This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
American Central University article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
Please note that I have archived the contents of this page prior to June 2008, excepting the lengthy and ongoing exchange below. CosmicPenguin ( Talk) 03:29, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Good sir/madam, Welcome to Wikipedia. I thank you for your attempted improvements to Wikipedia. Please notice that your edits have been reverted because they do not follow Wikipedia policy. I respectfully suggest that you get better familar with Wikipedia policies, guidelines, and suggested practices. Perhaps a nice friendly place to start is WP:WELCOME. I think that you'll find that there are many friendly editors here on Wikipedia that will be happy to answer any specific questions that you might have. Regards, TallMagic ( talk) 02:48, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
Dear Sir/madam, The information listed on wikipedia are seditous and not correct. Our request to you will be to provide correct information about our university. Alternatively you may altogether remove our organisation from you list. Thank you Ann —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.82.52.77 ( talk) 04:39, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi Ann, I would like to welcome you to Wikipedia and suggest you may be interested in reading the WP:Welcome article. Thank you so much for your interest in Wikipedia and the accuracy of this article. It is very much appreciated. I also appreciate that you have chosen to share your valued opinion on this talk page. Regarding your above assertions, I believe that everything stated in the article has been properly sourced and is verifiable. I really would appreciate it though if you could point out specific statements that are not properly sourced. Or perhaps you may have some alternative sources that seem to contradict the sources referenced in the article? Such considerations are very important and are taken very seriously. I would also like to suggest that you review the Wikipedia conflict of interest policy. Regards, TallMagic ( talk) 14:27, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
I am not trying to acuse you but we as a general public also expect wikipedia to see alternative views from people who are affected by your articles. It is sad to see that some people are bent on spoiling the names of good schools. ACU is a new entity with good affiliates offering good services. A journalist whos views are only mired by his prejudices can not be used against ACU. History is replete with examples where some yellow journalists cooked up stories just to tarnish other's image. I would not give a damn to this journalist and shall continue pursuing my program with ACU. I do hope that you will correct the facts and do justice to the reputation of Wikipedia and ACU. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.54.65.14 ( talk) 01:54, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi Tallmagic, Whatever we provide you instantly reject and rely on biased views which is not fair. Instead may I request you to either accept the facts or altogether remove our organization from wikipedia so as to avoid misunderstanding for everyone. Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.82.48.48 ( talk) 08:02, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi Tallmagic, All the sources cited are verifiable and meet the wikipedia guidlines and as such may I once again request you to edit the page making it factual rather seditious. Once that is done I will be happy and will let it remain. Thank you for your considerations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.51.9.184 ( talk) 09:58, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
I have in greater details reviewed the wikie policies as pointed by you. You make absurd comments rather following the wikie policies about editing and revisions. Information about an organization must be quoted from its original sources and not seditious sources. How much do you know about organization? Is it more than me being the major owner? Why you are stubborn in not allowing genuine concerns being addressed? Please be open to valuable changes for which everyone should be thankful. Ann —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.100.192.52 ( talk) 08:16, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
You are assuming that I am a teen and assumption is not good. What we request you is to remove the pack of lies associated with your article about our organization. Could you please kindly allow us to publish true information and remove the pack of lies which may be our nemesis has posted on your esteemed website. Wikipedia being a community oriented entity deserve to display correct rather wrong information. Thank you-45years old Ann Burnett —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.51.9.187 ( talk) 04:08, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi TallMagic, Please unprotect the page so the information on the page is updated and the case closed as both of us need to be friends and focus our time on gainful pursuits rather conflicts. Thank you so much. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.51.11.19 ( talk) 09:31, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi Tallmagic, Please note that the history, the ownership and our association with other organization is wrong as such may I request you to unprotect the site. I make changes and we amicably retain it. It needs to be corrected and I apprecaite your support. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.82.52.50 ( talk) 03:20, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
