Talk:Ganas: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Marelstrom (talk | contribs) |
m Maintain {{WPBS}}: 2 WikiProject templates. Keep majority rating "C" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 2 same ratings as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject Cooperatives}}, {{WikiProject Urban studies and planning}}. Tag: |
||
| (160 intermediate revisions by 19 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Talk header|search=y}} |
|||
{{ArticleHistory |
|||
| action1 = GAN |
{{Article history| action1 = GAN |
||
| action1date = 12:25, 21 March 2011 (UTC) |
| action1date = 12:25, 21 March 2011 (UTC) |
||
| action1link = Talk:Ganas/GA1 |
| action1link = Talk:Ganas/GA1 |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
| topic = Social sciences and society |
| topic = Social sciences and society |
||
}} |
}} |
||
{{WikiProject |
{{WikiProject banner shell|collapsed=yes|class=C|1= |
||
{{ |
{{WikiProject Cooperatives|importance=}} |
||
{{WikiProject Urban studies and planning|importance=}} |
|||
{{archives|auto=long|search=yes}} |
|||
}} |
|||
== Controversy Revisited == |
|||
So this is my rough draft for a new and improved Controversy section. For now I am leaving in wife-swapping until we decide what to do with it. I realize this paragraph reads rather clunkily, one statement after another, but without risking "synthesis" I don't know how to make it read smoother. So, there it is, now let's have it! [[User:Eroberer|Eroberer]] ([[User talk:Eroberer|talk]]) 02:07, 11 January 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:Please revew the material involed as there was no consensus for much that inclusion. [[User:ResidentAnthropologist|The Resident Anthropologist]] ([[User talk:ResidentAnthropologist|talk]]) 21:07, 11 January 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::Do you know what rough draft means? You are being disruptive making major changes whenever you please. [[User:Eroberer|Eroberer]] ([[User talk:Eroberer|talk]]) 01:15, 12 January 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== Addressing RA's major changes == |
|||
I think I can surmise your logic in including the shooting in the History section. However, don't you think it's a mistake to introduce this without some background about the culture and controversy of Ganas? As it stands readers are just plopped down in the middle of this without any context, and as much of what's controversial came out in the media as a result of the shooting, it seems to me they belong together. |
|||
Second, it's not allright to include only Mildred Gordon's definition of Feedback Learning. That's just as POV as omitting it completely. Before we had an objective reporter's view of it as well as Gordon's interpretation, and that's as it should be. If we only allow primary sources to define things then we might as well give up the encyclopedia and just let folks write their own promotional material on these pages. What's more, "designed to allow members to control their reactions to the world" is not what the source says about feedback learning, but about "killing one's buddha", which is such an obscure term it shouldn't be included without explanation, but what you've done is the dreaded SYNTHESIS you so often reprimand me for. "an intense brand of communication [21] designed to allow members to control their reactions to the world" does not explain how (in an objective viewpoint) communication would allow members to...and I don't think it's out of context for this reporter to say feedback learning looks to him like group therapy. Rather it's very helpful for understanding the context of the entire article. |
|||
I also don't think being tested for HIV explains what safe sex groups are, though I'm not surprised you're not happy with the source quotes, they are the only definition of safe sex groups I can find. |
|||
As an added note, the NYPost website is unreliable and the links are often not working. I think a working link outweighs the significance of link violations, don't you? |
|||
Can I hear some others' opinions on these points? [[User:Eroberer|Eroberer]] ([[User talk:Eroberer|talk]]) 21:33, 11 January 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:You forget [[WP:LINKVIO]] is a Policy with "Legal Considerations" also [[WP:RSN]] has found the Rick Ross site to alter the sources they host to conform to the're POV. When quotes are the entire >60 % of section that again raises issues. Also I still used the source merely presented the information NPOV fashion. We agreed above the quoting of Milford's lack of degree and what thier website said was [[WP:SYNTH]]. I shall be rmeoving that again shortly [[User:ResidentAnthropologist|The Resident Anthropologist]] ([[User talk:ResidentAnthropologist|talk]]) 21:45, 11 January 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::What issues does quotes raise? You didn't use the source to define Feedback Learning which is why it's there. It's still POV if you only use Gordon's primary source definition. You are not answering my points but ignoring them. [[User:Eroberer|Eroberer]] ([[User talk:Eroberer|talk]]) 22:47, 11 January 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::I am restoring the allegation of practicing therapy but removing unlicensed, I assume that is your objection to it. Technically only you and WikiDao agreed that quoting of Mildred's lack of degree and what thier website said was [[WP:SYNTH]], and I still think there should be some explanation of why people think therapy is being practiced there if, as they claim, it is not! Tell me how to write it without it being [[WP:SYNTH]] since you are so experienced. Actually, I'd be happy to just include Mildred's lack of degree without quoting their disclaimer, but I thought the idea was to present both sides! You seem to only want to present ''theirs.'' |
