Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adam Smith University

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Adam Smith University was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was keep

Adam Smith University

[edit]

Like with Knightsbridge University, above, this appears to be a diploma mill.[1] To repeat what was stated on Knightsbridge University: We have precedence from VfD that notorious diploma mills may be encyclopedic (see Kennedy-Western University and American World University), but I guess they should be described as such. Notability in these cases can be based, for instance, on the size of their business (based on the US Congress hearings and other online sources, some appear to be extremely profitable businesses) or on their indirect involvement in fake-degree scandals.

I don't feel like rewriting the article or doing the research needed, but I think it ought to be demonstrated that a diploma mill has this kind of notability for it to stay on WP. At present this is advertisement. Please note that the author behind this article is also the author of Knightsbridge University and has contributed to no other articles. / up+land (Please note that the article has been considerably revised since put on VfD. / up+land 06:33, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC))

  • Delete: Shady, POV advertising for a foreign flagged mail-order diploma mill. Geogre 15:26, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
    • Foreign to whom? Wikipedia is international. And it used to be flagged in the U.S., but moved. Samaritan 17:57, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
    • Believe it or not, I wasn't being provicial: It's a U. that targets the US but resides in a somewhat lawless land with a board of folks (just meaning they're paid, not that they do anything) to lend a sheen of respectability. I used the analogy of the foreign-flagged ships (those operating in the US and owned by US companies but flagged for the Bahamas or Panama or, very commonly, Liberia). Geogre 19:10, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Advertising. Not notable. Wikipedia aspires to be an "encyclopedia" containing reliable information. Lending whatever good name it may have to promotional purposes by a diploma mill should be an area of special concern. It is appropriate to set a higher bar here than it would be for (say) articles about vodka brands or rock bands. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 15:42, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete: nonnotable, advert. Wile E. Heresiarch 17:15, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Strong keep and I'll edit and watch this myself for NPOV. I personally remember discussions of this institution on Usenet in the mid-1990s. It used an address in the United States then. I'd venture to say this is more notable than Knightsbridge and American World, though probably less than Kennedy-Western, as such places go. Samaritan 17:57, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep and make it NPOV. Also needs to be listed on List of unaccredited institutions of higher learning since some aforementioned degree mills are. --Idont Havaname 18:27, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep as encylopedic, and thanks to Samaritan for volunteering to keep an eye on it... Shimgray 19:40, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep, weakly. It is a diploma mill, clearly, but the article here isn't an ad, and provides enough information for the average reader to learn what it's about. --Calton 20:34, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
    • I don't know which version that you read but the old versions looked to me like adds (while the new versions hav been non-POVed). My vote is keep. Famous diploma mills deserve article. Jeltz 22:22, 2004 Nov 28 (UTC)
  • Keep: we should have articles on notable diploma mills, provided that they're contextualized as such and NPOV. -Sean Curtin 23:17, Nov 28, 2004 (UTC)
Comment Assuming this article is kept, I would like a thoughtful discussion now of how to handle the link http://www.adamsmith.edu Adam Smith University official site. It is likely that the article was placed for the purpose of promoting Adam Smith University. It is proverbial that "there is no such thing as bad publicity," and as long as the link remains in the article in a Google-indexable form it serves Adam Smith University's promotional purposes. I tried a number of ways of handling this in American World University, ranging from replacing the link with a visual image of the URL, replacing it with a TinyURL equivalent, replacing it with a Google search URL that returned one hit on American World university, and my attempts to "sanitize" the link were shot down. I was listed under "vandalism in progress" etc. and eventually gave in to overwheming force of numbers. Suffice it to say that there were several determined editors insistent that an article on American World University had to include a link to AWU's website, and insistent that no substitute for the real link would do. (Their arguments against my specific proposed solutions made some sense, by the way. For example, if you replace a link with a TinyURL or similar service's substitute, when you hover over the link you cannot tell for sure what site you will link to (remember the Slashdot pranksters that used to hide links to shock sites behind innocent facades?).
If we acknowledge that leaving this link in its normal form serves the purpose of promoting Adam Smith University, is the consensus that this is a necessary evil and that we should just grit our teeth and live with it?
Or is there some practical way to serve our readers without serving Adam Smith University? [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 00:47, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I think that providing the link but then hiding it (via a graphic, a tinyurl, or what-have-you) isn't really the way to go. Either give the link as a normal exterbal link, or no external link at all. Given that the link is germane to the article, including it would probably be better than not including it, but YMMV. -Sean Curtin 02:19, Nov 29, 2004 (UTC)
We can simply leave it with a <nowiki> tag on it to prevent its being live and yet still displayed. It's not elegant, but it's better than a graphic, I guess. The other option is simply to put a big warning on it, similar to the porno warnings we use. I'm not worried about the page rank boosting, so long as it's just one article. These guys will have done a lot worse. Geogre 03:20, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I'd be perfectly happy with the <nowiki> tag solution if it will stick. Will people accept that? [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 13:19, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Absolutely not, it is an utterly POV solution. Removing links to a school just because they didn't pay their dues to some accredidation organization is taking the position that those accredidation organizations are in the right. Besides this being POV, it really isn't all that true. If we want to protect people from wasting their money, we should remove the links to Wesleyan University. Now there's the real scam. anthony 警告
  • Mmmmmmm, diploma mill. Keep, EXTREMELY. —[[User:Radman1|RaD Man (talk)]] 04:55, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. With Samaritan's changes, I think this article can be kept. But the List of unaccredited institutions of higher learning (mentioned above) should probably have another name, as these places aren't "institutions of higher learning" to begin with. / up+land 06:33, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Gamaliel 07:22, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. [[User:GRider|GRider\talk]] 20:06, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Not notable. --Improv 07:00, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Diploma mill. anthony 警告 22:57, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Adam_Smith_University&oldid=334792436"