How can I make the changes please advise so I do that. Thanks Ann —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.54.68.208 ( talk) 04:36, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi Ann Burnett, I believe I've been very clear on the proper method of editting Wikipedia articles. Please review the wp:five pillars article for general information. Note that this general information provides links into more specific information. I think a specific policy that your edits seem to violate is wp:verifiable. One other item that may or may not have been made clear to you is that I am but one of many Wikipedians that are working on this article over the past couple months. None of us will allow edits to add material that violates Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Also you won't be allowed to remove properly sourced material as you have tried to do in the past. The edits that you've attempted in the past appear to be vandalism. If I tried to make the same edits that you've done in the past then they too would be reverted by my fellow Wikipedians. When you find the wp:reliable sources that verify the information you'd like to see in the article then please post them here and I'll be happy to make the changes to the article or you can make the changes yourself when the article protection is removed. It would appear to be a mistake to remove the protection at this point because it appears that you still do not understand the Wikipedia policies or if you do, it appears that you're unwilling to follow those policies. Regards, TallMagic ( talk) 05:26, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi Tallmagic, I do not wish to violate any wikipedia policies but at the same time consider it as a personal obligation that the information provided are true and factual and not concocted and untrue. Thank you for your attention. Ann —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.82.50.29 ( talk) 02:27, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi Tallmagic, I am glad that you are open to include certain references from ACU website which makes sense. Sorry again but what is currently posted is not the truth. For example history should trace the history and not something else which is not the case. Thank you Ann —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.51.10.204 ( talk) 09:17, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi Ann Burnett, your last attempt to edit the article was unacceptable. (It wasn't reverted by me.) Although I did notice an assertion in there that according to ACU, the university was established in 2004. I looked on the website and couldn't find where this assertion was supported. Please provide the link to the page that this information can be found and I'll add that information to the article. Thanks, TallMagic ( talk) 14:12, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
I have provided the link to the history of the acu establishment please leave it as it is and dont bother about 2004 as it is not listed in the website. Many thanks and hope we reach a consensus. Have a great weekend Ann —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.54.65.7 ( talk) 04:38, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi Tallmagic, You are persistently refusing whatever I put on the page. My postings are correct and do meet the wikipedia policies but I fail to understand why you do not give me a chance to correct the lies posted. Please stop wasting one another time and it is good for all of us that our organisation is truelly presented and not mis-presented as it is. Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.51.9.213 ( talk) 04:00, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi Tallmagic, From your submissions it would seem that Wikipedia is promoting slander and lies over its platform. Reliable sources about an organization are also its own website which is repeatedly ignored by you and other editors. I do hope we solve this conflict amicably and focus on more productive pursuits as proposed by you. Thank you. Ann W Burnett —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.82.49.246 ( talk) 08:01, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
Hello Tallmagic, We are repeating ourselves without reaching any conclusion. I have read the contents of wp:verifiable and all sources meet the criteria. My only concern is that Wikipedia should not be used to spread lies and slander against people and organizations.It is the misuse of the freedom of speech. Please unprotect the page so we can make the requisite changes. I do not want our hacker teams to do that. Thanks Ann
Hi Tallmagic, Please do not misunderstand me I do not say the current pages are true rather the one I provided which was not included were. When will you unprotect the page so changes are mad. THank you. Ann —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.54.67.15 ( talk) 03:43, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
At least three independent editors have reviewed the sources listed above and found them to not be reliable. Additionally, many editors have reviewed the sources in the article, especially the Casper Star Tribune article and found them to be reliable. Wikipedia is a private website, you have no right to free speech. If you legitimately believe that you are being libeled, please visit WP:LIBEL or contact the Wikimedia Foundation. Please do not make further claims of libel or slander on this page until you do so. Continued threats may result in removal of your editing privileges while the matter is investigated. CosmicPenguin ( Talk) 03:49, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
I have carefully reviewed yours as well as cosmicpenguin's views. You are not giving us any chance of commmunicating our point of views rather imposing your views on us. I am sure wikipedia must have conflict resolution policies. I am also amazed about the claims that wikipedia is not interested in the truth. If it is a platform for spreading lies then ethical hackers must deal with it accordingly. Most of the items in the article are wrong and misleading including the history, ownership etc. which needs removal and correction. I am still not losing hope about sane considerations on your end and amicably resolving our concersn. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.82.55.171 ( talk) 03:52, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
