Talk:DeVry University/Archive 2

message: "Information is not entropy, a great part of the entropy is misiformation, wikipedia is not in anyway a version of a neutral entropy" codeplowed--Veritas Longa15:51, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  On the best interest of the readers 

message: G'day, I've a suggestion for improvement of this page. I've checked a around other university pages and have found a fairly standard list of sections, some of which we have. To de-stub this article we might want to add some of this information including:
    * Academics
    * Student life
    * Campuses (Got this)
          o Complete list of colleges and divisions (We have most of that but can we add to it and organize it?)
    * History (Got this)
    * Senior Officers of the university
    * Noted faculty
    * Noted graduates
    * See also
          o Student Societies
          o Student Clubs and Organizations
Flehmen 16:45, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  To Copy is the DeVry Way 

message: Is DeVry owned by General Electric?
    No, it's owned by its stockholders. — goethean ॐ 22:29, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ownership 

message: Is it just me, or does this read like an advertisement for DeVry?
The sad thing is its now better than it was not too long ago. A lot of for-profit schools have hacks and/or PR people who actually come on here and create (or "maintain") the articles. I've caught an employee of the Career Education Corporation (by the anon's IP address) making similarly "spam" edits to schools owned by that company. Remember the Wikipedia pillar of "Be Bold" (WP:BOLD), go forth and edit that which reads like advertising. You will have supporters. --Bobak 01:24, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV 

message: Has anyone found a devry blog? Does this belong on the external links? Hechung 18:36, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  devry blog 

message: Beware of vandalism on this page Hechung 22:57, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 

message: As I understood, the wiki and GFDL are based on the spirit of fairness, in this regard, all the free and open minded-people, we need to do as much a possible to preserve and defend our noble and practical aims. The Wiki is of course one of the best efforts in this regard. We need to tell the facts, regardless of other more mundane interests, in a fair and neutral way, and the fact will eventually lead other minds to have their own conclusions, the "DeVry entry" it is -for me- and insult if we are allowed to left its WikiEntry as is, please let us review it and minimize it, and take all the advertising from the wikipeadia. If we are going to be fair, then let us maintain the information by not leaving misinformation in that entry. What really the "DeVry entry" contents must be written about? what are those uncautioned and curious minds of the WikiWorld, who are use to visit for looking for open, free and shareable information, should read? TV and media advertising. We all know to well what so obviously this Devry Inc. is about. Does DeVry support or either encourage the use of freesoftware or do the use Encarta instead? I do believe there is not exceptions we need to Boldly edit this one. and institutions as DeVry, constitute one of the greatest dangers that our country is facing for its near future. So WikiEducators, is Devry Inc. about Education? Please regardless less please reedit this page properly and make sure we state its stock market values and its Financial Symbol, let us name its official and other trouble during its existance. Our future recursively need us or probably Bill Joy was right, Our future does not need us? I bet we are making the future by describing the concurrent history, this is our anthropology and we need the truth for survival. Let us do our best. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Codeplowed (talk • contribs) 01:11, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Don't Forget 

message: Please do not add external links that violate the guidelines set forth at WP:EL. Thank you. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 17:16, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links 

