Talk:List of unrecognized higher education accreditation organizations

message: A few days ago, another editor created two subcategories for the list:
*Organizations misidentified as offering accreditation
*Religious or theological accreditors lacking academic recognition
The new structure implies that these two groupings are legitimate organizations that are on the list due to special situations -- and that the rest of the entities on the list are not legitimate. Unfortunately, the basis for this classification is (at best) original research. In all but a few cases, the only sourced information that we have regarding the entities on this list is:
#Someone (usually either the organization itself or an entity that claims it is accredited by them) has identified them as higher education accreditors. And:
#They are not recognized higher education accreditation organizations.
There are many different possible reasons why an entity might appear on this list. Some probably are completely nonexistent (made-up), some are accreditation mills, some are legitimate organizations that are not engaged in accreditation but have been misrepresented by third parties, some may be legitimate organizations that are engaged in some sort of accreditation but are not accreditors of higher education, some are accreditors of religious reliability but not of educational quality, and some may be undertaking to do a quality job of higher education accreditation in spite of not being recognized. In the case of the majority of entries on this list, there is no authoritative, reliably sourced information identifying which of these reasons applies to a particular listed entity. This is why the part of the lead section of this article has essentially been a disclaimer -- text that explains (in other words) that the mere appearance of an entity on this list does not indicate any conclusion regarding its legitimacy.
It appears that the "religious or theological" subcategory of the list was created primarily on the basis of inference from the organization's name. Unfortunately, that cannot be defended as anything more than original research -- and, in fact, it is likely that at least a few of these entities are either made-up entities or accreditation mills. (Fraudsters engaged in misrepresentation have been known to misrepresent themselves using words like "interfaith" or "Christian" or "Bible".)
As for the "misidentified" list, it includes only UNESCO, apparently based on the source that I added to the lead section of the article a little while back. I made a particular point of listing it as an example because I am reasonably sure that there are several entities on this list that have been misidentified, but I have not seen an authoritative reliable source that states both that the organization is a reputable entity that is not engaged in higher education accreditation and that it has been misidentified or misrepresented as an accreditor. For example, I am reasonably sure that the United States Distance Learning Association and International Association of Educators for World Peace are reputable non-accreditation entities that appear on this list only because they have been misrepresented, but it would be WP:SYN for me to state that in an article. Breaking out a list of "Organizations misidentified", while leaving these organizations (and probably some others like them) in the master list of organizations implied to be illegitimate, besmirches the reputation of these organizations.
In view of the above concerns, which I consider to be very serious, I am reverting the edits that created the separate lists. --Orlady (talk) 14:52, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The besmirching of UNESCO, USDLA, IAEWP, etc. occurs when they are lumped into the overall list.  They deserve better.  (Are they not legitimate organizations?)  If not a separate section, then at least a notation next to their listing which tells the reader that they do not hold themselves out as an accreditation organization.  Mention of this fact in the introduction is hardly adequate.--S. Rich (talk) 16:05, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The content of this list-article is based on reliable sources that have identified the entities as unrecognized higher education accreditors. In many cases, the sources do not provide details as to why the entity is identified as such. To remove a few specific entities from the list (or to annotate the list entries with a notation that they are legitimate organizations not engaged in accreditation, but were misrepresented as accreditors by a third party) because we are kind-of-pretty-sure (based on looking at a bunch of other sources) that the entity was falsely accused would be an application of original research. --Orlady (talk) 16:56, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It would appear that your gripe is with the title of the article, Srich. I've wrestled with alternative names that would fully explain the scope of the list, but have not been able to come up with anything less awkward than something like "List of entities that lack recognition or authorization as higher education accrediting organizations but have been identified as higher education accreditors." I've looked at the various lists that are cited as sources, and note that all of them have titles similar to this article. Accordingly, I think it is best to stick with the current title, but clearly explain the scope in the lead section. It is rather common for Wikipedia list-articles to have titles that do not fully define the scope of the list, so this would be consistent with accepted practice. --Orlady (talk) 22:42, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I have absolutely NO beef with the title of the article.  (Where this idea comes from escapes me.)  Indeed, the article is most valuable and I have endeavored to improve it.  I do have a beef with the inclusion of some of the organizations.  As mentioned above, UNESCO is not, Not, NOT an organization that says "We are an 'unrecognized higher education accreditation organization'." Nor do they say "We are a higher education accreditation organization."  There are three criteria for inclusion in the list. 1. "as identified by the organizations themselves" -- UNESCO does not fit for the reason just given; 2. "government authorities in their respective countries"  -- we have no citation to a government authority that says UNESCO is a recognized or unrecognized higher education accreditation organization; and 3. "other independent authorities" -- Lantero does not say UNESCO is a recognized or unrecognized higher education accreditation organization.  UNESCO (and others I suspect) should come off the list.  (Replace it with SIAA!) --S. Rich (talk) 04:34, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately, the sources we rely on for most of the content in this article do not distinguish between (1) organizations that engage in accreditation with appropriate approval/recognition and (2) organizations that do not engage in accreditation but are identified by as accreditors by diploma mills or other institutions lacking accreditation. With rare exceptions -- notably UNESCO, we have no means other than original research to identify the organizations of type 2. For example, I have seen documentation regarding diploma mills that claim International Association of Educators for World Peace as an accreditor, but I cannot verify that IAEWP didn't "accredit" them in some fashion. Accordingly, it is best to list them all, but with prominent disclaimers. --Orlady (talk) 13:28, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