"Ethical hackers"? This is getting more and more bizarre! Why don't you actually do something about the problems with verifiability instead of blaming others? They are not spreading lies. Afterwriting ( talk) 09:36, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi Tallmagic, I did not keep quite just because what you say is right but you are stubbornly protecting lies and not including the sources which we provide. What is the use to communicate rather we must seek other means. We are unhappy with the lies about our organization on your website. Thanks Ann —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.82.55.15 ( talk) 05:00, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi Ann, I believe that your recent edit is very telling [1] and would seem to completely undercut all that you've previously claimed on this talk page. For future reference, the conjugation of lie is lie, lied, liars, lying. I do recognize that English is likely not your native language and this verb conjugation really makes little sense, so please don't interpret that as criticism in any way but actually a serious attempt to try and be helpful. I also must mention that you're once again speaking in generalities that are just too general to really be meaningful. May I respecfully suggest again that you try to find something more constructive to do with your time? Please stop trying to vandalize Wikipedia. Thank you, TallMagic ( talk) 05:17, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
The old link to ACU doesn't work. Piercetp put a link to a website for American Central University. This was reverted with a comment indicating that the working link was to an even more bogus diploma mill (not exact wording of edit comment). How do we know that it is not the new website? I think it is reasonable to assume that it is? Regards, TallMagic ( talk) 23:38, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Investigating the broken link to acusa.net, I checked up on other links too. The list of registered Wyoming institutions has been updated, and no longer includes ACU. I've not updated the page to reflect this yet because I've emailed the WY Dept of Education to check the facts on this before stating in the article that they are not registered; we already have a reference (in that the official list no longer includes them) but I'd like to double check, since they still have a business registration in WY; they may just have moved on to another state again. I'll update the article once I get a response. Bazzargh ( talk) 00:10, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Hello. I am finding myself repeatedly archiving links on this page. This usually happens when the archive doesn't recognize the archive to be good.
This could be because the link is either a redirect, or I am unknowingly archiving a dead link. Please check the following links to see if it's redirecting, or in anyway bad, and fix them, if possible.
In any event this will be the only notification in regards to these links, and I will discontinue my attempts to archive these pages.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 15:26, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
American Central University. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 15:27, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 4 external links on
American Central University. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked=
to true
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 07:55, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on American Central University. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 07:48, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on American Central University. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:19, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
American Central University article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
Please note that I have archived the contents of this page prior to June 2008, excepting the lengthy and ongoing exchange below. CosmicPenguin ( Talk) 03:29, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Good sir/madam, Welcome to Wikipedia. I thank you for your attempted improvements to Wikipedia. Please notice that your edits have been reverted because they do not follow Wikipedia policy. I respectfully suggest that you get better familar with Wikipedia policies, guidelines, and suggested practices. Perhaps a nice friendly place to start is WP:WELCOME. I think that you'll find that there are many friendly editors here on Wikipedia that will be happy to answer any specific questions that you might have. Regards, TallMagic ( talk) 02:48, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
Dear Sir/madam, The information listed on wikipedia are seditous and not correct. Our request to you will be to provide correct information about our university. Alternatively you may altogether remove our organisation from you list. Thank you Ann —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.82.52.77 ( talk) 04:39, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi Ann, I would like to welcome you to Wikipedia and suggest you may be interested in reading the WP:Welcome article. Thank you so much for your interest in Wikipedia and the accuracy of this article. It is very much appreciated. I also appreciate that you have chosen to share your valued opinion on this talk page. Regarding your above assertions, I believe that everything stated in the article has been properly sourced and is verifiable. I really would appreciate it though if you could point out specific statements that are not properly sourced. Or perhaps you may have some alternative sources that seem to contradict the sources referenced in the article? Such considerations are very important and are taken very seriously. I would also like to suggest that you review the Wikipedia conflict of interest policy. Regards, TallMagic ( talk) 14:27, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
I am not trying to acuse you but we as a general public also expect wikipedia to see alternative views from people who are affected by your articles. It is sad to see that some people are bent on spoiling the names of good schools. ACU is a new entity with good affiliates offering good services. A journalist whos views are only mired by his prejudices can not be used against ACU. History is replete with examples where some yellow journalists cooked up stories just to tarnish other's image. I would not give a damn to this journalist and shall continue pursuing my program with ACU. I do hope that you will correct the facts and do justice to the reputation of Wikipedia and ACU. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.54.65.14 ( talk) 01:54, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi Tallmagic, Whatever we provide you instantly reject and rely on biased views which is not fair. Instead may I request you to either accept the facts or altogether remove our organization from wikipedia so as to avoid misunderstanding for everyone. Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.82.48.48 ( talk) 08:02, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi Tallmagic, All the sources cited are verifiable and meet the wikipedia guidlines and as such may I once again request you to edit the page making it factual rather seditious. Once that is done I will be happy and will let it remain. Thank you for your considerations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.51.9.184 ( talk) 09:58, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
