Talk:Association of Technology, Management, and Applied Engineering

Advertisement

The whole article looks like a brochure illustrating the products sold by this company i.e. its programs and certifications. A lot of company-specific jargon is spread throughout the page (for example, "Applied Engineeering", which seems to have been made the subject of a related article.) ---- 79.21.242.123 (talk) 00:49, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

The article simply articulates information about the ATMAE professional association. There are many professional organizations such IEEE, SME, ABET, AACSB, ASEE, etc. on Wikipedia. There is another Wikipedia Page that focuses on a company named "Applied Engineering". This is different from ATMAE. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:985:302:38F8:E4B0:ECF6:DA34:EFCC (talk) 01:44, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

COI tag (February 2025)

Editor knows extensive details, and has not edited any other articles. Ldm1954 (talk) 18:00, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

Unsourced material is not allowed, neither is COI editing or opinion

Goodaj, you added many paragraphs of unsourced material. Everything has to be sourced using independent references. Wikipedia is not the place for advertising or promotional information about an organization such as ATMAE -- that is what LinkedIn or Facebook are for. Viewmont Viking reverted your addition of the material a second time (beating me to the punch by a few minutes). Also important, you need to acknowledge any COI of your editing, since it seems that you are affiliated with ATMAE from the history of your edits. Ldm1954 (talk) 17:21, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

@Goodaj: adding, if you feel that the material belongs please make your case here rather than getting involved in an edit war. Ldm1954 (talk) 17:23, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

The information provided is not promotional! Terms defined by a mass of people (an association of like minded people engaged in technology, management, and applied engineering) is not promotional and these definitions are key to academia and industry, even if you think they aren't. These terms are valid and should not be removed as they have been. I have changed the format of the information several times to try to remove all "promotional" aspects and reword to state the case that its the mass of people that are defining these terms, not me. I have referred to other associations' wiki pages as previously referenced and their pages are similar or more promotional, yet their content stays. This is not appropriate.

This site is overly complicated, so I've been trying to figure out for months how to communicate this information, but haven't found any way of doing it until now. Goodaj (talk) 17:33, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia articles are for documented information that is verified by sources. What ATMAE defines is not encyclopedic information, they are not the definitive authority (and neither is ABET). The definitions you included at most belong on the specific pages, e.g. Applied Engineering. From what I can see there is already some information from CIP there. You could add it as an additional/alternative definition so long as you do not try to claim that ATMAE has ownership. Note that the same goes for the other terms you wanted to define. Ldm1954 (talk) 17:58, 27 March 2025 (UTC)