Talk:Shaqra University

Content Removal

My edits are being removed and the reason given is "unreliable sources". How are references to mostly published peer reviewed articles, newspapers, media websites unreliable?

Many thanks Fahadotaibi (talk) 03:57, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

what is equally confusing is some of the research cited are articles authored by researchers affilated with Shaqra University. These scholars conducted research and reached conclusions based on a credible process of data collection. Fahadotaibi (talk) 06:41, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

You should strive to edit in good faith. You have added too many controversies and allegations that are not relevant and reliable. You need to review WP:NPOV. Also, no original research is permitted. Please check WP:SOURCE to understand reliable sources. Arbitorya (talk) 13:01, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

You gave a source for the numbers of staff and faculty but you know the document doesnt contain any numbers. If you want to remove what you call allegations and controversies from wiki page and turn it into a PR page, go ahead and remove them. All my reliable sources exists on the web. We local community know the reality of the sitation and this is what matters. Fahadotaibi (talk) 13:12, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

We respect your opinion. However, Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought and Wikipedia is not an anarchy or a forum for free speech, please WP:NOTANARCHY and WP:FORUM. Arbitorya (talk) 13:27, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

I respect your edits and havent deleted anything. I only added a counter evidence.

You have even deleted edits of editors before me that was four years old.

You have deleted a whole section on controversay. All my edits were supported with reliable sources. Your edits mostly link to the University Website. Any minor negative section was deleted.

All links to media websites, notices of retraction, published peer-reviewed articles were deleted.

Wikipedia isnt a PR page either. I think other editors need to look into this and revert any removal of content that is vandalism. Thanks. Fahadotaibi (talk) 18:42, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Once again, I’ve reviewed your sources and explained how they violate Wikipedia’s policies in the Talk:Shaqra University#Unsubentianted Claims and wrong information. Do not combine multiple sources to draw or imply a conclusion that is not explicitly stated in any of them. Similarly, avoid piecing together different parts of a single source to suggest a conclusion that the source itself does not clearly make, as outlined in WP:SYNTH. Before adding or editing the article, let us discuss your edits here in the talk page.

Thank you. Arbitorya (talk) 17:20, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Dont delete anything then before we reach an agreement. If you are really working in good faith, stop deleting for now and I am willing to hear your criticism in good faith. However, if you keep deleting content and ignoring my attempts to reach out via the talk page, I will keep adding the same content again. Fahadotaibi (talk) 20:56, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

let's start with the Accredition page. Why do you delete my edits concernig the fact that only three or four programs are nationally accredited. Why do you delete this fact? What is wrong with it? Why claim that the university offer "programs" when it is actually one program? Fahadotaibi (talk) 20:59, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Fahadotaibi

The source you provided in the Accreditation section does not specify that only three degrees are nationally accredited. This violates Wikipedia's policy on original research Wikipedia:No original research. My own search suggests that other programs, such as computer science [1] and clinical laboratory [2]., also hold accreditation. Without reliable sources explicitly confirming the number of accredited degrees, this statement cannot be included. I have mentioned this in my response in this section Talk:Shaqra University#Unsubentianted Claims and wrong information Arbitorya (talk) 22:01, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Here is your edits:

((Only three degrees offered by the university are currently nationally accredited, including undergraduate programs in Electrical Enginerring (full accredition), Medicine and Nursing (conditional accredition). ))

We can change it to:

The currently accredited degrees by the NCAAA include undergraduate programs in Electrical Engineering (full accreditation), Medicine, Computer science, Nursing (conditional accreditation). and your citations? Arbitorya (talk) 22:15, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

ok why not add these information as well? Have I deleted them? Why not include these other programs instead of deleting my whole edits. You arent working in good faith when you only delete edits without reaching an agreement or adding the sources you have and updating the information. Fahadotaibi (talk) 22:18, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

In simple terms, Wikipedia’s policy discourages adding harmful or negative content without prior consensus. I’m not introducing anything controversial. If we agree on my suggestions, we can move forward with adding them. Arbitorya (talk) 22:29, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

This is a reliable citation: https://ncaaa.org.sa/paccrediation Fahadotaibi (talk) 22:29, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

No it is not, it is not updated and doesn't does not specify exactly that only three degrees are nationally accredited. This violates Wikipedia's policy on original research Wikipedia:No original research. Arbitorya (talk) 22:40, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

If you have read the sources I have included, both in Arabic and English, you will know that the conclusions are drawn from there. Not me. I do not think you can read Arabic, can you? Fahadotaibi (talk) 21:01, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Also, if you are working in good faith, stop deleting my edits and the editors before me. I have not deleted any content you added, even though you lack credible sources at times. The page can have positive and negative information, but you seem so determined to include only edits that are seen in a PR copyedit. This raises many concerns. Fahadotaibi (talk) 21:06, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

You also keep deleting my counter evidence. This is your claim:"While geographic distribution enhances the university's accessibility and impact, serving a wide array of communities throughout the region"

You have not visited the region or even lived in the region. When add reliable sources from newspapers and media websites covering the community. You delete them. Can you please explain?

