Talk:James Kirk diploma mills

message: LaSalle University should not be considered a "diploma mill" because the students actually submitted course work in addition to tuition and fees. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.153.79.77 (talk • contribs) 16:49, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Texascrane, statements by former students, professors, and employees are verifiable when they conform to the Wikipedia wp:verifiable policy. Which essentially means that they are documented in a Wikipedia:reliable source. The definition of diploma mill is varied and can reasonably mean many different things. What is important from a Wikipedia point of view is that LaSalle has been referred to as a diploma mill in reliable sources. Perhaps those reliable sources glossed over the issues that you raised or perhaps the authors of those articles chose to focus on other areas or a different context when choosing that wording? For example, perhaps they decided to use a definition of diploma mill to mean that the owner of the institution was convicted of fraud for the running of that institution? Is that fair to the LaSalle alumni? I don't know but the answer to that question, while interesting, is tangential to the question of did multiple reliable sources refer to LaSalle as a diploma mill? Wikipedia's purpose is to try and report on what the main stream opinion and ideas of things are, not really to provide a sounding board for minority views that are not generally accepted. Regards, TallMagic (talk) 22:12, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: unsigned comment

message: Hi Apparent Logic,
The references I believe that you've tried to add seem to have the following problems.
http://www.onebrickcourt.com/cases_files/68EWHC1996.pdf This court case is not apparently relevant. This is a case about a newspaper versus someone with a degree from a university that was started up by James Kirk. You seem to draw unsupported conclusions that don't apply to the topic at hand. These statements appear to be a violation of the wp:NOR policy. It appears to me that the paragraphs on this court case are all undue weight when taken in the proper context which is James Kirk diploma mills. 
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/ViewArticle.aspx?articleid=2796404 is not a reliable source
Your comment seemed to claim seven new references or something like that. I only noticed two. Perhaps I missed a few though? Thanks, TallMagic (talk) 03:10, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent multiple reverts

message: I thought it would perhaps be helpful to explain why all the recent attempts to edit the article have been reverted. To start off with, there are much fewer false statements in the current revert (done by Orlady) than in previous. I do appreciate that it appears that there's an attempt to try and be more careful with assertions being made. There are still problems that appear to me to likely be POV pushing. When one is editting an article that say calls a school a diploma mill and say the editor has a degree from said diploma mill then one must be extra careful when editting to make sure that there's no original research and that everything is wp:verifiable as well as being stated in a neutral point of view. The recent edits have been reverted because they did not adhere to these principles. Now for detailed examples from the most recent edit reverted by Orlady. Here's the edit I'm referring to. 
"Illegal activity surrounding LaSalle University was the reason Kirk was ultimately prosecuted and jailed." This assertion seems to ignore the fact that his activities associated with his other diploma mills also contributed to his downfall.
"LaSalle did not grant degrees simply in return for a cash payment (the truest definition of a "diploma mill")" This statement is an unsupported assertion. The references say that apparently some alumni claim to have done work and that there's really only ONE alumni where there was more than just the alumni's claim to back up the assertion. No where does it say that LaSalle did not at least sometime grant degrees simply for a cash payment. The paranthetical statement is personal opinion of the editor which is not allowed in Wikipedia.
"and although LaSalle apparently granted credits for "life-learning", the institution required students to purchase textbooks and submit essays for grading." No where in the references does it say that LaSalle required all students to purchase textbooks and submit essays for grading.
"Lasalle students were required to produce some level of academic work for their degrees," Same kind of problem, the assertions made in the edit are not really supported by the references.
Here was some examples from just the first 3 or 4 sentences of the added text. Almost every statement has a problem in that it doesn't follow Wikipedia policy. That is why the edits need to be reverted. The edits are just wrong and so problematic that they aren't really salvageable. Regards, TallMagic (talk) 16:31, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Critic of Recent Edit 

