Talk:Up with People

message: Should their bankruptcy be mentioned?  Selling their headquarters building in Broomfield?
Nospamtodd 00:50, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is significant to their history - getting bankrupt and shutting down in 2001, restarting as WorldSmart in 2004, taking a break in early 2006 and relaunching in mid 2006 as Up With People. However, I'm not sure how this would fit into the "quoting your sources" thing as all this information comes firsthand (I travelled with them as WorldSmart in 2005) and while there are sources for the current incarnation, there's hardly anything that references the connection between UWP and WorldSmart.
Any advice on that? Tiara 11:26, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Bankruptcy

message: Normally I would delete the lyrics of the "Up with People" theme song on the grounds of copyvio and wikipolicy, however the statement about them not being allowed for commercial use is a bit confusing. Are the lyrics, therefore, public domain? If so this should be noted. Otherwise they might not be allowed to stay since usually only PD lyrics can be used on Wikipedia. 23skidoo 20:59, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Much about this group is somewhat confusing. It evolved from a deeply spiritual movement into a peppy light frothy show, it has several names, and the entry looks contrived. It is unsure whether the lyrics are in the pd.  Best to remove them in theses circumstances, as I have done, until clarification is given. GRANBRO 22:36, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Use of lyrics

message: Up with People is still in operation and maintains all its copyrights on its music.  Sheet music with lyrics can be purchased at: Media:http://www.musicnotes.com/.
CD's and other media from 40 plus years CAN be purchased from Up with People directly on their website: Media:http://www.upwithpeople.org/index.php  Click on "Get Involved", then choose "Shop the Up with People Store".  Virtually everything they ever recorded is for sale.  The prices are low.  
Alocam (talk) 07:22, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Music copyrights and availability

message: "... to Tokyo and by train past Hiroshima to Kobe ..."
The geography is wrong.  Coming from Tokyo by train, one arrives at Kobe well before Hiroshima, which is some hours further on. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.10.35.10 (talk) 20:20, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Japan Tour 

message: http://www.upwithpeople.org/ 
Unfortunately I have not been able to search songs for lyrics. One would be relevant to a class project. It was out near the time of their beginings - "Give the children back their childhood", ends in a very relevant "and they just may, forget someday, to carry on our wars".  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.196.97.35 (talk) 18:38, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Home page for Up With People 

message: I have added information about the documentary film.  I see that an anonymous user had deleted the substance of my entry.  I have restored the edit and added more information which gives better context.  Does anyone really have concerns or was it vandalism or what?  The film does make a strong statement though well-documented.  I have entered that statement in the context of the film and not my own opinion; solely opinion of the filmmakers.  That film may be getting an Oscar nomination from what I hear but that will not go into the article unless and until it happens.--Dstern1 (talk) 02:53, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The film and its website are the cited references.  The film primarily covers the period AFTER the split from MRA though the period prior to the split is also included.  Nothing stated is my own opinion.  Nothing stated is my interpretation.  Everything stated is from the film and cited as such.  Also confirmed by the website for the film which is also cited.--Dstern1 (talk) 20:01, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  To quote the director:   
"In the process, I’ve learned about the funding, political agenda, stringent standards, arranged marriages, sexual politics, and broken families of these “true believers” who set out to change the world."
 http://www.smiletilithurts.com/directors_statement.html
--Dstern1 (talk) 20:17, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

text:  I've just stumbled across the page, and I'm not certain that this film is notable enough to be used as a criticism of the subject. The notability seems all from a small paragraph in Village Voice, and the IRS case doesn't seem to deal with the actual film content. I'll wait for other discussion before deleting, I'd just like to see what everyone else has to say. Dayewalker (talk) 01:34, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Documentary film: ''Smile 'Til It Hurts: The Up with People Story'' 