You say you are working in good faith, stop deleting content and engage in the talk page first. Fahadotaibi (talk) 21:18, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

OK, I deleted this claim although it has reliable source. Again your edits violate Wikipedia’s policies in the Talk:Shaqra University#Unsubentianted Claims and wrong information. Arbitorya (talk) 21:56, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

I wonder if you are paid to do content writing? Because you edits are clearly biased. And i will vidit the page daily to revert back my edits. You arent working in good faith because you have just deleted my edits for the tenth time. I will stop engaging with you delete my edits AGAIN Fahadotaibi (talk) 22:32, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Let's talk about the Research section. This is a wikipedia page and NOT a marketing page for the university. You would like to include information about the different programs, that's find. Add sources to "research groups" and "journals" please.

But do not delete sections referring to research conducted in and by Shaqra staff. Dont delete my edits referring to notices of retractions, predatory publishing practices or research support, please.

You are biased and it is clear. Please, refrain from deleting my edits. Fahadotaibi (talk) 22:40, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

The quality of some of the research published by affiliated faculty has also been under scrutiny in the scholarly literature, raising the important issue of the pressure to publish in higher academia.

The source has not been explicitly and clearly mentioned your claimed. This is your interpretation of the study. Therefore, we reiterate: do not conduct new research based on your online searches. Adhere strictly to Wikipedia’s No Original Research policy Wikipedia:No original research . This same issue applies to other sources you’ve added. I could continue to point out flaws in each source you’ve provided, but the pattern is clear. Again, I have mentioned this in my response in this section Talk:Shaqra University#Unsubentianted Claims and wrong information Arbitorya

Arbitorya (talk) 22:45, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Unsubentianted Claims and wrong information

You have included this claim but your citation is to the homepage of the university. How is this a reliable source?

"The university’s geographic distribution enhances its accessibility and impact, allowing it to serve a wide array of communities throughout the region"

When I added media stories of local communities complaining about accessibility and being served. You deleted them all. Fahadotaibi (talk) 18:45, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

with accrediation section, you deleted my edits that was meant to give accurate information, including the fact that only three or four programs in the university are accredited. You have deleted the fact that aftet 14 years, the University has just received accredition. Fahadotaibi (talk) 18:49, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

I am not sure if you read Arabic, but the document you included for the count of staff is actually a policy document. It contains no numbers at all.

"The university currently enrolls 28,112 students. The total number of faculty members and equivalent positions is 1,337. The university also has an administrative workforce comprising 987 employees." Fahadotaibi (talk) 18:51, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Finally, I respect any positive edits you have made and I think they should never be deleted for a balanced view but with the research section, you deleted all citations to peer reviewed articles, notices of retractions from academic journal websites and only added links to media stories and to the university website itself and its documents.

"These programs seek to foster a thriving research environment within the university and support academics in achieving outstanding scientific accomplishments. The university has several periodic refereed scientific journals, and research groups." Fahadotaibi (talk) 18:57, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Dear @Fahadotaibi,

I’ve noticed that you’ve made numerous edits, including reverting existing content without prior discussion or consensus. Additionally, you've created multiple topics on the talk page. I strongly urge you to review Wikipedia's policies, particularly WP:NPOV and WP:SOURCE. It’s essential to ensure that all contributions are well-sourced and adhere to Wikipedia's guidelines on reliability. Please revisit WP:SOURCE to better understand what constitutes a reliable source.

Your recent edits include weak and unrelated sources, which do not meet Wikipedia's standards. WP:DISRUPTIVE editing hampers the collaborative process. Below are examples of problematic contributions:

((While geographic distribution enhances the university's accessibility and impact, serving a wide array of communities throughout the region, it has also put a strain on resources. This prompted the university to undergo a re-structuring process. Such re-structuring plans and closure of branches caused communities in the region to feel harmed as rural youth in the region are deined educational opportunities. ))

The cited sources are not aligned with the claim. Source does not state that resource strain prompted the university's restructuring. Instead, it mentions the university’s goal to alleviate pressure on Riyadh's institutions, not due to its own resource constraints. This misinterpretation violates WP:STICKTOTHESOURCE.