message: Life is too short to immerse myself in lengthy harangues about this subject, IMO. However, I believe that the direction of the recent edits by Apparent Logic is seriously off-topic. This is an article about diploma mills operated by James Kirk. It is not an article about findings in UK libel suits regarding people who claimed degrees from these diploma mills, nor is it an article about the motives and perceptions of people who received degrees from these diploma mills. 
The article should be focused on the James Kirk diploma mills, and about 99% of the new content should go away.
As for the specifics of Apparent Logic's concerns, I have a few comments:
*Diploma mills are a form of fraud, and no thoughtful observer would dispute the fact that the primary victims of their fraud are the students who pay good money on the expectation of receiving something of value. It is clear from the "literature" on diploma mills that some diploma mill students think they are enrolled in legitimate educational institutions and do a sizeable amount of work for their degrees. (For example, Laura Callahan says she put serious effort into her diploma mill PhD, mainly because she assumed she was supposed to do so.) The fact that a student in the UK convinced a judge that he thought he was receiving a legitimate education does not change the fact that the institution was a diploma mill. If there are reliable sources on the experiences of diploma mill victims, this would be a reasonable topic for inclusion in the article diploma mill, but the details of any one victim's experience with one particular diploma mill do not add value the article about that diploma mill.
The second category of diploma mill victims are the people and institutions that are defrauded by diploma mill degree recipients who pass themselves off as having valid professional qualifications. The fraud is more dangerous when a person claims qualifications as a medical doctor or psychologist than when the claimed qualification is a degree in something like paranormal phenomena, but it's fraud in any case. It appears to me that laws against using diploma mill degrees are aimed both at protecting the public against charlatans and at discouraging prospective students from "enrolling" in one of these institutions.
*There is no single hard-and-fast definition of "diploma mill". The lead section of diploma mill includes several definitions of the term. (I've even seen the term applied -- outside Wikipedia -- to the fully accredited U.S. universities that specialize in training teachers.) The fact that an institution requires students to buy textbooks or assigns some academic work does not mean that the institution is not a diploma mill. Indeed, a diploma mill that requires no academic work is not likely to be successful in luring "student" victims. 
*From Apparent Logic's assertions about 501-c-3 status, I infer that Apparent Logic is not familiar with U.S. law regarding nonprofit organizations. 501-c-3 status provides no assurance of legitimacy; it is an Internal Revenue Service classification related to taxation. A local birdwatching club or a book club can have 501-c-3 status, but that does not mean that they can or should confer academic degrees. 
--Orlady (talk) 04:16, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Very well put, Orlady. thanks, TallMagic (talk) 04:25, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

text: Whew.  That was close.  Almost conceded 2 references. Apparent Logic (talk) 06:54, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Focus, please

message: There is a wp:SPA that sometimes edits this article and keeps wanting to add irrelevant information regarding apostilles. They think it has some relevance showing legitimacy in one of these useless diploma mill degrees. They have also referenced the Hague agreement like it proves that their degree from this diploma mill has value proven by their apostille. Hopefully the section about diploma mills use of apostille in the following document will finally lay this sometimes misunderstood issue to rest. http://hcch.e-vision.nl/upload/wop/2008pd05e.pdf Regards,TallMagic (talk) 22:51, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  nonsense apostille 

message: Ladies & Gentlemen:
Since Wikipedia cites John Bear as an apparent authority, which he is, you are referred to the following which he posted on "DegreesInfo, Distance Learning" regarding Southland University:
At 03:35 PM on 3-21-2005, John Bear, Senior Member stated:
Southland, founded and run by James Kirk (later known as Thomas McPherson), operated under
California's very lenient state-authorization rules, and actually qualified its graduates to
take the Bar exam. While the pass rate was low, there are more than a dozen lawyers in
California who are alumni of Southland.
They were never shut down by anyone. When California laws got tougher, they moved to Arizona.
The FBI raided them, but no indictments were ever handed down. When Arizona laws got tougher, 
Kirk/McPherson moved to Missouri and started LaSalle, using the Southland model and courses. 
When Missouri leaned on him, he moved to Louisiana, which is where the FBI raid took place, 
followed by 18 indictments for various kinds of fraud, followed by a guilty plea, 4 years in 
a federal prison (from which Edison University, later Acton University was run), followed by 
various other Louisiana and Mississippi school involvements.
At 07:59 PM on 3-21-2005, John Bear, Senior Member stated:
If they have a Southland degree, then they have a degree from a school that was operating
legally under California, then Arizona law.
Please correct Wikipedia to properly reflect the above in lieu of the currently misleading information regarding Southland University.  Thanks.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.18.50.75 (talk) 00:38, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Online forum posts aren't normally considered reliable sources for Wikipedia articles. The article cites Dr. Bear's publications, not his online posts. Regardless, having read the forum thread and then reread the article, I don't think that this information contradicts anything in the article. In the online forum, Bear indicated that Southland's law school operated legally in California (note that being legal is not the same thing as "fully accredited") during a period when California's legal requirements were unusually lax, its graduates were allowed to sit for the bar exam, and some of those graduates passed. That doesn't negate anything in the article, but it probably could be mentioned in the article somewhere if there is a proper source for it. --Orlady (talk) 01:57, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Southland University 

