Talk:Weimar University

message: :Technically, I don't think Weimar Institute is affiliated (legally) with the Seventh-day Adventist church. There are Seventh-day Adventists who run it, attend it, own it, etc. but it has no legal affiliation with the Seventh-day Adventist Church whatsoever. In fact, Weimar Institute has significant differences with the Seventh-day Adventist Church on some issues. If I am wrong, please indicate here how. The article itself indicates that it is not owned by the Seventh-day Adventist Church.68.162.189.92 (talk) 04:10, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Admins, please do not remove this page simply because it currently has POV, it has significance, and is not meant to be an advertisement. It is meant to be a supporting document as part of the Seventh-day Adventist WikiProject. Ansell 06:36, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

text: This is a blatant copyright infringement, marking so, Please work on a replacement in your userspace and move it here later. The current material cannot be transformed, it must be deleted. Copied from this page Ansell 06:41, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

text: See new page as Weimar Institute/Temp.  Hope this is acceptable. Mel 07:04, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I see the temp page as a viable stub for the page. Don't be disappointed that the content has been lost. Making sure that the page develops starting at a basic stub, with non-plagiarised/non-copyrighted statements is a very important thing for wikipedia. If there are any facts in the Timeline that are misrepresented then feel free to fix up the facts. Otherwise, I think we should ask to have it moved over to the main page in place of the other version. Ansell 10:03, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Thanks for the notes.  Who will make implement the move of temp page to replace original page? Mel 17:31, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have just requested an admin to move the page.  Cheers -Fermion 06:40, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Many thanks! Mel 06:45, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Old unlabeled discussions

message: I have reverted this and request some help from a third party administrator. Undid revision 433002326 by Nomoskedasticity (talk)
A School's Bulletin is one of the most reliable of self-published sources plus, even large universities would be hard-pressed to find information on transferring credits in a third party source. 
I am requesting a discussion of this issue with at least one, and perhaps two, administrators. before the text is changed. Thanks DonaldRichardSands (talk) 09:30, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see WP:SELFPUB.  Administrators generally do not make rounds to pages like this -- you'll probably have to find one to ask directly.  Nomoskedasticity (talk) 09:38, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This information should stay until you can verify that a school bulletin is not a reliable source. Previously it has been considered one. WP:SELFPUB is acceptable in certain cases such as when schools are describing their policies or standards. I might add that you Nomo are removing a valid reference that is not directly from the school {Distance Education and Training Council) which does not fall underWP:SELFPUB. I am therefore re-adding that reference as it is valid and should not be taken out. Fountainviewkid 10:16, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The reason to remove the sentence about Griggs is that there is no reference for the existence of that relationship.  On both points please see WP:BURDEN.  Nomoskedasticity (talk) 10:20, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually there is evidence. The school's handbook and policies describe the relationship. We are allowed to post what a school says about itself. We can add that this is only a "claim" however there is no reason to keep the information off, if it's a reliable source. Fountainviewkid 10:26, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is a School's Bulletin an unacceptable source 

message: Is the high school curriculum accredited?  I can't seem to find any information about that and it's very important. ElKevbo (talk) 02:57, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure, but supposedly Donald was saying something about how at the high school level accreditation is not really an issue. He could explain more. What exactly is the difference between accredited and unaccredited for Weimar High School? Fountainviewkid (talk) 03:05, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course its an issue. An unaccredited high school's credits cannot be transferred to accredited high schools and generally won't be accepted by accredited colleges, or if they are, they are carefully scrutinized and you'll probably take an ass load of remedial classes. bW 03:13, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Well BW that's not the situation at Weimar. The students who transfer from the Academy there go straight into normal college classes (at least at Andrews, PUC, and other places). From the evidence I've seen there was no "ass load of remedial classes" either. --Fountainviewkid (talk) 03:19, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: That's fine but it doesn't answer the original question.  (I'm not attacking you or being difficult; if you, too, don't know the answer to the original question then that's ok!). ElKevbo (talk) 04:42, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I found the answer (though I'm prob. getting blocked soon) but hear goes. I went to the Academy website and found some information. Now I know for the college we considered it primary source and therefore SELFPUB, meaning we couldn't use it. It does exist however in the academy handbook , which notes that it is "approved" by the state but not accredited. Read the full details at the link. Hopefully that helps (and that I can still be here to find this information and not topic banned or blocked). Thanks. --Fountainviewkid (talk) 04:51, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, that's useful!  I'll let someone else decide if that information needs to be added and how best to do it; I'm a scholar of U.S. higher education and am not familiar with high school accreditation practices and standards.  ElKevbo (talk) 04:53, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay. That makes sense. Yeah high school accreditation doesn't seem to be as big of a deal as college (higher education) though there obviously is some benefit to it. I don't know all the complexities either as I've only attended accredited schools. Glad we can work constructively! Much appreciated! --Fountainviewkid (talk) 04:56, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

