Shivayves

You have undone my revision because of promotional talk?! Well, your article is highly tendentious, an encyclopedia (no matter if printed or online) is not for the promotion of personal opinions. For example, you wirte that the university is not among the universities accredited by the Sistema Nacional de Acreditación de la Educación Superior (SINAES). You do however omit that only 19 of the more than 100 state approved and authorized universities are accredited by SINAES and that this accreditation is completely voluntary. Also, you mention it is, for example, not among the five hundred top universities world-wide in the Times Higher Education World University Rankings. Well, this is true for the vast majority of universities across the world. At the same time, you withhold the information that it is listed in the world's leading handbook of approved universities, the International Handbook of Universities, published by the International Association of Universities and UNESCO. It seems that you are rather interested in calumny than in reliable and balanced information. I should add here that I have no connection to the university at all, however I find and found it inappropriate and disgraceful that you misuse Wikipedia to spread your personal disparagements rather than providing information according to accepted standards. Shivayves (talk) 12:58, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

I was about to undo your edit but I see someone beat me to it. My rationale is that it was a copyright violation, the material is largely copied from this site. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. You cannot simply copy nor even closely paraphrase material; it must be written in your own words.--S Philbrick(Talk) 13:35, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

I had provided the source you mention as a reference for the paragraph in question, however I can accept that in addition it needs to have quotation marks. Nonetheless it seems that the missing quotation marks are not the problem here but rather what was called "promotional talk". The Wikipedia guidelines say that "All encyclopedic content on Wikipedia must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), which means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all of the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic. NPOV is a fundamental principle of Wikipedia and of other Wikimedia projects." I think that this article does not at all follow the NPOV principle. This is a university which is fully approved by the governmental authorities in Costa Rica and authorized to award undergraduate and master's degrees in business administration. It is also listed in the International Handbook of Universities, the major authoritative source of reliable information on duly approved institutions of higher education. Both facts are not really made clear and the article is in general very tendentious. So, if you think the quotation was the problem, why was the paragraph on the International Handbook of Universities listing removed then? To me this article is clearly a bad example of editorial bias. The author might not like the fact that this is a fully approved university but this is a fact. Shivayves (talk) 15:41, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

August 2016

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for making legal threats or taking legal action. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

You are not allowed to edit Wikipedia while the threats stand or the legal action is unresolved.  Bbb23 (talk) 19:31, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Bbb23 (talk) 19:55, 13 August 2016 (UTC)