|||
::Also I have included the correct citation this time. [[User:Eroberer|Eroberer]] ([[User talk:Eroberer|talk]]) 23:09, 11 January 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:I thought the Jonah Lamb quote on Feedback Learning was good. It's unusual enough and central enough to Ganas that it's worth a longer discussion (and, I think, even a lengthy quote). The "Gordon's own literature" sentence currently in there doesn't have a citation, could whoever put that in please fix it? [[User:Schneck|Schneck]] ([[User talk:Schneck|talk]]) 14:30, 12 January 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::I agree with [[User:Schneck|Schneck]] on Lamb quote, it's an objective observers viewpoint and without it we're stuck with Gordon's own definition. Re: Gordon's literature source - I have a source but not copywrite permission. I think WP says a citation is not necessary for info that's well known/established, unless it is challenged, are you ([[User:Schneck|Schneck]])challenging it, or do you find it contentious? [[User:Eroberer|Eroberer]] ([[User talk:Eroberer|talk]]) 14:01, 13 January 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:::I imagine nothing about Feedback Learning should be considered well-known. Now, there's nothing wrong with citing copyrighted work (most citations are). But is the source not publicly available? If it's not something that readers or other editors could reasonably find, I think it's better to leave it out, especially since we already have a quote from Gordon on FL from a reliable and publicly available source. [[User:Schneck|Schneck]] ([[User talk:Schneck|talk]]) 18:25, 13 January 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::::No it's not publicly available, so I must reluctantly agree. I returned Lamb's view of Feedback Learning to the Culture section in shortened form. It's only fair to include his objective, independent observation and not just rely on Gordon's own definition. [[User:Eroberer|Eroberer]] ([[User talk:Eroberer|talk]]) 21:20, 13 January 2011 (UTC) |
|||
I made several changes, especially to Controversy. I'll mention the ones here in Talk that I guess are most likely to be disputed: |
|||
* Too contentious to say "FL looks like invasive group therapy" in WP's voice; returned this to quote instead. (This lengthens that Jonah Owen Lamb quote, which, personally, I think is appropriate.) |
|||
* I don't think the source for an ex-member claiming they practice therapy supports that. Replaced with the exact quote (that they practice mind-control) |
|||
* The "crackpot" quote specifically states one person from Ganas saying that; not clear that this represents the views of the collective |
|||
* The defense attorney suggested FL drove people insane during the trial, but the justice stopped him from pursuing that line of questioning. That's not "the shooting prompted questions that FL might drive people insane". I took the whole bit out, but if necessary, it could go back in if it puts it in the context of the trial. |
|||
* Reminding readers GROW was therapy school, right next to an accusation that Ganas practices therapy, is [[WP:SYNTH]]. I deleted this. (Beyond the [[WP:SYNTH]], I'm confident GROW, which is not Ganas, doesn't belong here again, especially given we have questioned whether it even belongs in History.) [[User:Schneck|Schneck]] ([[User talk:Schneck|talk]]) 03:38, 14 January 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::{{Agree}} - with [[User:Schneck|Schneck]] changes for the most part, though I'm still not satisfied with Controversy section. Isn't it interesting that [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin_Oaks_Community,_Virginia#Criticisms_of_Twin_Oaks Twin Oaks Criticism] section shows that Twin Oaks has at least enough integrity to acknowledge their own problems, while Ganas not only deny that any problems exist, but also seeks to stop people from talking about them. |
|||
== Flyswatting again == |
|||
::I'd like [[User:WikiDao|WikiDao]] to weigh in on [[User:Schneck|Schneck]] changes. [[User:Eroberer|Eroberer]] ([[User talk:Eroberer|talk]]) 13:38, 14 January 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:::Hi, I've been sort of busy elsewhere lately, but should get a chance to look in on how things have been coming along here soon (later today, or even tomorrow if it is going to require a lot of attention). Regards, [[User talk:WikiDao|<span style="font-family: Segoe print;">WikiDao</span>]] [[User:WikiDao|<span style="color:#000;">☯</span>]] 21:31, 14 January 2011 (UTC) |
|||
