Talk:Cru (Christian organization)/Archive 2

message: The discussions below should be for current subjects only. Please archive closed subjects. --Sixtrojans 01:42, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current Open Discussions 

message: The external link in the second paragraph after the word 'athletes' directs to www.aia.org.  It's an architect association site, The American Institue of Architects. Figured one of you would like to correct it. Thelma Bowlen 06:08, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment on athletes link

message: The following sources have been suggested for inclusion in the main article but are in dispute for various reasons.
=== Which Circle? ===
==== Reasons for Dispute ====
Neutral point of view; satire does not pass reliability test.
==== Discussion ====
As of today there were definitely some non-NPOV statements in the criticism section, namely:
*'the website "Which Circle" gives a secular, external stereotypical view of CCC).' (Actually, both the writer and the artist are ex-CCC and one is ex-staff.)
*'Compared to local church-based college outreaches, Crusade's experience and resources help avoid many pitfalls of college ministry. CCC continues to raise up thousands of quality Christian leaders in the workforce and on the missions field all over the world.'
In the interests of NPOV I am removing these and adding the information about the background of Which Circle. MikeRM 20:32, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Sources in Dispute 

message: ==== Reasons for Dispute ====
Neutral point of view; satire does not pass reliability test.
==== Discussion ====
As of today there were definitely some non-NPOV statements in the criticism section, namely:
*'the website "Which Circle" gives a secular, external stereotypical view of CCC).' (Actually, both the writer and the artist are ex-CCC and one is ex-staff.)
*'Compared to local church-based college outreaches, Crusade's experience and resources help avoid many pitfalls of college ministry. CCC continues to raise up thousands of quality Christian leaders in the workforce and on the missions field all over the world.'
In the interests of NPOV I am removing these and adding the information about the background of Which Circle. MikeRM 20:32, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which Circle? 

message: As of today there were definitely some non-NPOV statements in the criticism section, namely:
*'the website "Which Circle" gives a secular, external stereotypical view of CCC).' (Actually, both the writer and the artist are ex-CCC and one is ex-staff.)
*'Compared to local church-based college outreaches, Crusade's experience and resources help avoid many pitfalls of college ministry. CCC continues to raise up thousands of quality Christian leaders in the workforce and on the missions field all over the world.'
In the interests of NPOV I am removing these and adding the information about the background of Which Circle. MikeRM 20:32, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion 

message: Yes, it has a good pagerank, has been published in different legitimate sources, and is highly related to the article. Yarman 20:59, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POLL: 3 Votes YES to Include "Which Circle" Link in Main Article 

message: No. --Sixtrojans 19:44, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POLL: 3 Votes NO to Exclude "Which Circle" Link in Main Article 

message: The timeline seems to be copied from the CCfC Press Kit.  Although the source of this text includes a clear implicit license to republish, I'm not sure it can be reproduced as it is in the article and still conform to the GFDL.  Anyone know better? -Joshuapaquin 05:18, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I realize that, but text in Wikipedia articles is licensed under the GFDL.  My concern is that while we may have the right to reproduce the material, we may not have the right to alter its copyright status.  Note also that the source of the text is not cited in the article, which doesn't quite seem approprtiate for a verbatim copy. -Joshuapaquin 17:46, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

text: The "newsroom" is referenced as the first external link. When organizations put information like this into a press kit and make it available to the public, they do so with the expectation that it will not always be reproduced verbatim. The whole idea of a press kit is to provide answers to commonly asked questions from the media so some poor communications director doesn't have to answer the same boring questions a hundred times. The media can quickly get basic facts and reuse them as needed. --Sixtrojans 00:53, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyvio?