Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:22, 12 April 2007

California Unassessed

This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Template:SFBAProject

Academy of Art University received a peer review by Misplaced Pages editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Added Student Newspaper/Website to Controversy

I was the creator and one of the 6 students that ran the paper and site for 3 years, and I added the section. It is probably too much, so feel free.User:Jdylan|James Dylan]] 19:05, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Please note that Misplaced Pages is not a soapbox or a place to present or debate grievances or the reputations of living persons and organizations. See Misplaced Pages: Neutral Point of View and Misplaced Pages:What Misplaced Pages is not. lwalt 23:29, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, I didn't write that section as a grievance nor intend it to be a soapbox. I wrote about a group of students that revolted against the admin and started a website and paper against the admin and wrote about their issues. Just out of curiosity, I noticed that you take an exceptional interest in the AAC entry here on wikipedia, and am just wondering why? What is your connection to the school?James Dylan 23:40, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Although you've heavily edited your addition, still need verifiable references for material that you've added. As you can see, the previous info in the controversy has been well-sourced. For help, please refer to the Misplaced Pages sections that were provided to you earlier. And no...not associated with the Academy of Art University. I take lots of interest in many things (By the way, I'm also a major editor of the James Brown article, but I'm not related to him, to answer your concern about interest or participation in writing/editing articles). I'm a professional editor by trade, and I participate in writing/editing Misplaced Pages articles as a editor on a volunteer basis only.lwalt 23:59, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

I am working on as many as I can, but I have a question. I wrote that the school doesn't have a student body, and I know they don't, but does that mean I can't write it? The school is a private business and doesn't want one, and they are not obligated to have one. I am sure that every single thing I write doesn't have to be "proven", as I wouldn't be able to write anything! I created the underground paper and website, but took them down in 2002 when I graduated, but how am I supposed to "prove" it with a verifiable source? If this is the case with everything, nothing would get written. yes, the school has a bad reputation among prior students and in the art industry, but how can you prove that? It is almost common knowledge. I am not trying to be a jerk, but there is A LOT of negative news and feelings about the school and resentment amongst ex-students that is important to be put on this page as it is part of the school. I am past it all, but want future student or those looking around, to have the info.James Dylan 01:27, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

I understand...your contribution is POV and subject to removal by any editor as I've mentioned, since others might deem your contribution to be sensational, questionable or exhibit apparent bias. Misplaced Pages is not a soapbox, blog, news reporting source or place to promote personal essays and advance an advocacy for a particular point of view. Some of the information that you've included have been removed previously by another editor as having dubious value within the realm of an encyclopedic article (see the "A bit of a puff piece" section below for this discussion). The information has to be in perspective to events related directly to the school (your contribution refers to an off-campus activity, which suggests that the activity was indirectly related to the school as a consequence of attendance at the school by you and other former students). Most importantly, the information must be verifiable through an independent public, non-promotional source, especially if the content is controversial. These are Misplaced Pages's guidelines...its rules govern what's permissible for this online encyclopedia. As you've noticed, the material in the Controversies section is well-sourced through independent sources. In spite of that, I've already received feedback in a previous peer review that the article is already imbalanced...that is, little information is given for the university's side of the argument. Therefore, I plan to "neutralize" the article at a future date to further remove POV and evident bias, as suggested by feedback from the Misplaced Pages peer review. So, yes...if you allege it, then you're required to back up the assertions through credible, public, non-promotional sources. Otherwise, it's subject to removal by any editor.

As for your concerns, see Misplaced Pages: Citing Sources, Misplaced Pages: Reliable Sources, Misplaced Pages: Attribution and Misplaced Pages: Neutral Point of View. You can also consult with a Misplaced Pages administrator for clarification and further assistance about issues raised in your replies. Hope this helps. lwalt 04:27, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I understand. I maintain a website, and I plan to put back up the "student issues" pages that I ran before, but I will clean it up and modernize it and make it more presentable, but all the emails sent to me will be posted, and my entire experience will be on it, and I will put a link to it at the bottom of the AAC page. I'm sure you or Wiki Admin won't have an issue with that. I also have or saved several articles from credible newspapers in SF that are critical of the school and I don't see those links listed below, and I plan to add them. Also, I read your previous post about your interest in AAC, but it puzzles me as to..why? If you are not associated to the school, never attended it and are not related to Stephens, then why do you have such an interest in maintaining such attention to detail such as the accreditation status, application for, etc. You don't even have a Wiki user page. Sorry to be paranoid, but I don't trust it's president to not hire somebody to tediously maintain the AAC page to make sure nothing (too) negative is posted, seeing as how the school generates over $100 million a year for her. It just seems like there are too many (negative) issues with AAC for them not to be listed in Misplaced Pages. I also plan to work on the "controversies" page with credible sources.James Dylan 06:58, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

I am going to offer an unsolicited third opinion on this subject, because it seems one is needed. James Dylan, several lines of thought in which you seem to be indulging -- particularly in implying that a member of the editorial community, who strives to help the Misplaced Pages project by bringing a controversy-laden article into line with Misplaced Pages's accepted guidelines, must somehow be in league with whichever "side" of the controversy s/he makes "look better" -- strike me as being exceptionally paranoid. One of Misplaced Pages's core tenets is to assume good faith, and you seem to be doing the opposite.