{{od}}First of all, I'm glad to see that agreement. That's a good sign. And I think, at this point, it would really be best if those most interested in and familiar with this material would be able to work together civilly to arrive at a reasonable and mutually acceptable compromise about what should and should not be in the article. I am not too familiar with this material, so I can really only comment usefully about whether something specifically violates a WP policy or not in my view. I think both of you, Eroberer and Schneck, have a pretty good sense of what those policies are and how they apply here at this point. So, I'd like to try to step back again and let you two hash things out for awhile. You're both doing fine, you're making progress with the article, and I think there is a sufficiently workable amount of good-faith on both sides at this point too. If it bogs down completely again or gets heated and disputational, I'll try to help out with that. Otherwise: have at it, and happy editing! :) [[User talk:WikiDao|<span style="font-family: Segoe print;">WikiDao</span>]] [[User:WikiDao|<span style="color:#000;">☯</span>]] 04:53, 15 January 2011 (UTC) |
|||
Reverted to 439914645 revision, Flyswatting's repetitive changes after SilkTork's intervention is disruptive and not an improvement with the exception of the first paragraph which I left intact. Flyswatting and assorted socks please stop sabotaging this page. [[User:Eroberer|Eroberer]] ([[User talk:Eroberer|talk]]) 15:03, 23 October 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== thank you == |
|||
:I could say the same thing about you. --[[User:Flyswatting|Flyswatting]] ([[User talk:Flyswatting|talk]]) 06:40, 9 November 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== New York Post? Seriously? == |
|||
== Neutrality tag == |
|||
The New York Post is well-known for being a sensationalist tabloid and has been involved in numerous controversies regarding their reporting. Just look at Wikipedia's own article on the publication: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Post. IMO, this is in no way a reliable enough source of reference for a Wikipedia article. I have removed three sentences that exclusively use The New York Post as a reference, and removed it as one of the references in another sentence. Also changed "several" to "at least two" in "Controversies" section, as it is a more specific number and there were only two ex-members in the references cited that made the specified allegations (see: http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Avoid_weasel_words) |
|||
Has the controversy been resolved. I ask as the artcile is a candidate for a GAN quick-fail with that tag outstanding. [[User:Jezhotwells|Jezhotwells]] ([[User talk:Jezhotwells|talk]]) 16:13, 13 March 2011 (UTC) |
|||
-SunshineChap 2/9/2013 <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/65.216.227.186|65.216.227.186]] ([[User talk:65.216.227.186|talk]]) 17:08, 9 February 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:I suspect it is a reliable source for the revised sentence in the lead. [[User:Dmadeo|dm]] ([[User talk:Dmadeo|talk]]) 18:05, 9 February 2013 (UTC) |
|||
== External links modified == |
|||
I still question the inclusion of the pre-Ganas GROW story in this article. Also I think the amount of financial details included may be inappropriate. However, I'm happy for those details to be worked out in the future by the normal editing process, and would not object to the removal of the dispute tag at this time. [[User:Schneck|Schneck]] ([[User talk:Schneck|talk]]) 14:38, 19 March 2011 (UTC) |
|||
Hello fellow Wikipedians, |
|||
{{Talk:Ganas/GA1}} |
|||
I have just modified one external link on [[Ganas]]. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=804705765 my edit]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit [[User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot|this simple FaQ]] for additional information. I made the following changes: |
|||
== Reversion == |
|||
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080227041205/http://activistsolutions.org/about/who_we_are/mildred_gordon to http://activistsolutions.org/about/who_we_are/mildred_gordon |
|||
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs. |
|||
Most of this has been covered extensively in archived discussions, Marelstrom pls read. Ganas website says residents agree to abide by rules, one of which is non-negotiable negativity. Obligatory participation is simpler way of saying same, we strive to avoid directly quoting primary sources unless absolutely necessary, this is not an advertisement. Summary should consist of the main topics in article, ergo shooting belongs in summary. Recycling, store details, work arrangements already mentioned in body and trivial, again not an advertisement. No independent reference for core value or co-founders, only for original founder and central figure Gordon whose history is highly relevant. Again, all this covered in previous discussions, pls familiarize yourself and participate here if you make changes. [[User:Eroberer|Eroberer]] ([[User talk:Eroberer|talk]]) 23:41, 25 April 2011 (UTC) |
|||
{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}} |
|||
You wrote: "Recycling, store details, work arrangements already mentioned in body and trivial, again not an advertisement." |