I have in greater details reviewed the wikie policies as pointed by you. You make absurd comments rather following the wikie policies about editing and revisions. Information about an organization must be quoted from its original sources and not seditious sources. How much do you know about organization? Is it more than me being the major owner? Why you are stubborn in not allowing genuine concerns being addressed? Please be open to valuable changes for which everyone should be thankful. Ann —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.100.192.52 ( talk) 08:16, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
You are assuming that I am a teen and assumption is not good. What we request you is to remove the pack of lies associated with your article about our organization. Could you please kindly allow us to publish true information and remove the pack of lies which may be our nemesis has posted on your esteemed website. Wikipedia being a community oriented entity deserve to display correct rather wrong information. Thank you-45years old Ann Burnett —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.51.9.187 ( talk) 04:08, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi TallMagic, Please unprotect the page so the information on the page is updated and the case closed as both of us need to be friends and focus our time on gainful pursuits rather conflicts. Thank you so much. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.51.11.19 ( talk) 09:31, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi Tallmagic, Please note that the history, the ownership and our association with other organization is wrong as such may I request you to unprotect the site. I make changes and we amicably retain it. It needs to be corrected and I apprecaite your support. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.82.52.50 ( talk) 03:20, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
How can I make the changes please advise so I do that. Thanks Ann —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.54.68.208 ( talk) 04:36, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi Ann Burnett, I believe I've been very clear on the proper method of editting Wikipedia articles. Please review the wp:five pillars article for general information. Note that this general information provides links into more specific information. I think a specific policy that your edits seem to violate is wp:verifiable. One other item that may or may not have been made clear to you is that I am but one of many Wikipedians that are working on this article over the past couple months. None of us will allow edits to add material that violates Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Also you won't be allowed to remove properly sourced material as you have tried to do in the past. The edits that you've attempted in the past appear to be vandalism. If I tried to make the same edits that you've done in the past then they too would be reverted by my fellow Wikipedians. When you find the wp:reliable sources that verify the information you'd like to see in the article then please post them here and I'll be happy to make the changes to the article or you can make the changes yourself when the article protection is removed. It would appear to be a mistake to remove the protection at this point because it appears that you still do not understand the Wikipedia policies or if you do, it appears that you're unwilling to follow those policies. Regards, TallMagic ( talk) 05:26, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi Tallmagic, I do not wish to violate any wikipedia policies but at the same time consider it as a personal obligation that the information provided are true and factual and not concocted and untrue. Thank you for your attention. Ann —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.82.50.29 ( talk) 02:27, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi Tallmagic, I am glad that you are open to include certain references from ACU website which makes sense. Sorry again but what is currently posted is not the truth. For example history should trace the history and not something else which is not the case. Thank you Ann —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.51.10.204 ( talk) 09:17, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi Ann Burnett, your last attempt to edit the article was unacceptable. (It wasn't reverted by me.) Although I did notice an assertion in there that according to ACU, the university was established in 2004. I looked on the website and couldn't find where this assertion was supported. Please provide the link to the page that this information can be found and I'll add that information to the article. Thanks, TallMagic ( talk) 14:12, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
I have provided the link to the history of the acu establishment please leave it as it is and dont bother about 2004 as it is not listed in the website. Many thanks and hope we reach a consensus. Have a great weekend Ann —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.54.65.7 ( talk) 04:38, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi Tallmagic, You are persistently refusing whatever I put on the page. My postings are correct and do meet the wikipedia policies but I fail to understand why you do not give me a chance to correct the lies posted. Please stop wasting one another time and it is good for all of us that our organisation is truelly presented and not mis-presented as it is. Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.51.9.213 ( talk) 04:00, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi Tallmagic, From your submissions it would seem that Wikipedia is promoting slander and lies over its platform. Reliable sources about an organization are also its own website which is repeatedly ignored by you and other editors. I do hope we solve this conflict amicably and focus on more productive pursuits as proposed by you. Thank you. Ann W Burnett —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.82.49.246 ( talk) 08:01, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
