Talk:Harley Owners Group

message: The recently deleted edit is copied from one or more Harley Owners Group sites, which include a copyright notice for all material on the sites.  It is unclear where this was originally copied from, but Wikipedia can't use it.  Please do not add this copyrighted text again, and please cite reliable sources for any edits.--Dbratland (talk) 16:22, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyrighted text 

message: Why should charity work done by an individual branch of the club be removed? If anything there should be more examples, supported by references, to support the assertion made in the article that HOG does work for charity. --Biker Biker (talk) 16:50, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Because there are over 1000 hog chapters worldwide, most of them doing local charity work.  We do not want chapters thinking they can come here and list their charity ride in hopes of promoting it.  Regardless of what your motives are, we don't want to become a clearing house for all the charity rides, and we don't want this article's charity section to be longer than the article itself. Akuvar (talk) 23:15, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree strongly. The current section is too short, is unsourced and doesn't reflect the worldwide activity. As for it becoming a clearing house that wasn't my intention - it was just to illustrate that things take place in HOG groups outside of the USA. Let's see what others think. --Biker Biker (talk) 08:57, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps you can find something on Harley's site that talks about chapters doing local charity work? They may have a good statement that could be used to blanket the whole thing.  I just know that once you start listing individual events, people are going to want to list their event, because of pride or promotion, it would start to fill up fast. Akuvar (talk) 15:53, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that lists of this sort can become dumping grounds where everybody adds their favorite thing. The reason that happens is a lack of standards or criteria for what is on the list. I would suggest including only those charity events that have received major media coverage. Non-notable organizations often get routine coverage -- they have an event and the local media put it on a calendar or in a column without discrimination. So leave that out, and leave out any brief news items from local media. But include ones that have garnered attention in major regional or national media. <P>I think that is generally in line with Wikipedia's policy on notability, and it prevents the section from growing indiscriminately. I would write it out that way: "Charity events that have received major media attention include..." and possibly add a comment asking editors not to add to it without citing significant media coverage.<P>There also at least a dozen marketing books published that mention HOG charity work. The HOG is included in many marketing textbooks and the charity aspect is considered an important element in Harley's groundbreaking use of the club as a marketing tool. --Dbratland (talk) 17:58, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Charity work