Talk:Ilian Mihov

=Critics section=

Untitled
Several problems with this. The sources are not sources. The source that actually shows that there was acknowledgment by one staff member that there was perhaps something amiss, appears to be just a reply to an internal form. That's not a source. What we are looking for is media coverage of something negative about this persons actions. See WP:RS and WP:UNDUE, among others. The sources need to be especially strong as this is a WP:BLP. If this person has not been covered in some sort of academic journal, media publication, new broadcast, etc, for this thing that is being written about here, then there is no reason for this section to be present. Beach drifter (talk) 01:13, 27 November 2019 (UTC)


 * I have looked at the sources, translated to English. Again, while they show that this event happened, they do not say why it is critical, or how it has received notable or noteworthy criticism, or anything like that. Beach drifter (talk) 18:29, 27 November 2019 (UTC)


 * I have also removed the section for the reasons stated by above. It appears to be mostly original research that has been synthesized together, and I am not sure that the sources mention the article subject in any significant way that would make this information due. – wallyfromdilbert (talk) 18:47, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
 * The editor U:Dazhong Gao, who wrote this section, sought help in #wikipedia-zh-help several days ago. So I took some efforts to review the sources then. I want to make it clear:
 * The so-called educational institute "北京北大后工商管理促进会" (literally translated into: "Beijing PKU Post EMBA Association"), "北大后E促进会" (literally translated into: "PKU Post E Association"), "HOUYI Institute of Advanced Education", “HOUYI Institute of Advanced Education”, “Beijing Post EMBA Alumni Association” is obviously a diploma mill promoting themself to be officially backed by the Peking University & INSEAD and sharing faculty with PKU1.
 * PKU officially states that the so-called institute has nothing to do with them at all and "the promotional materials on faculties related to Peking University have never been authorized by Peking University"2.
 * There are investigations and critics by media on the whole thing.1
 * INSEAD has a strategic partnership with this institute on their trainning programs. These, based on my original research, is a stupid decision made in the absence of basic discernment.
 * Please check this file [ value.forceforgood.xyz/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/TRANSLATION.pdf 1]. It is not a proper RS. It just collects the most available RSs related to this issue and translated them with the original URLs present.
 * To sum to, I cannot agree with your opinion that it is mostly out of original research or synthesis although media coverage is not much. I do not think it is of much meaning to add the "critics" section into the article Ilian_Mihov. But it is worth to be put in the article INSEAD, with a more proper name （e.g. controversies）.--虹易 (talk) 03:40, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , courtesy ping. --虹易 (talk) 03:43, 30 November 2019 (UTC)