text: Would a brief discussion of UNESCO, and any others like it, right next to the listing alleviate both concerns (OR and unjustified/unintentional besmirchment)? By this I mean, state right next to a listing what the RSs say, in UNESCO's case that other orgs have fudged what UNESCO is. If the RSs are silent as to why or how, so is the list. That would allow the list to remian a list of orgs that 1) anyone has claimed is an accreditor as reported by an RS (whether the group itself concurs, disagrees, or doesn't even know) and 2) such group is not recognized as such. Novaseminary (talk) 18:03, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: We already have some of these distinctions in the list.  E.g., "International Association of Educators for World Peace[7][9] (Includes the international organization[30] and national affiliates in individual countries. Although some unaccredited institutions may have claimed accreditation from this organization, it is not engaged in educational accreditation nor is it an authorized accreditor.)" and "Distance Education Council (DEC) (connected to the operator of Saint Regis University) (not to be confused with the legitimate Distance Education Council recognized by the Indian Department of Education [2])[9]"  UNESCO (which as a RS to distinguish it from this besmirching inclusion) and others should have such notations. --S. Rich (talk) 18:36, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Any such annotation that appears in the list (or in footnotes) would need to be fully supported by sources -- not including synthesis by Wikipedia contributors. (Those "not to be confused with" entries are essentially disambiguation notes, so they do not require the same level of sourcing.) Ideally, organizations that we think are legitimate groups that have been misrepresented by unethical outfits (like International Association of Educators for World Peace) would have articles linked from the list, so that readers with a concern could read the article and reach their own conclusions. --Orlady (talk) 22:42, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

text: I've created a stub article for International Association of Educators for World Peace, so it's no longer a redlink. I did not find any indications that the organization has ever represented itself as an accreditor, but I have a hunch (this is totally from "reading between the lines" -- one of the purest forms of original research!) that it has encouraged some marginal institutions to promote themselves by advertising a connection with the organization. --Orlady (talk) 01:26, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Just out of curiosity, are you affiliated with any of those organizations? because unless you are in contact with members from those organizations I highly doubt one person could alone find a so high number of (in my opinion) unreliable sources with the same theme (unless using the direct keywords like people working in there and/or the association name) using any search engine, so to find those sources you have to: 1) Know direct keywords, wich implies you know those words in real "world" so you know someone affiliated or you are affiliated yourself 2) You  have access to direct links, however those links all comes from affiliated sites on the same "network" wich links back to group 1). However thanks for linking to me all those unreliable articles I hope some moderator deeply look inside this pages. RationalWiki (talk) 08:49, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: User:RationalWiki, when and if you return with a new name, as this one is against our user policy, we have something called good faith that we ask editors to extend to each other. What Orlady wrote was a stub, just a few sentences – seeSpecial:PermanentLink/391348875 which had only 2 sources. Since then one editor added most of what you see. Doug Weller talk 12:07, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categorization of the list 

