Talk:American Friends Service Committee
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Religious Society of Friends (Quakers), an attempt to better organise and unify articles relating to the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers). If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale. |
| High | This article is on a subject of High-importance within Quakerism. |
 |
American Friends Service Committee is part of the WikiProject Philadelphia, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Philadelphia and the Delaware Valley on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. |
| Low | This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. |
[edit] Unprogrammed Friends
"Still, among many unprogrammed Friends, it has retained its appeal."
- "Unprogrammed?" I don't know what that means, but it smells NPOV. There are legitimate criticisms of any organization, and just because you don't ally yourself with one doesn't make you somehow hypnotized.--Ben Applegate 18:31, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
-
- The term "Unprogrammed" Friends isn't a POV term in my opinion, it juxtaposed the reference to evangelical Friends earlier in the paragraph. It should probably be referenced over the Religious Society of Friends article to allow reader a chance to understand what the term means (granted there isn't a clear explanation of that term there because of clarity issues with that article). I don't share your concern about the phrasing here (although I agree any organization can be fairly criticized), nor do I see how removing the word "Unprogrammed" resolves your concern. I read here a general description that states that two (of the three) major sub-groups within the RSoF have chosen to take different views on the organization. I don't see the article as suggesting that one of those two groups is right. If there's are POV issue here, I see it in the more subtle point of leaving out the third major sub-group of Friends. For the time being I'm inclined to replace the removed term. --Ahc 17:07, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- Ah, I see what you mean now. You mean "unprogrammed" as in "not belonging to a program." I took "program" in its sense of "trained to respond in a certain way by propaganda." I've replaced the term with "unaffiliated" to remove the possibility for confusion.--Ben Applegate 12:46, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
- Actually still not quite right. Among Friends programmed or unprogrammed is a term used to refer to types of worship (whether or not their form of worship has a planned order or events). There are many other details about how Friends understand the world that generally track with the form of worship they choose. See Religious_Society_of_Friends#Quaker_worship for some background. As I said before it's not a perfect description, but you might find it helpful. In truth a better term should be found, but unprogrammed is one Friends would expect to see. We just need to find one that's more accessible to outsiders (We [the editors] should probably add something to the list of Quaker terminology. --Ahc 13:16, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
- Ah, OK, I see. It's probably pretty obvious that I just wasn't familiar with the term. Sorry, and thanks for your patience.--Ben Applegate 15:16, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
- Actually still not quite right. Among Friends programmed or unprogrammed is a term used to refer to types of worship (whether or not their form of worship has a planned order or events). There are many other details about how Friends understand the world that generally track with the form of worship they choose. See Religious_Society_of_Friends#Quaker_worship for some background. As I said before it's not a perfect description, but you might find it helpful. In truth a better term should be found, but unprogrammed is one Friends would expect to see. We just need to find one that's more accessible to outsiders (We [the editors] should probably add something to the list of Quaker terminology. --Ahc 13:16, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
- Ah, I see what you mean now. You mean "unprogrammed" as in "not belonging to a program." I took "program" in its sense of "trained to respond in a certain way by propaganda." I've replaced the term with "unaffiliated" to remove the possibility for confusion.--Ben Applegate 12:46, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
- The term "Unprogrammed" Friends isn't a POV term in my opinion, it juxtaposed the reference to evangelical Friends earlier in the paragraph. It should probably be referenced over the Religious Society of Friends article to allow reader a chance to understand what the term means (granted there isn't a clear explanation of that term there because of clarity issues with that article). I don't share your concern about the phrasing here (although I agree any organization can be fairly criticized), nor do I see how removing the word "Unprogrammed" resolves your concern. I read here a general description that states that two (of the three) major sub-groups within the RSoF have chosen to take different views on the organization. I don't see the article as suggesting that one of those two groups is right. If there's are POV issue here, I see it in the more subtle point of leaving out the third major sub-group of Friends. For the time being I'm inclined to replace the removed term. --Ahc 17:07, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Logo
Can we use their logo like that? Seems like a possible copyright vio.
I made a similar image for the stub tag, which could be used instead with a caption perhaps? 
Zach 14:12, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- I think using logos is fair use. Take a look at the logo article, and it's certainly common around Wikipedia. --Ahc 02:28, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
[edit] External Links
I'm wondering how many AFSC operated websites should be listed in this article. There are several already present, but many more missing (there are something like 30-40 sites that I know of). I try to keep from editing this article too much, since I have a conflict of interest, but I thought I'd throw this out there for consideration. I would personally suggest that it be kept down to just the main AFSC.org, and then the publications (like Street Spirit) but leave off individual programs (like the Northeast Ohio link). --Ahc 18:00, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