message: * Please, be aware of advertising, an external link cannot refer to a site that is recursively referring to the same entry, does not
add value to the content, therefore, links to the entry's sites should be eliminated.
* please, be aware of the employees and dubious PR, employees and marketing people, they do not discriminate to exploit well-intentioned collaborative efforts [like this] to fit their monetary ends. The bottom line.
* We need to discuss how to properly offer to the readers access to primary sources no otherwise accessible to them, [I fear for our democratic system] in the most neutral way, yes the sources should be reliable and verifiable but also need to be refreshed with some more options to access those important concurrent consumers' concern and their generated feedback and information as well. Meaning this encyclopedia needs to be updated continually and neutrally for certain entries that are in progress or are effecting their histories at the present moment. For instance thee have been many documented incidences of people being fire unjustly at different institutions whose only voice have being via their blog, Blogs and forums are testimonials, we need somehow to create a system to measure the verifiability of the statements, descriptions or information about people, institutions or places written in those places.
* Diderot, probably would not understand how such a thing could be possibly admissible in any encyclopedic knowledge but he was not exposed to the GNU's GPL and GFDL either.
* The sad thing is that there are people profiting from the mere spirit of the Wikipedia, and they even do not care to destroyed or ruined it as well with misinformation, we know this.
* In many ways, credibility is what content management and access represent for the user/reader. Encarta or Britannic or the American Biographical Society or any source whatsoever in the final analysis are used and judged not by their claims if not by their contents. The WikiWay, appears to me, has super passed those encyclopedias because its tremendous flexibility and cross-interactivity to respond to changes as not other way of publishing and sharing knowledge.
* Let us expedite the process even further by digesting valid information more wikiwiki. This comment is more applicable for businesses such as DeVry Inc. and individuals that only are looking into how advertise their grandiose, products, and services for profit and/or glory purposes, and for that same greedy reason are failing big time in delivering their promises or claims to their publics.
* we shouldn't care so much about the individual "experts" who claim to be disciples of some non plus ultra "Sapa Gurus", because they want to inflate their empty ego so they advertise in here with their contributions, but we should do care about those many individuals in the corporate world who basically are exploiting all kind of people with advertising claiming they are doing great when there are many substantiated evidences that are clearly indicating otherwise, These evidences and records take years to find their way into the public eye, sometimes they remain silent forever because the powerful mechanisms of repressive practices of some of these institutions.
* Wikipedia must neutrally inform, yes but its success and growth only depend in how fast [or Wiki] facts can be translated into concurrent and verifiable knowledge and this has more to do with ethics and determination than with what is accepted by the pockets or stomachs of the so-called trained or domesticated "experts" in anything. 24.90.244.160 18:28, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  On References and Advertising 

message: As a student and employee of DeVry, I do not feel as though I can edit this entry in an unbiased way, and therefore I won't. But can I request that someone review the edits by the user "codeplowed"? I agree that this entry should be made more neutral (as should all company and product websites) and am also disturbed about editing from inside the organization (and thus won't do it myself), but adding negative and unsourced comments doesn't seem like an improvement. Talk comments in particular seem unrelated to the entry itself. The comment, "institutions as DeVry, constitute one of the greatest dangers that our country is facing for its near future" is particularly of concern. Wikipedia isn't meant for advertising, but it's not a soapbox, either.
Consider looking up DeVry in unbiased sources such as ipeds (Integrated Postsecondary Education Database) at http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/ or via accreditation agencies. There are plenty of sources out there of verifiable information about DeVry, as an educational institution and as a company, that will cover both positive and negative aspects of the organization. 208.0.29.250 23:15, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  DeVry Student and Employee POV and suggested links 

message: Honestly, can someone else clean up this article?  It now reads like an argument between an advertiser/marketer and someone with a grudge against DeVry.  Some of the information is even false; for example, someone added an external link marked "DeVry does not have a FAFSA School or College Code", which is not correct (although you do have to search for it in "Illinois")  And why these links to the deceptive loan practices news, which doesn't mention this organization at all?  Can we just get a bare-bones description of the company, its history, and its programs? 208.0.29.250 01:04, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: This page needs help

message: Cool, if nothing else, I learned who Bill Joy was :)  I'll look into his writing and ideas.  Personally I'm more a fan of Ray Kurzweil -- I hope that doesn't make us enemies :)
Please understand the reason I've been posting to the talk pages so much recently -- it's not because I'm a tool of the dark corporate masters of DeVry.  It's also not because you wish to focus on different descriptive aspects of DeVry that I would focus on.  It's because some of the facts posted recently have been either obfuscated or false.  For example, you mention some lawsuits against DeVry, but not their outcomes.  Simply being sued is not noteworthy in the United States or Canada!  What was the outcome of the case?  The readers of this entry want to know.
I'm even more concerned about the financial aid comments you posted this week.  You are correct that it is not easy to find the FAFSA code for DeVry locations, because they all show up as being based in Illinois.  However, when this issue was addressed, you dismissed it and did not correct the inaccuracy.  This concerns me, and yet, my own overgrown sense of honor won't let me jump in and edit this entry.
You're stressing that you want people who read this entry to know that it is a publicly owned company as well as an education institution.  Great!  Most people don't know that.  There are plenty of things that you can tell people about DeVry that they don't know.  Focus on those!  Be bold, express your viewpoint on the entity, yes!  Stress your concerns about an organization whose goals are both educational and monetary -- an excellent point!  But don't deceive.  Use factual sources and clear, unobfuscated language.  When you muddle the issues, you're just playing the marketer's game .  208.0.29.250 22:13, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seemed Vandal Expressing & POVing into himself