text: We would technically under your guidelines need Secondary sourcing for this. As in something that says they are unaccredited which is reliable. I will not go rounds with you however, as we can use the Primary source from the academy itself which says as much. The question now is how that information should best be added "by someone familiar with high school accreditation practices and standards". --Fountainviewkid (talk) 05:52, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: In this case, the lack of evidence of accreditation from the accreditation board is evidence enough, imo. bW 17:20, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: High school

message: There has been debate on this article as to the accreditation issue. I have found a variety of secondary sources which provide information on this issue. Below is a summary.
The first source which I found describes Weimar's connection to Griggs occurs in the SDA Yearbook. It is more recent as it updates Griggs University under Andrews University which recently took over management of Griggs. The source is here . This is from the SDA Yearbook, the official directory of the church. Scroll to the bottom where it says "Griggs University" and you will see "Griggs University--Weimar Center" followed by the address of the college and the name of the Director of the center who happens to be the VP of Education for Weimar College, Randall Seibold.
I also found this secondary source linking Weimar College and Griggs University which provides accredited credits. The source is a Word document that can be accessed online . This document details the whole SDA education system. The source website demonstrates that it comes from an official organization. Once you open this document go to page 43 where it says "GRIGGS UNIVERSITY(Higher Education Division of Home Study International)". Scroll down to "Extended campus locations:" and you will see #13 is "Griggs University - Weimar, Weimar College, California". This demonstrates that Griggs & Weimar do have some type of affiliation. 
Furthermore, from the SDA official church paper the Adventist Review, is this news story about when Weimar College was going to close. It did not as another church organization was able to connect with it and keep it open, however the article notes that "Though not a Seventh-day Adventist Church entity, the college is certified by the state of California and affiliated with Griggs University." The entire source can be found here . 
Another secondary source is this journal article. While this section was written by the VP of Education for Weimar the article is located in a secondary source (the Loma Linda University Alumni Journal) making it valid. On page 6 it says "The college has also had an articulation agreement with Griggs University that allows many of our classes to be listed on a Griggs transcript, easing transfer of credits for students moving to a non-Adventist institution". The source can be found as a PDF here . 
With regards to Weimar's relationship with other SDA colleges, a  good source on Weimar's "credit situation" can be found courtesy of the State of California Board of Registered Nursing. This is an update on Weimar's feasibility study to get licensing. This is as recent as May 18,2011 and is Agenda Item 9.6.2. Here is the PDF  The board notes that "Currently, two Adventist universities (Southern Adventist University in Tennessee and Andrews University in Michigan) accept Weimar College credit units.  Both of these universities have BSN and graduate level nursing programs.  Further, these two universities are part of the North American Division (NAD) of the Adventist Church which consists of 10 accredited SDA universities. A task force has been established in the NAD to explore mechanisms of transfer of units form Weimar College to all ten universities". Griggs University is under Andrews University as any credits with Griggs are transferable with Andrews and vice versa. Andrews & Southern also accept certain Weimar credits (such as for Religion classes) as well as the Griggs credits which I believe and transferable at every SDA institution. Fountainviewkid 21:28, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes I plan to work on that over the next several days. Can't let you have all the fun, even though you're like the best peacemaking editor we have in the world of SDA wiki. You can be the Jan Paulsen to our Ted Wilson & Ray Cottrell!Fountainviewkid (talk) 00:49, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I assume that you're comparing me to Dr. Cottrell, which leads me to conclude you just compared yourself to Ted Wilson?!? I am surprised you would insult yourself in such a manner. Good thing the policy against personal attacks doesn't apply to attacking yourself, or does it? ;) bW 05:08, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I was joking. Allow me to use a little bit of humor BW. From our edit POV's it's obviously appeared that way. The one thing it would make us though is both having PhD.'s which we don't. Surprisingly Ted Wilson is also Dr. Wilson receiving his doctorate from a non SDA institution, but again that's beside the point. --Fountainviewkid (talk) 05:19, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I know, hence the ";)" at the end of my reply. I am aware that Wilson got his PhD from New York University, something about studying Ellen White if I understand correctly. And I pride myself on making NPOV edits. bW 05:44, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: NPOV? No comment.--Fountainviewkid (talk) 05:53, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Summary of Reliable Secondary Sources 

