Talk:Universidad Empresarial de Costa Rica

Some user are undoing article without discussing the changes in the talk page

Dear editors // Please support my claim My edition reflect a hard writting effort to bring reliable sourses. I feel its unfair to undo all the work, I did to bring references to the discussion. Also I must underline, that controversial website was www.unem.edu.pl not www.unem.cr Furthermore, I see no reason why the listing of 27 notable people has been shortened. I am the only one engaged in bring facts and already discussed all the aforementioned in the talk page. By the way NONE of the user that reverts my editions, are bringing ANY fact into the talk page. They are merely limited to undo my work Ramdiesel (talk) 20:21, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

I'm tempted to agree with you that you are the only one arguing for your edits, particularly since your past supporters were blocked for sockpuppetry. The sources you provide, however, are not reliable by Wikipedia's standards. They mostly are mere list or directory entries, not detailed coverage, and they're not subject to any editorial oversight at all. The best source by far is Der Spiegel, and I don't think "rumor allegations" is an appropriate heading for what it reports. Rather, it's a deliberate whitewashing, intended to minimize the unsavory facts. That Spiegel article, the most detailed coverage and at the same time the most reliable source, should not be shunted off into a section on "rumors", but made the basis of this article, according to the policy on due weight of sources. Regarding the list of supposedly "notable people", I don't think we had articles for most of them, nor was there independent coverage discussing their supposed degrees, either.

Finally, regarding the website, the mere fact that the other website also had some support in sources, say here, should give us pause. There's also, for example, this and this. (Fun fact: Their Google Maps map shows the university is located on the General Cemetery of San Jose.) Huon (talk) 22:19, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Google map is not exact. Also a Cementery only covers 1 block. I think you are NOT familiarize with Central and Southamerica at all!!! You can choose your source wheter to use www.unem.edu.pl www.unem.international www.unem.cr Anyway you did not reply why the listing of notable people has been earsed. And take a CLOSE look that MANY user such as Musiccafeangela , Emily.H.Kitty and many others agree with the content my edition showsRamdiesel (talk) 23:04, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

I'd say I have taken a closer look at that editor who used to agree with you using multiple accounts than he/she would have liked. I did say why the listing of "notable people" was largely removed: Because those people are not in fact notable by Wikipedia's standards and there were no relilable third-party sources for their degrees. Huon (talk) 00:46, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Dear user Huon According to your edition, user Safetylun edited the article and he is also wrong??? Don't you think you must be the wrong one here??? Ramdiesel (talk) 00:53, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Chan f.c.: Safetylun is yet another obvious sockpuppet. It's not a different editor, it's the same editor all over again with a new account, editing in violation of Wikipedia's policies (and that account will soon be blocked, like the others). And to be blunt, it wouldn't even matter if many different editors tried to whitewash UNEM and turn the article into a badly-sourced promotional piece in violation of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines such as WP:WEIGHT and WP:RS; they'd all be wrong. Huon (talk) 01:18, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Huon, you are wrong. Although you are interesting to block all users that opposite you or your edition, this is no use. There are hundred of people looking at this site, and concern about it. I am not Chan f.c., or other users. I only want to look for a balanced, neutral article, that's all. If you only try to block all users that opposite you, it is not gentleman being. I only could not bear watching what you do. Safetylun (talk) 02:52, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Huon, I agree in full with Safetylun and we are different user, different countries, different IP. It seems you Huon and Justlettersandnumbers seems to think are the owners of the true and the rest of us in the talk page, we are alll wrong. Ramdiesel (talk) 14:41, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

In my humble opinion Huon and Justlettersandnumbers have no ground to edit the article. I see no expertize in the subject. Most of the users involved are from CostA Rica, or other souther countries, such as uruguay and Argentina. We are more familiarized with private small Universities, and this article helps nothing. All user we cannot be all wrongCostaRicaOnline (talk) 01:02, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Justlettersandnumbers said here "all of whom have also shown a monothematic interest in this institution and a remarkable propensity for edit-warring?" here on 01:40, 5 March 2015 (UTC)..... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Chan_f.c. I felt not included into this.. I help editing other articles, such as Dulce de Leche, Ceibal Laptops for primary studenst in uruguay, and articles such as Tabare vazquez )President of Uruguay and Jose Mujica. I place my efford to contribute, although I am non english native speaker, and Huon and Justlettersandnumbers instead of helping improve, erase everybody else contribution. I think they are the ones punishable for making edit warring and not the rest of the users.