Furthermore, the news outlet cited as is not a reliable source. The source explicitly states that the university denies the allegations, which contradicts your claim. Per WP:VERIFYOR, unverifiable information should not be included.

Now let us take another example of your edit:

((Only three degrees offered by the university are currently nationally accredited, including undergraduate programs in Electrical Enginerring (full accredition), Medicine and Nursing (conditional accredition). ))

The source you provided does not specify that only three degrees are nationally accredited. This violates Wikipedia's policy on original research Wikipedia:No original research. My own search suggests that other programs, such as computer science [3] and clinical laboratory [4]., also hold accreditation. Without reliable sources explicitly confirming the number of accredited degrees, this statement cannot be included.

Now, let’s move on to the Criticism of Research section that you created., you violates Wikipedia's policy on original research Wikipedia:No original research.

The quality of some of the research published by affiliated faculty has also been under scrutiny in the scholarly literature, raising the important issue of the pressure to publish in higher academia.

The source has not been explicitly and clearly mentioned your claimed. This is your interpretation of the study. Therefore, we reiterate: do not conduct new research based on your online searches. Adhere strictly to Wikipedia’s No Original Research policy Wikipedia:No original research . This same issue applies to other sources you’ve added. I could continue to point out flaws in each source you’ve provided, but the pattern is clear.

To improve collaboration and uphold Wikipedia’s standards, please follow these guidelines:

• Ensure every claim is backed by a reliable and relevant source.
• Avoid original research or misrepresenting sources to fit a narrative.
• Use the talk page to discuss significant edits before implementing them.

Let’s work together to enhance the article in line with Wikipedia’s policies. Arbitorya (talk) 16:30, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Kindly remainder

to those trying to delete controversy section and any news stories seen as "allegations". You can present counter evidence, but continuing on this path of removing content might backfire and more people might want to come and read what is being deleted. I urge you to stop. Fahadotaibi (talk) 13:42, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

There’s no need to open a new section on the talk page. We can address your concerns and reach a consensus within the existing above sections. Thank you Arbitorya (talk) 16:33, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

What gets deleted? (What they dont want you to read)

The following sections:

Women & gender, Controversies, Criticism of research

Women and Gender

Female Students

Alleged cases of Abuse

News of an alleged harassment case of female students at the university was reported in local media. A report stated that a bus driver contracted with the university was leaving underwear garments in the bus before students got onto the bus for their daily commute. An investigation was launched to verify students' claims. Female students have also reported issues of overcrowding on university buses, which presented a major safety issue. Another alleged case of abuse was reported by medical female students who took issue with the college building. As per Shaqra Newspaper, the dilapidated building was infested with mice and lizards. Further, it was in a bad condition with a collapsed roof.

Discrimination of Women with Disabilities

A recent study reported that female students with disabilities were denied opportunities due to their visual impairment.

Female Academics

Recent research has shed light on the experience of women in the workplace at Shaqra University. A study employing quantitative and qualtitative approaches has reported that female leaders in adiminstrative positions within the university faced challanges as decision-makers, including feeling disempowered to solve problems as they had risen. This has also been proved and substantiated in similar published studies focusing on the limited roles of female academics in the decision-making process in Saudi universities due to gender segregation and the exclusion of women.

Another study has also highlighted the obstacles female academics in nursing faced as researchers. Specifically, female academics in nursing reported instituational barriers, unavailalibity of databases and feeling under-valued.

Controversies

Since its founding, the university main controversies revolved around two issues: student satisfaction, and recruitment of staff and faculty

Students' Experience & Satisfaction

In the past ten years, Shaqra University has received negative media coverage and backlash on social media in regard to its low levels of satisfaction among students.  

The most recent controversy happened in 2018 during an "open meeting" between the rector, Awad Al-asmary and a group of medical students. In the meeting, a medical student expressed his concern about the absence of Saudi nationals from the teaching staff body. In response, the rector accused the student of racism against non-Saudi academics in the university. The video, which was circulated widely on social media, caused  a major backlash.

The video recording of this meeting went viral and spurred the publication of op-ed pieces tackling the absence of professors of Saudi nationality.

In 2020, students have also complained about the size of the classes as the university put classes caps at 90 students.

Faculty Recruitment and Alleged Cases of Nepotism

In terms of controversies related to its recruitment of staff, such issues have been reported by several local news outlets.

On several occasions, unqualified staff has been allegedly appointed because of their "connections" with high level officials. In 2015, Sabq, a Saudi news website, reported that an unqualified member of staff has been appointed based on the "recommendations" of a member of the Saudi Shura. Fahadotaibi (talk) 11:24, 17 November 2024 (UTC)