message: I'm afraid my vague tag on the michlist reference is buried in the footnote, so I'll add a notation here.  What I'd like to know is what office in the State of Michigan is publishing the list.  While the list says the bodies listed are not approved by US ED, e.g., DoE has approved bodies not on the michlist, who in Michigan is preparing the list and where does their info come from?  Perhaps it comes from Wikipedia! If so, then it fails the WP:RS requirement to have a "reputation for fact-checking and accuracy." (Also, the latest rendition of the list is dated 8/13/2010.)--S. Rich (talk) 21:21, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: That PDF is published and updated by the State of Michigan Civil Service Commission. It is linked from this Civil Service Commission webpage. Although the heading on the list implies that it is limited to entities not approved by CHEA, I don't see any evidence that it includes valid non-U.S. accreditors. None of the non-U.S. bodies on the list are entities that I've ever seen on lists of entities approved by cognizant government authorities for accreditation/authorization of higher education. --Orlady (talk) 16:35, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Michigan List 

message: Elsewhere on this page (to a limited extent) and more extensively at Talk:Accreditation mill and Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2010 November 18#Category:Unrecognized accreditation associations, User:John J. Bulten has alluded to a perceived absence of inclusion criteria. I infer that his main concern is with this list article.
The current criteria for inclusion are described in the lead paragraph. Here are the relevant excerpts:
*"entities that are engaged in higher education accreditation or have been identified as being accreditors, but that lack appropriate recognition or authorization" – This scope includes organizations that are engaged in accreditation without the recognition or authorization required in the relevant jurisdiction, plus organizations that someone else has identified as being engaged in accreditation, but that don't have the authority to engage in accreditation.
*"as identified by the organizations themselves, government authorities in their respective countries, or other independent authorities" – This describes the types of information used to determine whether an entity belongs in this article. If the organization says it offers accreditation, but lacks official authorization to engage in accreditation, that's sufficient basis to list it. On that same basis, if "accredited" educational institutions say their accreditor lacks official authorization, I consider that sufficient basis to list the accreditor. If a government authority, such as the U.S. Department of Education or the Oregon Office of Degree Authorization or the Republic of Liberia National Commission on Higher Education, identifies the organization as one that is an unrecognized accreditor, that's sufficient basis to list it. As for "other independent authorities", they may include nongovernmental organizations (such as CHEA), governmental education agencies in other jurisdictions (such as information that the Oregon Office of Degree Authorization may publish regarding accreditors outside the U.S.), international organizations (such as European Union education agencies), WP:RS periodical publications and news media, and published works (regardless of the medium of publication) by authors with acknowledged expertise on the topic (this includes, for example, John Bear, Steve Levicoff, George Gollin, and Allen Ezell).
If sources conflict regarding the status of an organization -- for example, if the State of Michigan says it's an unrecognized accreditor but CHEA says it is recognized, then obviously the article editors need to make a judgment call or else annotate the listing about the conflict between sources. (In the example, I'd trust CHEA over the State of Michigan, but in most cases an annotation is appropriate.) However, if one source says it's an unrecognized accreditor but other sources have no information about it, it still belongs on the list.
Regarding entities that might not actually be engaged in accreditation, but appear on a reliably sourced list of unrecognized accreditors, a contributor's hunch that they might be falsely labeled is nothing more than original research, and not a reason to exclude them from the list. Additionally, it is not up to Wikipedia contributors to investigate the detailed story underlying a source's identification of an entity as an "unrecognized accreditor"; if there's a source that explains that the entity was falsely accused or otherwise documents the basis for a listing, that information belongs in the list (either in a text annotation or a footnote), but a lack of detailed background information is not a basis for removing an entity from the list.
One final comment: My own preference (based in part on my experience with Featured List Candidates) is for the inclusion criteria to appear at or near the end of the introductory section of a list article, rather than in the lead sentence. I think it is more effective to provide background information before stating the list inclusion criteria, rather than stating the criteria before giving the reader the background they need to understand what the criteria mean. User:Novaseminary disagrees with me on that point and created the current sequence in October. It appears to me that the change in the structure of the introduction reduced clarity regarding inclusion criteria; if others agree, I suggest that you take the matter up with Novaseminary. --Orlady (talk) 02:42, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inclusion criteria 

message: I came in response to a request at WP:AN to close the discussion above. I have read most but not all of it. It's very long and I'm tired. My impression from reading the points and counterpoints and from looking at the website in dispute is that S. Rich and Orlady have the better arguments. I don't think the lack of a named author, or the failure of the author to update the article periodically, would suggest to anyone that the article is made up or otherwise unreliable. If I were researching this topic, I would want to know about the Get Educated website. On the basis of these general impressions, I would recommend a closure in favor of declaring the website a reliable source. However, since I am not an expert on disputes about whether a page is a relable source, I will make this only a recommended outcome, and will defer to the next person who may come along and overrule me. Chutznik (talk) 05:43, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Toward closing this discussion 