Ramdiesel (talk) 01:15, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

This http://www.unem.international/en/ seems to be the International website in English. Hope this will help Tartaruganight (talk) 17:18, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 April 2015

This page is total blackmail to UNEM - not fair to organisation like UNEM. Whatever this person (s) is up to, for the purpose of blackmail. He is not only punishing the University but all the people that have graduated from the University. Hence the need to edit the page or totally delete it. Thanks. Wikiunem (talk) 14:21, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. --I am k6ka ^{Talk to me!} _{See what I have done} 16:54, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Request total deletion of the article

Because of the questionable status of the university (two parties claim holding of the school with two different website found)，there are possible for some fault party blackmail to the university. And the source cited in the article are questionable，it should carefully to consider when the cited source may shame to the exiting person/organization. l suggest total deletion of the article or any cited source first，to prevent wiki be used by some fault party for wrong purposes Japanuji (talk) 18:28, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

@Japanuji: There are several deletion criteria (see: WP:DEL-REASON), but the possibility that the article may be "used by some fault party for wrong purposes" is not a reason to delete. Vanjagenije (talk) 20:20, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Finally a neutral website was agree, since in Costa Rica dot AC dot CR domains are equivalent to USA dot EDU. Dot AC Dot CR domains are only available for CONESUP (Ministry of public education) registered Universities.Taesulkim (talk) 03:29, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Misuse of Wikipedia Article for promotion of tendentious personal opinion

You have undone my revision because of promotional talk?! Well, your article is highly tendentious, an encyclopedia (no matter if printed or online) is not for the promotion of personal opinions. For example, you wirte that the university is not among the universities accredited by the Sistema Nacional de Acreditación de la Educación Superior (SINAES). You do however omit that only 19 of the more than 100 state approved and authorized universities are accredited by SINAES and that this accreditation is completely voluntary. Also, you mention it is, for example, not among the five hundred top universities world-wide in the Times Higher Education World University Rankings. Well, this is true for the vast majority of universities across the world. At the same time, you withhold the information that it is listed in the world's leading handbook of approved universities, the International Handbook of Universities, published by the International Association of Universities and UNESCO. It seems that you are rather interested in calumny than in reliable and balanced information. I should add here that I have no connection to the university at all, however I find and found it inappropriate and disgraceful that you misuse Wikipedia to spread your personal disparagements rather than providing information according to accepted standards. Shivayves (talk) 12:58, 15 July 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shivayves (talk • contribs)

@Shivayves: I agree with Bbb23 here, your edit was overly promotional. "The SINAES accreditation is an extra label of excellence" is certainly not encyclopedic style. Vanjagenije (talk) 16:37, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

No matter if "The SINAES accreditation is an extra label of excellence" is regarded as encyclopedic style or not, it can certainhly not be regarded as promotional language in favor of the university as it does NOT hold this accreditation. In my view it is not in accordance with Wiki guidelines and principles and encyclopedic style to mention that the university does not hold the SINAES accreditation before mentioning that it is duly approved by the governmental authorities and without adding that SINAES accreditation is voluntary and that only 20 of more than 100 Costa Rican universities hold this accreditation. This raises the impression that the university is not duly authorized or that it lacks a type of recognition that all or most of the universities in the country have. Please also note that this sentence you criticize is a quotation from a publication of the European Consortium for Accreditation, the leading association of recognised accreditation and quality assurance agencies in Europe (view here: http://ecahe.eu/enwiki/w/images/d/df/JOQAR_publication_multra-observation-report-SINAES.pdf) They are not really suspicious of using promotional language of any kind. Shivayves (talk) 13:52, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

I have now created a new version which is more balanced and more in accordance with Wikipedia principles but still provides all critical information. Shivayves (talk) 13:11, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

In accordance with Wikipedia principle called WP:COI, you shouldn't even edit this article, as you are obviously in a conflict of interest. That much about Wikipedia principles. Vanjagenije (talk) 15:59, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

