The George Wythe University and Oliver DeMille articles are currently bombarded by GWU students, faculty, both (not sure exactly) diligently whitewashing anything that may reflect poorly on the school. The main points gone are that (1) GW previously awarded degrees based on life experience; and (2) DeMille may have made up some of his degrees in the past. I suspect one (or all) of the editors is Shanon Brooks, director of marketing for the school.
If you want some insight into how, in my experience, GW students / faculty tend to engage in discussion with those of a different viewpoint, check out the talk pages of these articles (linked to the left on this blog). One of the first responses when presented with damning evidence is to attack the opponent personally. Close behind is the straw man, the favorite fallacy it seems of GW adherents. For example, they often define your terms for you, then attack the definition they made up for you.
Wikipedia articles must conform to an ideal called "neutral point of view," meaning articles should not be presented from a pro- or con perspective, but rather from a neutral perspective. The facts in this case are damning enough that they speak for themselves even from a neutral perspective.
The nature of Wikipedia is such that if enough people get on there, majority rules, not a neutral point of view, and not the truth. Sadly in this case, the truth is losing.