message: Weimar College is quite transparent in its Bulletin accreditation discussion. Weimar states clearly that it is not accredited; It describes the transfer of credits as complicated; It points to Griggs University as the bridge to other Adventist institutions of higher learning; It quotes the North American Division Working Policy of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists to assert the reliability of Griggs' credit transferability within the Adventist system. Now that Griggs is part of Andrews University, the inter-connectedness of the various SDA institutions of higher learning, including Weimar via Griggs, is interesting to say the least. DonaldRichardSands (talk) 13:34, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes Thanks Donald. I've realize the situation is complicated. That's why we had the "degrees" compromise rather than saying the credits were "unaccredited". Right now the information on the article is decent but could probably be revised (not towards POV though). --Fountainviewkid (talk) 15:58, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weimar's Transparency re: Accreditation 

message: How about Weimar Center of Health & Education?  Kenatipo  speak! 17:16, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Do it. bW 17:18, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: We have consensus.  Done.  --Kenatipo  speak! 19:15, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a bit of a stretch to say that "we have consensus" when only one other editor has agreed with you and the discussion was open for just under 2 hours.  I don't object to moving this article but I am very wary of your judgment of consensus; please leave discussions open much longer and allow them to receive more input in the future. ElKevbo (talk) 20:26, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, it was 26 hours, and when Bello and I agree on anything, it's a lock!  --Kenatipo  speak! 20:42, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The article has been changed to the wrong name.  The name, per their website, includes the ampersand.  (Like A&P).  --Kenatipo  speak! 20:42, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

text: Other examples: Fortnum & Mason, Abercrombie & Fitch, AT&T, Lord & Taylor.  --Kenatipo  speak! 21:07, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, you're right - it was over 24 hours.  That doesn't do much to alleviate my concerns, though. ElKevbo (talk) 20:44, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: If you feel like bitching at someone, bitch at Orangemike for changing it to the wrong name.  Naming conventions?  Where does Wikipedia get off telling entities what characters they can use in their own names?   --Kenatipo  speak! 20:52, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I tried to undo Orangemike twice but it didn't take.  --Kenatipo  speak! 20:54, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

text: If you'd like to propose a different name for the article, Kevbo, the floor is open for discussion.  --Kenatipo  speak! 21:00, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't want to change the name of the article.  I'd just like you to be more mindful of declaring "consensus" in the future. ElKevbo (talk) 21:07, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Sir, please rest assured that we will give your kind and thoughtful suggestion all the consideration it deserves!  --Kenatipo  speak! 21:34, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: El Kevbo I get what you're saying, but Kenatipo has a point that if he and BW agree it's about done. Also this is such a small article that very few will comment to give their opinion. If we wait too long for consensus we'd never get it. It's true that it's become more noticed (Thanks ANI) but in this situation not much harm was done. --Fountainviewkid (talk) 21:40, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Wrong. In this case, it was appropriate since there wasn't opposition, but if it were challenged, the opinions of two editors does not equal consensus. bW 03:39, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  time to re-name the article 

message: It should be noted that the Distance Education and Training Council is not a regional accreditation agency and its accreditation does not confer transferability to regionally accredited schools (which is standard).
Also, Adventist Review should be linked. bW 04:12, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi BW, Weimar's interest in Griggs (and thus, DETC) is transferability among Adventist institutions. How does what you report here affect such transfering within the Adventist system? DonaldRichardSands (talk) 12:01, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some changes