Talk:Mercy Corps

message: Critics observe that any negative feedback is continously erased by Mercy Corps. 
This is already the fith time censors at Mercy Corpse have been active and erased comments posted here to address the balance.
Even constructive comments posted by literate Tsunami survivors complaining about many of M/C's unwise investments and totally incompetend local staff is not allowed to stand. The information seems nothing but a self-advert issued by this controversial NGO.
The press has been informed and some are now monitoring future developments on this page.
Many survivors in Eastern Sri Lanka feel that any positive achievements by M/C are already eclipsed by lack of local consultation and continous disregard to any democratic value.
AbHa = The original Arugam Bay Hotel Association fully endorses comments above.
Mercy Corps has been the main diving force resulting in a split of the entire Community.
Incompetence, financial blackmail and selective support for favourite minority groups are some examples of Mercy Corps local activities and complaints thereof.
This is complete unsubstantiated opinion, which is inappropriate to include in an encyclopedia article. The talk section is the perfect place to discuss this until you can provide enough substantiation to include it in the article itself. JTM 21:43, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  OK; please indicate which of the previous versions of the page contained the censored material, so we can look at them and judge for ourselves. 72.70.225.151 16:32, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: For an organization to assign a paid staff member to camp out on a Wikipage to ensure that any contributions that do not adhere to the CEO’s dictates are quickly expunged is rather telling. This smacks of one of those religious cults (Scientology) that assign legions of brainwashed foot soldiers to police the internet and make sure the company line is being followed and that no incriminating evidence is ever shown to the public. I have to assume that Mercy Corps knows there is incriminating dirt out there and if brought to the forefront it would damage the organization – otherwise why the dramatic move of a net police officer on the payroll?  I don’t fault Mercy Corps. No matter what incriminating evidence may or may not be out there, the organization needs to make sure a most angelic face is shown to the public (just like all the other NGOs competing for the same contributions from the same audience).  No, the problem here is Wikipedia. How can the fans of Wikipedia take it seriously and stand by their claim that this is an “encyclopedia” when the subject of an entry is permitted to dictate what does or does not appear on this page? This is ludicrous. This is amateurish. This is propaganda.202.79.62.16 02:41, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Censorship

message: As of Dec 25 06, the introductory section especially does not have an approriate, NPOV encyclopedia tone; it reads like a pamphlet soliciting donations.
At the very least, it should be enclosed in "Mercy Corps claims."  I flagged it with  to draw attention to the problem.
 72.70.225.151 16:36, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inappropriate Tone 

message: This article was mainly developed by User:RogerBurks, who apparently spent about 1 1/2 years keeping this article kind to Mercy Corps, adding other Mercy Corps-related praise into Wikipedia,  , and neglecting to add independent references. He's apparently not editing under that name anymore. This evening, a new editor dashed through 15 Wiki articles adding external links to "http://www.GlobalEnvision.org - Global Envision - a web initiative of Mercy Corps." GlobalEnvision.org is listed on this article as a Mercy Corps initiative.  
I've tagged this article for references, which in the circumstances is pretty light treatment. Wikipedia is not to be used by ANY organization or person for self-promotion. Please get citations in place as soon as possible. Thanks! --Busy Stubber 02:28, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see any citations yet, so I'm adding a COI warning for unwary readers. --Busy Stubber 23:54, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

text: The Charity Navigator website requires registration to obtain detailed information on an organization. Apparently you've provided your registration code in citing this website. Please do not provide personal or organizational website access codes in Wikipedia. Thank you! --Busy Stubber (talk) 00:56, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Public relations article, so the citations better be darn good 

message: Hello, I have been maintaining this page for Mercy Corps, as I am a writer and editor here.  I have worked hard to keep it from sounding like an advertisement or public relations vehicle - and have now added references.  The article in its current form simply lists facts about the organization - history and current work, mostly.  It doesn't read as a solicitation, just as an explanation of the agency's good work around the world.
I realize that there's a fine line to walk - but I believe we've done it.  This is not spam.  It's not spam when we add to other topic articles, when appropriate.
It seems like folks have been overzealous in editing and tagging this page.  If someone thinks it still reads like an ad, please let us know the specific sections that sound like an ad.
Thank you.  Roger 00:12, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Roger, I commend you on your hard work on this article. It is valuable to have an insider editing this article. But I feel I must also remind you that all Wikipedia articles are collaborative. No single person maintains an article. You are but one of many people who choose to edit and shape this article. It is a bit unsettling that you use language like "we've" walked that fine line and "I have been maintaining this page." That shouldn't be your role here. Here you are a Wikipedian first! :) Your role here should be fairness and balance for Wikipedia's sake, not for Mercy Corps' sake. There's a difference, somehow. Kingturtle 04:10, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  So, if someone works for an organization, can't they edit that organization's page without someone tagging it "COI" 