This page has been "subverted" suspiciously before (it was actually lwalt's work that was erased in this instance), and it definitely bears watching for vandalism and other violations of Misplaced Pages policy. However -- Misplaced Pages is not a forum. It is not an extention of Consumer Reports or the Better Business Bureau. It is an encyclopedia, and it needs to keep as neutral and objective a viewpoint toward its subjects as it can. By loading the article with controversy and bad noise, one takes the article just as out-of-balance as somebody who, as in the above-referenced edit, blanks the page and inserts AAU marketing copy. Please familiarize yourself with what, exactly, Misplaced Pages is (start with what Misplaced Pages is not) and don't be so suspicious of good-faith editing or editors. We're just trying to make the encyclopedia better, one edit at a time. We welcome your input; we just wish you'd trust ours. --Dynaflow 07:49, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

RESPONSE TO JDylan - Information that is POV will be removed from the article as failing to follow the Misplaced Pages NPOV (Neutral Point of View) guidelines. In certain cases, inclusion of this material against Misplaced Pages policies might be viewed by some editors as vandalism.

As for inclusion of info about "student issues" pages that you manage or were managing -- an activity not sponsored by the subject university, along with inclusion of information about your personal experience with the school, links to other unrelated information such as email messages, the Misplaced Pages administration will likely view your actions as violation of its policies. From all appearances, you imply that you plan to use Misplaced Pages articles as a personal platform to present yours and other's negative experiences with the school. This activity is considered advocacy, which is definitely not a neutral point of view and certainly inappropriate in the encyclopedia context.

Again...'Misplaced Pages is an online encyclopedia.' As I have and now another editor have already mentioned to you, Misplaced Pages is not an avenue for venting, staging personal attacks, a forum for discussing or debating personal grievances or issues, nor is Misplaced Pages a soapbox, a blog, a linkserve used for disseminating news, a newspaper, your diary or journal, personal web site or personal platform for advocating a particular point of view. Misplaced Pages is also not an extension of Consumer Reports or the Better Business Bureau. In addition, using the Talk page for these same purposes would also violate Misplaced Pages's guidelines. Talk pages are to be used for conducting discussions about improving articles. Improving this article does not include advocating your personal point of view based on your personal experience for an event held off campus that was not sponsored or directed by the subject university. You have already stated that you had created the web site that will become the subject of the section, which means that you are using Misplaced Pages articles as your personal web page to disseminate information related to your (and others) personal experience.

I strongly recommend that you refer to Misplaced Pages: Citing Sources, Misplaced Pages: Reliable Sources, Misplaced Pages: Attribution and Misplaced Pages: Neutral Point of View or consult with a Misplaced Pages administrator for clarification and further assistance. lwalt 20:33, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

One question, guys, I saw that under the Accreditation title, lwalt changed my comment about the AAU lacking WASC accreditation. He changed it back to "AAU has applied for" it. AAU has been applying for and has been declined accreditation since I first attended 10 years ago, which is a reason some schools won't accept transfer credits from them (which I found out the hard way). This is why I feel lwalt is a hack for AAU. They won't get approved because they would need to have full-time instructors, which AAU does not have. Lwalt is sugarcoating it to make it look like they have applied and will get it, but that has been going on for who knows how long, at least since 97. You guys don't feel this is noteworthy? Also, how do you know all this, lwalt? Also, how do you know all the minute details about their application status? I tried to find this out too, but couldn't. I also couldn't see why lwalt deleted my comment on the school revenue in the intro, I didn't see that as controversial or one-sided. Thanks. James Dylan 20:38, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

James Dylan, Please DO NOT remove other editors' contributions from discussion pages. That is considered vandalism and is also perceived as intellectually dishonest. Also, talk of "hacks" constitutes a violation of Misplaced Pages's policy against personal attacks. I have restored the last version of this page saved by lwalt and pasted in your latest response (above). This version necessarily includes both contributions of lwalt's and of your own which you redacted. --Dynaflow 21:12, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I was just removing lines I put in, repetitive, etc., no vandalism intended. I didn't think removing comments form the discussion page was bad, as lwalt already wrote me to not use this page for discussion. I will leave it alone.James Dylan 21:32, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Now that that's taken care of... James Dylan is correct, I think, in wanting to add AAU's difficulties in getting WASC accreditation to the article. That has been AAU's major albatross for at least as long as I've been in the Bay Area and have been aware of its existence. Not including it would be like doing an article on Bill Clinton without mentioning Whitewater, and I think it can be mentioned without this article degenerating from an encyclopedia article into a smear piece. If possible, whatever information we use (and cite!) should come from WASC itself, rather than questionable (in the literal sense, not the pejorative) secondary sources, in order to avoid venturing too close to the frontiers of Libel Land. We should also make sure that it does not become the obsessive focus of the article, but retains its proper station in the article. --Dynaflow 21:43, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for putting up with me, I AM a little new here and learning boundries. I will back off and just observe for now and discuss first without making changes.