message: Membership in the Agency shall be limited to institutions that offer instruction, assessment, and student services in the distance education field and are accredited by the WOEAC Accrediting Commission. The WOEAC Accrediting Commission may also accredit independent learning institutions.  The World Online Education Accrediting Commission (WOEAC) has been the standard-setting Accrediting Commission for correspondence study and distance education institutions including Ashwood University.
Ashwood University has full accreditation status.  Accredited by two recognized accreditation institutions, the World Online Education Accrediting Commission (WOEAC) and the Board of Online Universities Accreditation (BOUA). The Board of Online Universities Accreditation (BOUA) has been the leading agency for distance education institutions since its inception.
The Board of Online Universities Accreditation (BOUA) has been providing accreditation to online universities since its inception.  It was set up to improve educational standards and commercial practices of online universities that have sprung up in the last few decades.8.225.200.43 (talk) 18:22, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: What evidence do you have that either of these entities is recognized as accreditation organizations by anybody but diploma mill operators? --Orange Mike | Talk 19:21, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The act of accrediting or the state of being accredited, especially the granting of approval to an institution of learning by an official review board after the school has met specific requirements.
Accreditation is a non-governmental peer review process in which the integrity and good faith of an institution and its officers are essential.  Membership in the Agency shall be limited to institutions that offer instruction, assessment, and student services in the distance education field and are accredited by the WOEAC Accrediting Commission. The WOEAC Accrediting Commission may also accredit independent learning institutions.  The World Online Education Accrediting Commission (WOEAC) has been the standard-setting Accrediting Commission for correspondence study and distance education institutions including Ashwood University.
Ashwood University has full accreditation status.  Accredited by two recognized accreditation institutions, the World Online Education Accrediting Commission (WOEAC) and the Board of Online Universities Accreditation (BOUA). The Board of Online Universities Accreditation (BOUA) has been the leading agency for distance education institutions since its inception.
The Board of Online Universities Accreditation (BOUA) has been providing accreditation to online universities since its inception.  It was set up to improve educational standards and commercial practices of online universities that have sprung up in the last few decades.8.225.200.43 (talk) 18:24, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: That's probably mainly copyvio. The BOUA seems to be part of a much larger diploma mill organisation.. As for Ashwood University, "Ashwood University is not accredited by any recognised accreditation body. As such, its degrees may not be acceptable to employers or other institutions, and use of degree titles may be restricted or illegal in some jurisdictions. The Toronto Star reports that Ashwood University operates out of Pakistan.Dale Braza, Big promises, broken dreams, Toronto Star, August 31, 2008" See also World Online Education Accrediting Commission. We won't be in a hurry to remove these. Dougweller (talk) 19:22, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  WOEAC AND  BOUA NEEDS TO BE REMOVED FROM THIS LIST 

message: We need sources in order to add this one. Dougweller (talk) 11:13, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accreditation Council for Online Higher Education 

message: A couple of sources on naturopathy:  and  – ran into these while researching Clayton College. Dougweller (talk) 11:15, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Naturopathic 

message: I'm not sure i understood the including or exclusion for this article. So here's my question:
Currently, the Association for Comprehensive Energy Psychology (ACEP) is listed in this article.
on their website they write: "It is with tremendous pleasure that we announce to you that ACEP has been approved by the American Psychological Association to be a provider of CE credit for psychologists and that we can provide CE credit for our programs in Energy Psychology effective Nov 11, 2012." 
The American Psychological Association Does list them on APA Approved Sponsors of Continuing Professional Education 
Is this relevant to this article? 109.66.128.60 (talk) 01:25, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Association for Comprehensive Energy Psychology 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on List of unrecognized higher education accreditation organizations. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.chea.org/pdf/overview_US_accred_8-03.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:44, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on List of unrecognized higher education accreditation organizations. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130925092641/http://www.iiaaweb.org:80/ to http://www.iiaaweb.org/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:52, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Unaccredited Accrediting Orgs: Who Accredits the Accrediting Orgs?  I surmise that various governmental agencies end up with that de facto role.  (PeacePeace (talk) 22:12, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unaccredited Accrediting Orgs: Who Accredits the Accrediting Orgs? 

