User talk:Geldi

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Geldi, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  Just zis Guy you know? 22:37, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Re your last edit to University of the Nations, [1] - please do not conceal removal of pertinent criticism under misleading edit summaries. All it does is piss people off needlessly - the chances of any edit on an unaccredited university pasing un-noticed are pretty remote. Just zis Guy you know? 22:37, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

OK thanks. I will make sure to summarize all info. I am removing unnecessary info on U of N’s accreditation info again this time with summary. Also restoring relevant history you removed. This is a wiki JzG. Please remember that just because you are admin doesn't make youall powerful and all knowing. But I do thank you for your good contributions. Geldi 22:53 (UTC) 21 March 2006
At least some of the information you removed is pertinent and important. I'm sorry I did not re-insert the text in the first para - I used the "rollback" link instead of editing, reflexively - I should have copied and pasted instead. But: there is a strong consensus that unaccredited universities should be clearly identified as such.
As to illegality, there are many jurisdictions where there are legal controls over the use of degree and especially doctoral titles. These have been discusse don the Talk pages of other articles. Maybe we should have an article on legal recognition of academic titles :-) Just zis Guy you know? 23:31, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
I appreciate what you are doing. Could we have a discussion about the "legality" issue on accreditation? Here is how I see it. Those are general accreditation details that should fall under the Wiki entry on unaccredited universities. Similarly, we do not talk generally on universities or about Christianity on the U of N entry- both of those topics are found under the entries "university" and "Christianity". If someone wants to find out more about legality issues concerning accreditation they should go to the Unaccredited institutions entry on wiki. Additionally, I have no verifiable source that they are "illegal". The link which had been provided didn't even work. Unaccredited (unless its a true diploma mill which the U of N is clearly not) means that they do not meet a generally agreed upon standard and may or may not be accepted by employers or other institutions- it does not equate to illegal.
My personal view here is that, for an unaccredited university, we should generally include one short sentence noting that, as an unaccredited university, its degrees may not be recognised by employers and other institutions, and use of degree titles may be illegal in some jurisdictions. I think we should have a boilerplate for that. Not everybody is going to wade through the article on accreditation to find that detail, and not everyone is going to realise the significance. As to Christianity, I think that is a more widely-understood concept than accreditation. All universities start off unaccredited, there is no especial shame in it, but it does require explanation. Some unaccredited universities are degree mills, and those will have a much longer discussion on accreditation and so on; these ones will usually have claims to be accredited by unrecognised accrediting bodies, "regional accreditation" (which is usually a license to operate, not an academic accreditation) or whatever. A school which has a genuinely good reason for not being accredited will not make these claims, so we in turn will not need to point them out. Just zis Guy you know? 09:55, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
I agree that Christianity and University are more widely-understood concepts. I just was trying to make the point that the amount of detail about U of N's accreditation is currently superfluous. ----Copied from discussion page of U of N: Yes, let’s make a template. Or perhaps just an internal link that takes the reader to Wiki's entry on unaccredited degrees for them to read more, but I don't think putting detailed info down on individual US states accreditation law is necessary in this case.
As for other accredited universities that state they take U of N credit and students: yes it is a case by case basis (although there are a few universities which will take U of N credits and students as a matter of policy; these aare usually Christian schools). Over 100 accredited universities- Christian and non-Christian have taken U of N students into graduate programs or taken transfer credit (I know of one such university from personal experience). Finding a reliable source for that could be difficult, but I will look.
Issue of diploma mill- The U of N is not a diploma mill- it is a Christian university with many quality courses. Unfortunately, because of its international structure, its decentralized makeup and the design of its degree program- a modular and international program- it has yet to apply for accreditation. I for one hope this changes in the near future, but that’s a different topic….. Geldi 12:08, 22 March 2006 (UTC)