Talk:Trump University

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Trump University Spam

I've moved this from the article - the newspaper source doesn't support most of the claims made (and google groups & google search are not suitable sources). However, if it can be properly sourced it should be put back in the article. --Singkong2005 · talk 13:52, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

==Trump University Spam==

Trump University has been controversial as a confirmed source of spam. Trump University routinely denies the allegation. The spam, which originates from servers in Provo, Utah, include offers for pet medications, diet pills, software, loans, photo contests, and mortgage applications. [1] [2] [3]

Some spammers have been reported to have yearly earnings in the tens of millions of dollars.

I have to disagree - the newspaper source does confirm them as a source of spam.

It defines them as spam in a loose and inaccurate or irregular sense (it seems the author is on their list and gets excessive promo email - not offers for body part enlargement etc); most of the allegations are not supported in the newspaper article. I've also responded on your talk page. --Singkong2005 · talk 00:02, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

And instead of deleting the section, rules state ythat you should ask for additional cites, correct? --Corwin8 17:00, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Actually, allegations without appropriate sources should be removed... Wikipedia:Citing sources says:

If it is doubtful and harmful, you should remove it from the article; you may want to move it to the talk page and ask for a source, unless you regard it is as very harmful or absurd, in which case it shouldn't be posted to a talk page either. Use your common sense.

I see you've added a citation - I'm still not happy about the section, and would like to see it more carefully written... partly because I actually would like to see it done well enough to stay in the article and bring attention to their (apparently) bad behavior. But with that citation, I won't remove it or edit it just now. Please add other sources if you're able and consider moderating some of the language. --Singkong2005 · talk 00:23, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV

Keep NPOV in mind. The spamming "rumors" shouldn't be highlighted as the only thing in the article with it's own subsection! --ElectricEye (talk) 19:23, 8 January 2007 (UTC)