Talk:University of the People
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the University of the People article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5Auto-archiving period: 3 months |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
|
The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
|
This article is prone to spam. Please monitor the References and External links sections. |
Total cost for different degree
[edit]Their degree cost:
Computer Science – B.S. Degree $4,060
Business Administration – A.S. Degree $2,060
Business Administration – B.S. Degree $4,060
Computer Science – A.S. Degree $2,060
Health Science – Community and Public Health Track – A.S. Degree $2,060
If you can add this information to the article. People may get the impression that the degree cost few hundreds of dollars, but it is more like a few thousands of dollars. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.154.23.73 (talk)
- it' normal, this article is an ADVERTISEMENT !!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.91.248.85 (talk)
Very inadequate article
[edit]For a "university" with such public notoriety, controversy, and potential impact, this article is woefully inadequate. Please improve with relevant information from WP:RS sources. (I'm adding the "Accreditation" section, now) ~ Penlite (talk) 22:02, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
accreditation section
[edit]From the text it sound that the accreditation process has stopped and that it wont get wasc accreditation.
But when I check it they are still candidate 2A02:14F:1F3:9644:0:0:C138:E503 (talk) 08:35, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Which means they have not gotten it yet. Slatersteven (talk) 11:01, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- There is a difference between they have not got it and still candidate and a situation they have not got and not candidate any more.
- The article should clarify if they are in the first situation or the second. 2001:4DF4:5500:E00:95F8:6F96:41BE:FCB8 (talk) 08:11, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
- Why? what does that tell us, they either are or are not accredited, that is what matters. Slatersteven (talk) 10:44, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
- Candidacy indicates that they are actively working toward accreditation with a legitimate accreditor with some degree of success. It's not the same as being accredited, of course, but it's qualitatively different from simply being unaccredited with no intention or ability to become accredited. ElKevbo (talk) 15:03, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
- No it means they have not yet been rejected. Slatersteven (talk) 15:30, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
- from the text is sound they have been rejected and nothing is going to be changed about this. 85.65.226.30 (talk) 09:43, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
- No it means they have not yet been rejected. Slatersteven (talk) 15:30, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
- no, it is also matter if they are still in a process to get accreditation or not. 85.65.226.30 (talk) 09:42, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
- No it does not, all that matters if if they have it or not. Slatersteven (talk) 11:38, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
- It doesn't matter to you. Ok, but clearly you can see doesn matter for other people. so why force your opinion? ArmorredKnight (talk) 14:28, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
- But we are an encyclopedia, so what does this tell us the reader needs to know (remember we are wp:not a means of promotion). So what would this tell the reader they need to know (what does the reader need to know, if they are accredited or not, not if they have applied). Also its called wp:consensus, its a policy. I am no more forcing my opinion on anyone than you are by wanting this. I have sted my objection, and it is a form no, it will remain this until I say my mind has been changed. It is now time for others to chip in. Slatersteven (talk) 14:37, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
- It doesn't matter to you. Ok, but clearly you can see doesn matter for other people. so why force your opinion? ArmorredKnight (talk) 14:28, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
- No it does not, all that matters if if they have it or not. Slatersteven (talk) 11:38, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
- Candidacy indicates that they are actively working toward accreditation with a legitimate accreditor with some degree of success. It's not the same as being accredited, of course, but it's qualitatively different from simply being unaccredited with no intention or ability to become accredited. ElKevbo (talk) 15:03, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
- Why? what does that tell us, they either are or are not accredited, that is what matters. Slatersteven (talk) 10:44, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
- C-Class Higher education articles
- WikiProject Higher education articles
- C-Class California articles
- Low-importance California articles
- C-Class Los Angeles articles
- Unknown-importance Los Angeles articles
- Los Angeles area task force articles
- C-Class Southern California articles
- Unknown-importance Southern California articles
- Southern California task force articles
- WikiProject California articles
- C-Class Israel-related articles
- Low-importance Israel-related articles
- WikiProject Israel articles
- C-Class Internet culture articles
- Low-importance Internet culture articles
- WikiProject Internet culture articles
- Articles edited by connected contributors