message: I would like someone more experienced to comment on whether this organization should be added to the list: http://www.iaaos.org/
One indicator that this is not a recognized organization is that none of the people they list as representatives on global chapters, can be found by googling and a lot of them
have PhDs so I expect they should be listed as alumni in respective universities.
Kpsychas (talk) 22:50, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  International Accreditation Association for Online Schools 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 10 external links on List of unrecognized higher education accreditation organizations. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://web.archive.org/web/20050312020754/http%3A//www.madison.com/tct/news/stories/index.php?ntid=28423&ntpid=3
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://web.archive.org/web/20070804003555/http%3A//www.chea.org/pdf/overview_US_accred_8-03.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101015220035/http://www.osac.state.or.us/oda/accreditation.html to http://www.osac.state.or.us/oda/accreditation.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071013185653/http://www.billingsgazette.com/newdex.php?display=rednews%2F2005%2F04%2F23%2Fbuild%2Fwyoming%2F35-distance-degree.inc to http://www.billingsgazette.com/newdex.php?display=rednews%2F2005%2F04%2F23%2Fbuild%2Fwyoming%2F35-distance-degree.inc
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090308052626/http://www.degree.net/guides/non-gaap_listings.html to http://www.degree.net/guides/non-gaap_listings.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090208105135/http://www.houstonpress.com/Issues/2006-07-20/news/news.html to http://www.houstonpress.com/Issues/2006-07-20/news/news.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071106040701/http://www.napnsc.org/ to http://www.napnsc.org/
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://web.archive.org/web/20080303055713/http%3A//www.embassyofliberia.org/news/item_a.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://web.archive.org/web/20031210221930/www.sbcollege.net/Accreditation.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://web.archive.org/web/20070217012233/http%3A//www.thecb.state.tx.us/AAR/PrivateInstitutions/FraudulentAccreditors.cfm
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) 21:18, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on List of unrecognized higher education accreditation organizations. 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/20150513185433/http://www.cimea.it/files/fileusers/Diploma_mills_Luca_Lantero_EN.pdf to http://www.cimea.it/files/fileusers/Diploma_mills_Luca_Lantero_EN.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080905085108/http://www.the-aide.org/ to http://www.the-aide.org/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080214095433/http://aiea-edu.org/faq.php to http://aiea-edu.org/faq.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071109210555/http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ous/international/usnei/us/edlite-accred-fraud.html to http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ous/international/usnei/us/edlite-accred-fraud.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070708234030/http://www.unicalamus.org/accred.htm to http://www.unicalamus.org/accred.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060711093745/http://www.occm.org/OurPurpose.htm to http://www.occm.org/OurPurpose.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070808085303/http://www.occm.org/OurMembers.htm to http://www.occm.org/OurMembers.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) 00:03, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 9 external links on List of unrecognized higher education accreditation organizations. 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/20110420041706/http://chea.org/intdb/international_directory.asp to http://www.chea.org/intdb/international_directory.asp
*Added  tag to http://portal.unesco.org/education/en/ev.php-URL_ID%3D48787%26URL_DO%3DDO_TOPIC%26URL_SECTION%3D201.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120313135806/http://www.cimea.it/files/fileusers/CHAPTER4.pdf to http://www.cimea.it/files/fileusers/CHAPTER4.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060815053055/http://www.chea.org/Directories/index.asp to http://www.chea.org/Directories/index.asp
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20161224213200/http://www.chea.org/Directories/private.asp to http://www.chea.org/Directories/private.asp
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100723112519/http://www.unva.edu/accredit.htm to http://www.unva.edu/accredit.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110726013806/http://www.edaccredit.org/pages/aboutus.html to http://www.edaccredit.org/pages/aboutus.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130817103204/http://accreditedu.org/pages/aboutus.html to http://www.accreditedu.org/pages/aboutus.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070306110542/http://pittsburghlive.com/x/dailycourier/news/connellsville/s_328132.html to http://pittsburghlive.com/x/dailycourier/news/connellsville/s_328132.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120716051400/http://www.naapti.com/Pages/AboutAccreditation.aspx to http://www.naapti.com/Pages/AboutAccreditation.aspx
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) 07:35, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on List of unrecognized higher education accreditation organizations. 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/20100331224450/http://chea.org/pdf/fact_sheet_6_diploma_mills.pdf to http://www.chea.org/pdf/fact_sheet_6_diploma_mills.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20161018195021/http://www.chea.org/pdf/Recognition/summaries-2016-sep/AACSB.pdf to http://www.chea.org/pdf/Recognition/summaries-2016-sep/AACSB.pdf
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) 09:27, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018)