message: I removed the list of countries where you work; just as a list, it is not in my opinion encyclopedic information, and serves merely to produced links to as many pages as possible. The organisation works in about two dozen countries, distributed over the usual regions of the world. Some of the places where there is notable work has been mentioned in the article, and that is appropriate. Just having a list is one of the thinks that  makes it look like an ad or public relations piece. I see now that something of the sort was already said in the introduction, so I will remove the heading and the remaining sentence as well. Inappropriate over-weight on details, and non-encyclopedic tone. DGG (talk) 21:42, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Details

message: I noticed that "Dan O'Neill" links to the cartoonist Dan O'Neill rather than the humanitarian (whose entry no longer exists). Could someone please remove that link? Thank you. 24.21.71.175 (talk) 17:24, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Please edit article

message: It's a point of minor interest, but Dan O'Neill is Pat Boone's Son-In-Law. Check the Wikipedia Cherry Boone entry. Should be included, perhaps? Macousticboy (talk) 22:17, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  O'Neill/Boone 

message: I was inspired to contribute to Wikipedia by the prospect of advancing freedom of thought through making factual and relevant information accessible to as many people as possible. I don't think that it serves to advance the Wikimedia vision of "every single human being [being able to] freely share in the sum of all knowledge" to have articles written like promotional fluff in a self-serving manner.  The lead section of this article (at the least) is very promotional and not encyclopedic in tone or content (WP:NOTPROMOTION). For one thing, it employs vague jargon ("transitional environments", "market-led"), describing the organization's activities in subjective terms favorable to itself ("move as quickly as possible", "enabling people to rebuild their economy", "focuses on connecting to both government and business for the changes they would like to see").  And it gives undue weight to what the president of the organization herself has to say, violating all in violation of the neutral-point-of-view guideline (WP:NPOV).  Add to this that the various self-reported figures quoted at the conclusion of the lead section are misplaced unnecessary unless the intent is to boost the organization's philanthropic image.  Such details have their place (properly attributed regarding their source), but the lead section is meant as a general introduction and summary of the broad points of an article (MOS:LEAD). —Coconutporkpie (talk) 11:51, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It hasn't changed very much, in 2019. Bangabandhu (talk) 22:04, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Still overly promotional, May 2015 

message: Requesting update to Mercy Corps' Wikipedia page to reflect leadership change. Beth deHamel is no longer interim CEO of Mercy Corps. Tjada D'Oyen McKenna was appointed as CEO of Mercy Corps and began on October 15, 2020. Under Leadership section, replace "Beth deHamel serves as interim CEO" with "Tjada D'Oyen McKenna is CEO of Mercy Corps and began on October 15, 2020."  https://apnews.com/article/oregon-child-abuse-melinda-gates-portland-627214ae6f0a265e15429a0bfa00201d   https://www.mercycorps.org/blog/new-ceo  24.22.77.216 (talk) 16:59, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Partly done:  Does the current wording satisfy this? Heart (talk) 03:08, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request on 24 May 2021 

message: Requesting edit to Mercy Corps Northwest section of Mercy Corps Wikipedia as the overview is now outdated and does not reflect current services or operations, which have been closed by the organization. In March 2023, Mercy Corps Northwest announced (reference: https://www.mercycorps.org/press-room/releases/mcnw-future) it would end client programming, including its business education, grants, and loans by June 2024. As of December 2023, all Mercy Corps Northwest direct-to-client services ended or were transitioning to other service providers” (reference: https://nw.mercycorps.org/mcnw-future). Community Investment Trust was developed and launched by Mercy Corps Northwest, but now operates as its own initiative and continues today (reference: https://investcit.com/). The overview of Mercy Corps Northwest services should all be updated to the past tense (IDAs, small business grants, Women's Business Center, Reentry Transition Center). 24.22.77.216 (talk) 20:58, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request to Mercy Corps Northwest  section