Hello Tallmagic, We are repeating ourselves without reaching any conclusion. I have read the contents of wp:verifiable and all sources meet the criteria. My only concern is that Wikipedia should not be used to spread lies and slander against people and organizations.It is the misuse of the freedom of speech. Please unprotect the page so we can make the requisite changes. I do not want our hacker teams to do that. Thanks Ann
Hi Tallmagic, Please do not misunderstand me I do not say the current pages are true rather the one I provided which was not included were. When will you unprotect the page so changes are mad. THank you. Ann —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.54.67.15 ( talk) 03:43, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
At least three independent editors have reviewed the sources listed above and found them to not be reliable. Additionally, many editors have reviewed the sources in the article, especially the Casper Star Tribune article and found them to be reliable. Wikipedia is a private website, you have no right to free speech. If you legitimately believe that you are being libeled, please visit WP:LIBEL or contact the Wikimedia Foundation. Please do not make further claims of libel or slander on this page until you do so. Continued threats may result in removal of your editing privileges while the matter is investigated. CosmicPenguin ( Talk) 03:49, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
I have carefully reviewed yours as well as cosmicpenguin's views. You are not giving us any chance of commmunicating our point of views rather imposing your views on us. I am sure wikipedia must have conflict resolution policies. I am also amazed about the claims that wikipedia is not interested in the truth. If it is a platform for spreading lies then ethical hackers must deal with it accordingly. Most of the items in the article are wrong and misleading including the history, ownership etc. which needs removal and correction. I am still not losing hope about sane considerations on your end and amicably resolving our concersn. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.82.55.171 ( talk) 03:52, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
"Ethical hackers"? This is getting more and more bizarre! Why don't you actually do something about the problems with verifiability instead of blaming others? They are not spreading lies. Afterwriting ( talk) 09:36, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi Tallmagic, I did not keep quite just because what you say is right but you are stubbornly protecting lies and not including the sources which we provide. What is the use to communicate rather we must seek other means. We are unhappy with the lies about our organization on your website. Thanks Ann —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.82.55.15 ( talk) 05:00, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi Ann, I believe that your recent edit is very telling [1] and would seem to completely undercut all that you've previously claimed on this talk page. For future reference, the conjugation of lie is lie, lied, liars, lying. I do recognize that English is likely not your native language and this verb conjugation really makes little sense, so please don't interpret that as criticism in any way but actually a serious attempt to try and be helpful. I also must mention that you're once again speaking in generalities that are just too general to really be meaningful. May I respecfully suggest again that you try to find something more constructive to do with your time? Please stop trying to vandalize Wikipedia. Thank you, TallMagic ( talk) 05:17, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
The old link to ACU doesn't work. Piercetp put a link to a website for American Central University. This was reverted with a comment indicating that the working link was to an even more bogus diploma mill (not exact wording of edit comment). How do we know that it is not the new website? I think it is reasonable to assume that it is? Regards, TallMagic ( talk) 23:38, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Investigating the broken link to acusa.net, I checked up on other links too. The list of registered Wyoming institutions has been updated, and no longer includes ACU. I've not updated the page to reflect this yet because I've emailed the WY Dept of Education to check the facts on this before stating in the article that they are not registered; we already have a reference (in that the official list no longer includes them) but I'd like to double check, since they still have a business registration in WY; they may just have moved on to another state again. I'll update the article once I get a response. Bazzargh ( talk) 00:10, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Hello. I am finding myself repeatedly archiving links on this page. This usually happens when the archive doesn't recognize the archive to be good.
This could be because the link is either a redirect, or I am unknowingly archiving a dead link. Please check the following links to see if it's redirecting, or in anyway bad, and fix them, if possible.
In any event this will be the only notification in regards to these links, and I will discontinue my attempts to archive these pages.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 15:26, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
American Central University. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 15:27, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 4 external links on
American Central University. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked=
to true
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 07:55, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on American Central University. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 07:48, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on American Central University. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:19, 18 September 2017 (UTC)