message: Southland, founded and run by James Kirk (later known as Thomas McPherson), operated under
California's very lenient state-authorization rules, and actually qualified its graduates to
take the Bar exam. While the pass rate was low, there are more than a dozen lawyers in
California who are alumni of Southland.  They were never shut down by anyone. When California
laws got tougher, they moved to Arizona.  The FBI raided them, but no indictments were ever
handed down. When Arizona laws got tougher, Kirk/McPherson moved to Missouri and started LaSalle,
using the Southland model and courses.  When Missouri leaned on him, he moved to Louisiana,
which is where the FBI raid took place, followed by 18 indictments for various kinds of fraud,
followed by a guilty plea, 4 years in a federal prison (from which Edison University, later
Acton University was run), followed by various other Louisiana and Mississippi school involvements.(1)
If they have a Southland degree, then they have a degree from a school that was operating
legally under California, then Arizona law.(2)
(1) 03:35 PM on 3-21-2005, John Bear, Senior Member, DegreeInfo Distance Learning
(2) 07:59 PM on 3-21-2005, John Bear, Senior Member, DegreeInfo Distance Learning
Jlra1984 (talk) 01:49, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: See above. Also note that it would be a WP:copyvio (not to mention being poor practice) for Wikipedia to copy a verbatim statement. --Orlady (talk) 01:57, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Denied for now, please gain consensus for this before entry (it does not appear to meet "non-controversial" requirement that must be met if there is not consensus on this page. Also as Orlady said please reword so that it is not a copyvio and find reliable sources. James (T C) 02:20, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from Jlra1984, 14 June 2010 

message: The author reviewed my previously submitted posts by John Bear from DegreeInfo on 3-21-2005 at 03:35 pm and 07:59 pm and has agreed that students of Southland University School of Law were permitted to sit for the California bar.  However, the author fails to state such in the text of Wikipedia.  As Mr. Bear stated, some of the students passed the exceptionally difficult California bar.  Thus, the article continues to be misleading to those who may read it.
The author cites a Time magazine article but fails to cite Dr. Bear's posts on DegreeInfo's website.  Are we to take it that printed matter is more reliable than that presented on the internet?  If so, what does this say about Wikipedia in general?
Jlra1984 (talk) 15:12, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Jira, also please re-read the guidelines on Reliable Sources You are constantly trying to reference statements made on a forum that is rarely accepted as a reliable source. James (T C) 19:01, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from Jlra1984, 14 June 2010 

message: Since Southland University met the state of California's (1) requirements/regulations for degree programs, it neither meets the Wikipedia or the U.S. Department of Education's (2) definitions of a diploma mill.  Accordingly, reference to Southland University in the 2nd line needs to be removed as well as the 1st paragraph under "History."  Nowhere in the "Time" reference does it state Southland University was a diploma mill.
(1) California Postsecondary Education Commission
(2) www.ED.gov
Jlra1984 (talk) 16:01, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Plenty of references use the term to describe it. This cannot be done as a semi-protected request unless a clear consensus can be demonstrated here, on the talk page. Chzz  ►  19:43, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from Jlra1984, 15 June 2010 

message: Some recent edits removed a couple of references to the following article. http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=345  The edit comment stated that the source was unreliable. I'm unfamilar with the indicated source but after a quick review it looked like a reliable source to me. Would someone mind explaining what was wrong with the referenced article and/or source of the referenced article? Zugman (talk) 21:14, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent removal of a reference 

message: I've fixed this up to ensure it is Wikipedia style and only relies on Wikipedia accepted references. This section was an instance of some significant (and somewhat interesting) original research, but only this amount is verifiable.Jeremy112233 (talk) 20:47, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Camarda Incident

message: I'd like to remove the word "fraud" from the part that discusses Camarada, as per BLP rules. The subject of this paragraph has never been charged with fraud, nor has he been investigated for fraud by any authoritative body. That during an employment dispute a former employee says he felt Camarada committed fraud, does not meet Wikipedia's standards for evidence of such an extreme charge. So, could this not be seen as unnecessarily damaging to the BLP mentioned in the paragraph? If I alter this sentence, would there be any objections here? Jeremy112233 (talk) 20:27, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Camarada Phrasing

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on James Kirk diploma mills. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131017030629/http://www.novus.edu/generalinfo/terms_of_use.htm to http://www.novus.edu/generalinfo/terms_of_use.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.flippinchannels.com/Kole-resigns.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:29, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on James Kirk diploma mills. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090805094551/http://www.thestandard.com.hk/stdn/std/Metro/GD20Ak01.html to http://www.thestandard.com.hk/stdn/std/Metro/GD20Ak01.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:48, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified