That's my point!  It's exactly the same as an MPA, so why exclude it from the MPA article?  More specifically, the original author added the line (paraphrased), "Some universities call their programs XYZ, but they are still MPA's."  A&M; calls their's an MPSA.  If Wikipedia is intended to capture knowledge about a topic, in this case the MPA, and one of the subjects noted in the article is other names by which the MPA is known and/or closely related degrees, I fail to see how not including that information would be a responsible thing to do.  The article is incomplete at that point.  

As for the "promoting" argument, if another school called their program the MPSA, then we could easily say "...while other universities refer to their programs as an MPSA."  But, A&M; is the only one that does that to my knowledge, so it would be awkward not to refer to them by name.  That would be like saying 14 nations on the UN Security Council voted for something, but one didn't, and we're not going to tell you which one it is because we don't want to show favortism toward that country.

I see three choices.  Either add Texas A&M; as an outlier that refers to their MPA as the MPSA (using neutral language like I did originally), or strike the entire sentence about what some universities call their degrees.  The former is the most thorough course of action, while the latter is specifically and intentionally deleting information that is relevant to the discussion, or do nothing, in which case the article is still incomplete.  I'll let you decide which to go with.