Talk:L'Arche

This doesn't appear to be an egalitarian community, or communities...

Correct. L'Arche is not egalitarian. Instead, it is based upon the common humanity of those involved and upon the complementary gifts that each member contributes. At least, that was my experience when I lived with the Wash, DC community. Freder1ck 02:26, 10 November 2006 (UTC)Freder1ck

Confusion between L'Arche and the Arc

Both organizations, L'Arche and The Arc are large, national organizations which serve people with developmental disabilities. There is often some confusion that the two are related because of the similarity in names: L'Arche and The Arc. They are, however, not related. The Arc gets its name from the old acronym Association for Retarded Citizens or Association for Retarded Children.

Is it worth noting for a sentence or two that it is a separate agency from The Arc? --Pylon 16:26, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Copyright

I have removed most of the article, as it appears to have been a copyright violation from here: http://www.larche.org/charter-of-the-communities-of-l-arche.en-gb.43.3.content.htm . Let's rebuild the article using a variety sources and a neutral point of view. Kla'quot 07:15, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Fiddy2

The suggestion has been made by [1] that this project is not of a financial magnitude to affect the International L'Arche organization. Deletion of the section has been proposed, and I welcome further views. Xcstar (talk) 19:13, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

• The suggestion that this is an important issue was raised by you, yourself. Your knowingly false and malicious edit on December 31 claimed the existence of a "controversy" with an edit summary noting that you "added reference to Fiddy2, an unfortunate episode in the L'Arche fundraising history". It seems extremely hypocritical to claim that the section be removed when it was you who inserted it here in the first place. Alansohn (talk) 19:18, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

• I have tried to keep the name of the promoter out of this article, and you keep adding him back in. Contrary to your claim, I did not make the suggestion at [2] but having read it, believed that it would be more appropriately discussed here. The edit on December 31 merely reversed a prior deletion. A little civility on your part would go a long way. Certainly, the promoter's abuse of Wikipedia, has not help L'Arche's cause, and is in the words of that other editor, "annoying." I hope that you are not yet another in a long line of the promoter's sockpupets. Xcstar (talk) 22:01, 8 January 2008 (UTC)