Talk:Cadet Honor Code

Military history: Historiography / North America / United States Start‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion not met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military historiography task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Cadet Honor Code. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 22:55, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

January 2019

Recent changes were made by IP 117.82.228.51 seeking to put the Citadel Cadet Honor Code in a different category. The reasons given were that the Citadel also has an honor code for non-cadets. However, the source material, while it is related to the topic, did not actually state the things that the IP editor has added to the article. I've reverted those changes, for now, pending further discussion. Ewen Douglas (talk) 01:46, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for opportunity to discuss further. I replaced accurate source info in the article as it clearly sheds light on fact that citadel, like norwich and texas A&M, has both a cadet and non-cadet honor code. Something which was repeatedly deleted and called into question, but which is now shown to be fact. Due to this, it should not be in same category as schools which have 100% cadets, such as WestPoint, VMI, Air Force Academy, and even Annapolis (which has honor concept, not code). Citadel with cadet corps and non-cadets corps is in line with Texas A&M, Norwich, and others. NOTE: Previous edits also claimed citadel has single-sanction honor code, similar to VMI, which is false (as covered near end of source in 'punishments section'). Punishments for honor violation at the citadel vary based on severity: dismissal, suspension, reprimand, or even fines, as listed on the school website. Thanks again for opportunity to shed light on this. Source website included for further review: http://www.citadel.edu/root/graduatecollege-current-students/honor-the-code

117.82.228.51 (talk) 11:23, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

First off, you should know about WP:CYCLE. Wikipedia policy is to make an edit, and if it is reverted, to discuss that edit BEFORE making the edit again. To do otherwise is called edit warring, and you can be blocked from editing. I understand that you may not have been aware of this. I would encourage you to self-revert your last changes, as failure to do so would be called edit warring. After that, we can proceed with a civil discussion of the problems with your edits. Ewen Douglas (talk) 14:18, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I’m new here, so please forgive me if I’m off base. From what I’m seeing, it appears as though user: Ewen Douglas reverted edits and deleted references. Is that ok to do without previous discussion? Article in its current form is inaccurately written if reference is current and correct. Please advise...Slaphappy19 (talk) 09:05, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]