|||
Actually, I wrote it not because I want to advertise the community, but because it is a neutral way of describing Ganas. --[[User:Marelstrom|Marelstrom]] ([[User talk:Marelstrom|talk]]) 06:06, 29 April 2011 (UTC) |
|||
Cheers.—[[User:InternetArchiveBot|'''<span style="color:darkgrey;font-family:monospace">InternetArchiveBot</span>''']] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">([[User talk:InternetArchiveBot|Report bug]])</span> 16:57, 10 October 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:IMO Ganas residents, which [[User:Marelstrom|Marelstrom]] ([[User talk:Marelstrom|talk]]) obviously is, should not be involved with this article at all, as they seem unable to grasp the WP notion of what constitutes neutrality. Neutral does not mean eliminate all controversy and let the subject define themself. Any description of Ganas should be from objective source not their own literature. Left note on your talk page. [[User:Eroberer|Eroberer]] ([[User talk:Eroberer|talk]]) 12:40, 1 May 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== Jeff Gross returned to New York? == |
|||
:: Excuse me, I am not a Ganas resident. You believe that my changes are not neutral, but I believe they are. I would not mind third party intervention, if you are not willing to discuss the specifics. --[[User:Marelstrom|Marelstrom]] ([[User talk:Marelstrom|talk]]) 01:23, 2 May 2011 (UTC) |
|||
[[User:StanfordMITPhd|<bdi>StanfordMITPhd</bdi>]] Hi, I have very little experience editing and I hope I'm not committing a faux pas here. Am I reading the history correctly that you added that the Esquire magazine says Jeff Gross moved back to New York? I don't think that is true, and I cannot find that in the article. Can you point me to that? Thank you for your time. [[Special:Contributions/108.29.219.186|108.29.219.186]] ([[User talk:108.29.219.186|talk]]) 22:04, 5 November 2022 (UTC) |
|||
:::Yer IP 96.250.214.152 is from Staten Island, looks pretty suspicious to me. Anyway I HAVE discussed the specifics, seems you are not willing to address my points, specically your misunderstanding of neutrality and how it relates to Wikepedia policy IN PARTICULAR. Typical. [[User:Eroberer|Eroberer]] ([[User talk:Eroberer|talk]]) 18:03, 9 May 2011 (UTC) |
|||
: |
:I agree. Thanks for noting. Made the change. [[User:StanfordMITPhd|StanfordMITPhd]] ([[User talk:StanfordMITPhd|talk]]) 12:32, 11 November 2022 (UTC) |
||
Latest revision as of 16:22, 14 February 2024
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ganas article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: 1, 2, 3 |
 | Ganas was a Social sciences and society good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
Flyswatting again
[edit]Reverted to 439914645 revision, Flyswatting's repetitive changes after SilkTork's intervention is disruptive and not an improvement with the exception of the first paragraph which I left intact. Flyswatting and assorted socks please stop sabotaging this page. Eroberer (talk) 15:03, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
- I could say the same thing about you. --Flyswatting (talk) 06:40, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
New York Post? Seriously?
[edit]The New York Post is well-known for being a sensationalist tabloid and has been involved in numerous controversies regarding their reporting. Just look at Wikipedia's own article on the publication: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Post. IMO, this is in no way a reliable enough source of reference for a Wikipedia article. I have removed three sentences that exclusively use The New York Post as a reference, and removed it as one of the references in another sentence. Also changed "several" to "at least two" in "Controversies" section, as it is a more specific number and there were only two ex-members in the references cited that made the specified allegations (see: http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Avoid_weasel_words) -SunshineChap 2/9/2013 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.216.227.186 (talk) 17:08, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- I suspect it is a reliable source for the revised sentence in the lead. dm (talk) 18:05, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
External links modified
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Ganas. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080227041205/http://activistsolutions.org/about/who_we_are/mildred_gordon to http://activistsolutions.org/about/who_we_are/mildred_gordon
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:57, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
Jeff Gross returned to New York?
[edit]StanfordMITPhd Hi, I have very little experience editing and I hope I'm not committing a faux pas here. Am I reading the history correctly that you added that the Esquire magazine says Jeff Gross moved back to New York? I don't think that is true, and I cannot find that in the article. Can you point me to that? Thank you for your time. 108.29.219.186 (talk) 22:04, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
- I agree. Thanks for noting. Made the change. StanfordMITPhd (talk) 12:32, 11 November 2022 (UTC)