I am not at all in a conflict of interest and I sincerely suggest that you are more careful with nonproven imputations. Wikipedia is not extralegal territory. In fact I have no relation to the University at all and I have made no change that would misrepresent any facts. All critical information was left in the article. However, it is for example intentionally misleading to mention that the university does not hold SINAES accreditation at the beginning of the article without mentioning that this accreditation is completely voluntary and that only 19 of more than 50 universities in Costa Rica hold this accreditation. At the same time, the official approval by the only governmental authority in charge is put in a later paragraph. I have restructured the article without changing the actual information included and added the information on SINAES accreditation. As this does not seem to please you, I must ask you if it is not you who is in a conflict of interest and what your interest actually is. Do you really think that an encyclopedia is there to spread your personal opinions and judgements? Just stick with the facts and present them as they would be presented in a printed encyclopedia. Shivayves (talk) 16:22, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

University website

To whom it may concern: Please be informed that NIC.cr (Which runs the Academia Nacional), only make available .ac.cr domains for Universities listed by the CONESUP. So no one except the real University can registered such ac.cr domain (AC stands for academies, on University levels) since Costa Rica does not use dot edu extension. Take as an example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universidad_San_Juan_de_la_Cruz You may contact www.nic.cr and get an official reply if you are not sureTaesulkim (talk) 14:44, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

• @Taesulkim: Wikipedia does not allow wp:original research. Unless you have some reliable source to prove that the domain belongs to UNEM, we shouldn't add it to the article. Vanjagenije (talk) 14:50, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Sure, my friend Take a look here https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/.cr Quote ac.cr:Entidades académicas (Restringido). Restringido its means RESTRICTED. Ac.CR its only available, after NIC.CR proves its a University approbed by the CONESUP (Consejo Nacional de Educación Superior)Taesulkim (talk) 15:05, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

According to our wp:circular policy, Wikipedia (including Spanish Wikipedia) is not a reliable source. Vanjagenije (talk) 16:58, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Can you please take a look to https://www.nic.cr/en/policies/1 I quote: AC.CR Domains Academic: colleges, universities, research entities that have academic and/or research objectives. In the case of government-sponsored state institutions they shall have to be certified by CONARE, and private academic institutions shall have to be certified by CONESUP. (National Council on Private Higher Education).

So, the website is www.universidad-empresarial.ac.cr Taesulkim (talk) 21:55, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Please read the link, below https://www.nic.cr/en/policies/1

under 1.5 Documentation needed to register a domain name

The required documents for Domain Name registration are:

.ac.cr

A legal entity certification for the institution, issued no more than one month before. A letter from the domain’s legal representative requesting the domain. A copy of the legal representative’s national ID card. Post-graduate centers and research institutions should present a copy of their legal charter document. Private universities should present a copy of the legal recognition document issued by the CONESUP. State-run universities should present a copy of the legal recognition document issued by the CONARE

What else do you need?? Please clarify, since unless the institutios has CONESUP approval, it can not get and ac.cr domain Taesulkim (talk) 22:13, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

The link you cite does not say anything about the UNEM web site. We need a reliable secondary source that says what is the web site of the university. Everything else is what we call WP:original research. Vanjagenije (talk) 13:55, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

I found this http://unesco.vg/whed/detail_institution.php?id=17738 Thats a UNESCO WHED listing for www.unem.edu.pl I hope this will help Taesulkim (talk) 14:57, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Website // Reliable sources

It seems some editors are engaged in blackisting certain institutions Please note the followin link http://unesco.vg/whed/detail_institution.php?id=17738

First ask for reliable sources, but now, its not enough and need concensus? Who must agree to this reliable source to become valid? Taesulkim (talk) 18:36, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

So which one is it now? First you said it is universidad-empresarial.ac.cr, now you say it is www.unem.edu.pl. Vanjagenije (talk) 20:28, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

@Vanjagenije I applied for a Dispute resolution as @Generalization applied for a Sockpuppet investigation. If you enter www.unem.edu.pl you are driven to the international website http://www.unem.international/en/ for the English Version, meanwhile www.uneversidad-empresarial.ac.cr leads you to the International Website http://www.unem.international/es/ Spanish Version. So either www.universidad-empresarial.ac.cr and www.unem.edu.pl points to the same domain in 2 different languages, depending on your search criteria. Taesulkim (talk) 20:46, 9 November 2016 (UTC)