User talk:Angelone7749

I made some changes to this section citing solid references which I recently discovered. Will Beback reverted these changes asking that I discuss them prior to making the changes. I am happy to do so. Anyone can view the changes in the history section of the article. I made the changes in three parts.

The first on January 23rd which showed that PWU California's reference in the 2004 GAO report which is the basis for all the other controversy materials in this section, was in fact referencing a different Pacific Western University, the one in Hawaii. ^[1] There were three separate Pacific Western University programs that legally operated from 1976 through 2005. Each of these schools were separately incorporated, were located in separate states, operating under separate state laws and regulations, and offered separate degree programs, with separate curriculum and academic standards.^[2] Over the the years specific reports and news stories reportedly associated with Pacific Western University - California were actually the information concerning one of the other Pacific Western University schools.^[1]

My changes referenced Education Services webpage materials showing the actual GAO report and Archived webstites from both PWU - California and PWU - Hawaii that were active at the time of the 2004 report. The web article conclusively showed that the GAO was referencing PWU - Hawaii in their report and not PWU - California. I also added some of the detail from the Education Services webpage that added clarity to the actual 2004 GAO report and showed the nature and detail of California State Approval that further clarified PWU - California's State Approved institutional status at the time of the 2004 report.

Change two corrected information concerning a television news report claiming two professors in Tucson had earned their degrees from PWU - California and, subsequent to the May 2011 GAO report, had their teaching salaries reduced. Education Services shows that these two professors who are named in the KVOA report, earned doctorate degrees in Science Education and Religious Studies and were not graduates from PWU - California as the news report claimed.^[1] Neither of these doctorate degree programs were offered by Pacific Western University - California as the University's official website from September 26, 2004 clearly lists.^[3]

The third change showed that the international news stories concerning reported graduates of PWU - California were also inaccurate. What follows is a portion of this change: Internationally their were several news stories who mentioned Pacific Western University – California, all of which either referenced the 2004 GAO report as their source and/or quoted other media stories which referenced the GAO as their source. ^[4][5] − It was reported in the Irish Independent on 9 October 2005 that the Chief Science Adviser to the government of Ireland, Barry McSweeney, had been found to have advanced his career using a doctorate degree in biochemistry allegedly earned at Pacific Western University - California.^[6][7] To quote Education Services, the official custodian of records for PWU California on Mr. McSweeney’s degree: Once again, this is a degree that Pacific Western University – California did not offer, and our records confirm that this adviser was not an alumni of Pacific Western University – California.^[1]

Below is my post to Will BeBack in his talk page that I have published here for review by all concerned. Hello Will. You requested that the material that I presented and the changes that I made to the CMU article be discussed prior to making the edits. You then reverted the article. I have made many edits to this article in the past and I have not had to get consensus on these edits, so I am a bit surprised with your reversion. The material that was presented in the update referenced materials which are well sourced and verifiable. I welcome your input. Please feel free to discuss the material so that we can come to a consensus. Please note that the updates in my recent contributions concern errors that were published in the article that have been shown to be incorrect. These changes, to my knowledge, meet all the standards of Wikipedia and do not omit any areas of controversy from the article. Please let me know if you disagree, and if so, what specifically your disagreements might be. Warmest Regards. Angelone7749 (talk • contribs) 2012-01-26T16:19:51

I await comments and suggestions from all contributors on the above information.Angelone7749 (talk) 16:16, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Kensington_College_Seal.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 15:15, 20 June 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. feydey (talk) 15:15, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi Angelone, I thought that I'd mention that the minor edit flag is intended to be used for extremely minor edits that no one would likely have any issue with. For example, correcting a misspelled word or something along those lines. Thanks again for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regards, TallMagic (talk) 16:45, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification. I'll use this criteria in the future. Angelone7749 (talk) 14:14, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:KC Logo.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Courcelles 05:11, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. I have started a thread at Talk:California Miramar University#Controversy section rewrite. Let's discuss it there.   Will Beback  talk  20:29, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I haven't gotten an email from you. Did you use the email button in the toolbox? Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 21:19, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi, thanks so much for your message. I'll reply to each of your queries individually, if that's ok. :) 1. There's no official formal process for what you ask. Because any abuse of multiple accounts was not confirmed by checkuser, just my observations of your edits, I want you to know that I will assume your good faith and I apologize for assuming otherwise. 2. You can go to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Angelone7749 to see all of that. 3. I don't have any relationship to him/her, and I've never had any interactions with him or her as far as I know. I was just acting in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator/clerk. 4. Again, there's not a specific formal process, but I'd definitely suggest taking it up with this person on their talk page before going to a formal noticeboard - maybe you can work it out with a minimum of drama. 5. Again, you can try their talk page, but if that doesn't work, I would highly suggest informal mediation. If that doesn't work, I'd suggest pursuing formal Mediation, which could definitely help. I've been involved in both processes and have found them to be really helpful in solving similar disputes. 6 and 7. I don't currently have a particular opinion, but I could take a look and give an honest, unbiased 3rd opinion if you think that would help defuse things. Again, my apologies for causing you do much distress and for escalating an existing conflict. I'm so sorry. Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 18:50, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

However, I do want to ask why it is that you and SeeTrue have very similar edit summary style (both signing with ~~~~, the same relative editing times, and the same narrow topic area? That was what I based the block on. Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 03:58, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

This is in response to part of your comment on my talk page and the complaints you posted about me on User talk:Keilana. I gather that one of your concerns is about your desire for the article to aid former PWU students in identifying "Education Services" as the official custodian of records for PWU - California and finding its contact information. (That is far from the only area of conflict associated with your edits to California Miramar University, but that's what you told Keilana about. I'll respond to that one issue first.) Please be aware that Wikipedia, as an encyclopedia, is not a guidebook or directory on any topic and does not exist to provide directory information of any sort. See WP:NOT for more details. The footnote in the article regarding the records custodian for PWU is appropriate for an encyclopedia article. If you want to create an online guide for former PWU students, please find another platform (for example, you probably could create a Facebook page). --Orlady (talk) 20:40, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your quick response and suggestions. This was the type of feedback I was seeking. I do not feel that adding detail to a post automatically makes it qualify as a guidebook or a directory but I can see your overall point. It is appropriate that you noticed the post to Keilana. I await your responses to my other questions and comments in the near future.Angelone7749 (talk) 00:36, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Hello-- Due to your long-term editing patterns at California Miramar University, I have reason to believe you are personally or professionally associated with the school. Would you be willing to state your relationships to PWU, PWU (Hawaii), and CMU here for the record? You are not under obligation to do so, but it would certainly help clarify why your editing activity falls within the definition of a single-purpose account. Barring that, I wonder if you would consider posting your proposed edits on the talk page rather than in the article itself? The essay at WP:BOOSTERISM has some additional information on this topic. Thanks! Jokestress (talk) 21:39, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Kensington College logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:37, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Do you have a connection to California Miramar University‎? If you are being paid by the university or any other subject to edit Wikipedia, you are required to explicitly disclose that. ElKevbo (talk) 19:28, 7 July 2021 (UTC)