message: I do not know who removed it.  Check the edit history.  However, you have got to be kidding!  Where in the world did you get information that Up with People was a religious organization or a cult?  Please cite your references!  18,000 plus people participated in Up with People; from over 60 countries; from every religion (or none at all).  Arranged marriages? That's a new one!  I worked at Up with People from 1985 until 2001 and I can certainly vouch for the credibility of the program.  Why would General Motors, The University of Arizona, The National Football League, Toyota Motor Corporation, Wells Fargo Bank, Key Bank, NBC; The Readers Digest; just to name a few of the MAJOR sponsors of Up with People be involved if it was a religious cult?  Again, please cite your references and I will be happy to help you with it.  The producer of the documentary was just in Tucson Arizona during the last week of July 2009 attending the Up with People International Alumni Reunion.  No mention of what you were talking about was made by anyone.  The period the documentary covers is the period BEFORE Up with People split with Moral Re-Armament and become an independent not-for-profit 501 c(3) organization under US Tax code.  Up with People continues to be accredited with several US Universities. This type of mis-information must be removed. -Michael Howard, Great Falls, MT
Alocam (talk) 07:40, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The film and its website are the cited references.  The film primarily covers the period AFTER the split from MRA though the period prior to the split is also included.  Nothing stated is my own opinion.  Nothing stated is my interpretation.  Everything stated is from the film and cited as such.  Also confirmed by the website for the film which is also cited.--Dstern1 (talk) 20:01, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  To quote the director:   
"In the process, I’ve learned about the funding, political agenda, stringent standards, arranged marriages, sexual politics, and broken families of these “true believers” who set out to change the world."
 http://www.smiletilithurts.com/directors_statement.html
--Dstern1 (talk) 20:17, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

text:  I've just stumbled across the page, and I'm not certain that this film is notable enough to be used as a criticism of the subject. The notability seems all from a small paragraph in Village Voice, and the IRS case doesn't seem to deal with the actual film content. I'll wait for other discussion before deleting, I'd just like to see what everyone else has to say. Dayewalker (talk) 01:34, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: It was certainly not vandalism

message: Per this article. - Wikidemon (talk) 22:24, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems to me that a separate "Criticism" section of the article may be called for to address points raised above and elsewhere on this talk page. A single article from the Crimson hardly makes for an assessment of sources broad enough to support the generalizations made in the original sentence in which it was cited. Hipgnostic (talk) 03:03, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  There was a lengthy article in the New Yorker in the late 60's.  I'll hunt for it at the library soon. AvocadosTheorem (talk) 18:20, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Still on "to do" list. AvocadosTheorem (talk) 18:08, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not everyone is a fan 

message: I remember being interested in joining Up With People many years back and the only way you were allowed to was by raising a certain amount of money. It was a lot, like $20,000 or something.  Where did that money all of that money go?  Why is no mention of stuff like this, good or bad, on the page? Really nothing controversial is listed on this page at all...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.246.114.81 (talk) 02:56, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Money Raising 

message: The entire two first sections after the lead, and the lead itself, all totally unsourced, are clearly a whitewash written by a member or former member.  They notably avoid any mention of controversy, any mention of the heavily "spiritual" (religious), pro-West and conservative nature of the songs' messages, etc.  An obvious approach to take would be to merge the critical material in the film section, hopefully bolstered with other non-promotional material, into the historical sections, then actually find independent sources for and tone down the promotional nature of the extant material in those sections. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ  Contribs. 06:33, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Almost 6 years later, we have an equal but opposite problem, and this now reads as a hatchet job. The critical material should be put into a section for that, including the bit about Glenn Close calling them a "cult", which still remains unsourced. The present text only represents the critical viewpoint about the organization.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  17:54, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Overwhelming bias

message: Where are the sections?
Where are the references?
I had added a section on a documentary film.  I felt that it was appropriate with this article and not its own article; now it is deleted.
Was someone on a path of destruction?Dstern1 (talk) 20:04, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  what has happened to this article? 

message: I made some fixes to restore.  Still needs much improvement.Dstern1 (talk) 20:38, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: fix

message: I don't quite understand why there is no mention of Moral Rearmament in this article.  You really can't separate UPW from MRA.  From what I understand, Sing Out was the music program of MRA, they performed at their conventions and meetings.  The program proved to be so popular that it was spun out on its own and renamed UPW when Belk took it over.  Sing Out was sort of the squeeky clean mouthpiece of the MRA, as it moved away from the religious to a more patriotic movement.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nospamtodd (talk • contribs) 21:26, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: MRA and SO are covered now.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  17:55, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moral Rearmament 

message: I placed a COI Template. At least the very beginning of the entry is lifted word for word from upwithpeople.org. This needs to be rewritten with WP:secondary sources.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.80.111.142 (talk) 17:53, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  COI Template 

message: This article used to have an entire section detailing criticisms of this group and even included information about a documentary from a former member of the group that criticized the group's practices. Now all of that has been scrubbed and this article reads like a PR puff piece. Disappointing. 98.220.122.106 (talk) 21:18, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I actually started editing Wikipedia because I felt like this article was biased and that it had clearly been written by someone with a connection to the organization. Looks like they deleted all of my edits. Oh well.  CharliApplesauce (talk) 01:14, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  What happened to this article?