've done as it's necessary to keep it on Wiki. the article is now more fact based and I've removed some other weasel words, but I think it should be ok now. Any other queries, scribble here or give me a message. Cheers Drivenapart 09:26, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Biola Media Conference. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080821104112/http://www.infuzemagazine.com/ to http://infuzemagazine.com
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070813023310/http://71.18.42.111:80/speakers.htm to http://71.18.42.111/speakers.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070807082551/http://www.christiansandmedia.org:80/ to http://www.christiansandmedia.org/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070608204532/http://www.mcom.biola.edu:80/ to http://mcom.biola.edu
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070608200908/http://www.mcom.biola.edu:80/taskforce/studiotaskforce/ to http://www.mcom.biola.edu/taskforce/studiotaskforce

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:59, 2 November 2016 (UTC)