Talk:Kuwait College of Science and Technology

September 2017

The topic imparts information about a university in Kuwait which is engaged in imparting science and technology education to the citizens of Kuwait. This information is as pertinent as (for example) the following:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_University_of_Kuwait

None has flagged the above Wikipedia page (and numerous others, f.ex. American University of Middle East, Gulf University of Science and Technology, Australian College of Kuwait, etc.) for improvements. Please be specific in your comments before flagging and advice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drkvirk (talk • contribs) 02:35, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. The fact is this page has issues, you appear to have a COI, and continuing to remove these tags yourself will result in you being blocked from editing. Do not remove the maintenance templates again. Garchy (talk) 14:11, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Very interesting (I had already suspected that): "THIS USER IS A KNOWN TALK PAGE STALKER". I don't think, I would like to contribute again to Wikipedia. You can go ahead and bully others (by the way, you're free to delete this page). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drkvirk (talk • contribs) 18:49, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Award section

On 2019-02-03, I moved information about the EBA awards from the Campus section, where it did not belong, to its own Awards section, where it would hopefully be joined by other awards. At the same time, I cited two sources about the ceremony and awards, as well as two more about the nature of EBA. It's clear that it happened – there are several sources, including photo evidence.

On 2019-02-05, Dan9055, a recently created WP:SPA, removed the section and added uncited claims about an undescribed decree and WP:CRYSTAL speculation on qualifying for future accreditation, which I reverted on those grounds.

Hours later, a Kuwaiti IP reverts with the summary Reference to the awards was removed from all web and all university literature as it was honest response to invitation without any wrongdoing.. Re-checking my sources, KCST's linkedIn page has now removed the post regarding the award. The second source, archived here has now removed the lede picture of KCST's president with another awardee at the event. There are still others, though.

I get it. They fell for a vanity mill's offer to improve their profile, they're embarrassed about it, and want to remove all trace of it. Whether it was "honest" and without "wrongdoing" though? It's my understanding from coverage of EBA that they charge for their awards. IMO, the material (all two sentences of it) should remain. If coverage of how they fell for this scam and their honest response to it should appear in a WP:RS, then a cited sentence about that should follow.

Meanwhile, there is still the issue of the obvious WP:COI/WP:MEATPUPPET SPAs and IPs that have been warring over this article for years, including its creator Drkvirk, followed by Drmunir, and now Dan9055. The single-purpose IP User:80.164.111.52 was responsible for the inappropriate negative editorializing, some of which I also removed (in case there's any doubt as to my NPOV). Drkvirk also, at one point, blanked this talk page, removing the #September 2017 section I restored above.

What should be done here? —[AlanM1(talk)]— 05:58, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

While this is a content dispute, it has elements of multi-account abuse as well, as the last paragraph describes. Should I just bring this straight to WP:ANI (or somewhere else)? What should be done about the disputed content? —[AlanM1(talk)]— 17:58, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi AlanM1, the helpers for the "help me" template can't assist here. WP:ANI sounds like a good idea for this kind of problems, especially if it involves multiple issues that need to be dealt with administratively. Feel free to create the same report there, then remove it from here. Thank you very much in advance. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:37, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

I found this page from ANI. I'm sure admins will apply page protection and sort out the suspicious SPAs who have been editing this article. But as for the actual content dispute: seeing as how the award isn't really notable and hasn't sufficient media coverage, we shouldn't mention it. As a side note, the commentary on the EBA in this version might be seen as WP:SYNTH since none of the cited sources explicitly mention this university. Elspamo4 (talk) 04:45, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the input. The first source cited, their linkedIn page, did specifically boast about their having received it (which is what I used to write about it), until they took it down. Part of it can still be seen in the Google search showing their page at the linkedIn country-specific sites. The WP:PRIMARY nature of it seems to be a problem when it's used as a positive, but when the statements are against the interest of the subject? Notability of the award seemed to be established by its fraudulent nature – there's significant coverage of the EBA's practices. Anyway, that was my reasoning. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 07:53, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Technically the award itself is notable for its fraudulence, but as you touch on in ANI, in the context of this university winning the award, it seems WP:UNDUE. I couldn't find any news articles that mention the university winning this award aside from the LinkedIn profile and a lone picture of Al-Beghain on a Ghanaian news outlet. As for EBA's practices, yes they are well documented, I've read the last two sources you provided in the article. However they don't mention this university in particular. It seems contentious to throw in a comment regarding the EBA's past fraudulence when for all we know, this particular award could be entirely legit. As Wikipedia editors we're not exactly qualified to draw conclusions like this, in spite of how obvious it may seem. That's my interpretation anyway, hopefully someone who is more knowledgeable about policy can chime in. Elspamo4 (talk) 08:27, 8 February 2019 (UTC)