Copyvio discussion

Sorry, I did not see that the copyright was on the meta tag. (Unsigned by User:Amorrow).

A replacement article for a copyvio text should be written on a temp page. Anyway, what is there now is still copyvio from . There is nothing in the old article that can be used, as it is all copied from the webpage of the university, and it all has to be rewritten in the temp page. Please restore the copyvio message now. I'll put the template here for the time being. It can then be moved to the temp page. Uppland 29 June 2005 06:28 (UTC)

Yes. Sorry. I have not done institutions before, just people. I tried to use the content from my old alma mater, RPI as a model. I will try harder. I did do some work: I have visit the Academy and took their campus tour and stuff, so I am trying hard to get up to speed on it. I really have to wonder if the Academy has a motto. I will contact the Admissions dept. and find out... Amorrow 29 June 2005 23:16 (UTC)

Sorry, I was unclear before. When there is a copyvio, one is supposed to restart the article at a temporary page, like this: Academy of Art University/temp. Later, when the copyvio version is deleted, the new article will be moved into place at the proper title. That way one avoids having copyrighted text in the beginning of the history of the article. Uppland 1 July 2005 03:53 (UTC)

A bit of a puff piece

This is a frankly bizarre list of issues - almost non of which are true. This school, like any other, has it's weaknesses, but 'reputation' and 'placement rate' really are not amongst them. The standard of teaching is quite phenominal, and facilities second to only a few (far more expensive) private art schools in the US.

Some of this sounds like Academy of Art marketing material. They actually have a terrible reputation (a terrible repuation with who?) . The claim: "the Academy of Art University boasts a high job placement rating upon graduation, with 80% of graduates finding employment in fields related to their majors" needs a cite, preferably from some source other than Academy of Art.

The + 80% placement rate is a figure audited every year for their accreditation. If you would like a site - I'm sure Academy of Art University would be happy to provide one.

I went ahead and deleted that section. I considered changing it to read "the Academy claims a high job placement rating" but couldn't find an obvious source for that, even. If anybody would like to add it back, feel free but please provide a source for the 80% figure, which seems fairly dubious for any art school. -- thither 09:56, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

The link to Elisa Stephens saying the school has an 80% to 100% placement is here - ]

Despite their claim to be a "university", Academy of Art is accredited more like a trade school. Compare with .

The Academy of Art University is a for-profit college (like a trade school, but they are accredited). This means, among other things, that students are not protected under Educational Law, but only under Consumer Law. Potential students should consider this carefully.

Again, bizarre posting - this school has nothing to do with Academy of Art University.

-- Also see this article about their business model, this article about issues with firing faculty, and this ] article about the profits they make from student housing].--Larrybob 19:32, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Extensive Revisions for the Content

Not the original author, but decided to clean up and revise content of article to "neutralize" the some of negative bias (in the External links section, most of the links referred to news stories and editorials about same event rather than new information about the school, so I used some of those as references and removed others that duplicate what has been already cited). I've also added sections for some of the content to improve readability (can't find anything on the page if it's a "sea of gray," making the page hard to read) added citations for much of the information mentioned in the article's article original version, and added notes where citations are needed, especially. if I could not find information to substantiate those claims. Finally, I added a Trivia section, and moved one of the links from the External links section to that area. The article should now reflect a bit more balance between information about the school's good and bad points. Hopefully, this article is and will remain in good form for the most part and that its current format is acceptable to everyone. lwalt 23:53, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

FOLLOW-UP....

Did a few more things to correct some things in the article (e.g., correct formats of citations, remove duplicate reference), clarify areas (distinguished accredited programs), and so on. Also, corrected the name of the organization that Rushdie was affiliated with from "PEN Faulkner Association" to "PEN American Center" (source: http://penusa.org/go/news/comments/campaign-for-reader-privacy-voice-of-america-press-conference). Thanks to the previous editor who helped improve the article! lwalt 17:29, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Article content was heavily redacted during Illustrator12's edits between 19-21 March 2007. Specifically, ALL negative information was pared away, and what was left sounded as if it was written by a PR firm or marketing department. Illustrator12's only contributions to Misplaced Pages have been those edits of this page.

Without accusing AAU of being responsible for the suspicious edit, I will say that using a Misplaced Pages page as a brochure or erasing someone else's work in order to bring one's Misplaced Pages page more into line with one's marketing strategy is dishonest and reproachful. I have reverted the page to lwalt's last edit and sent Illustrator12 a warning on deleting material. Dynaflow 06:38, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

• Unassessed California articles
• Unknown-importance California articles
• WikiProject California articles
• Old requests for peer review