Talk:Mission America (Columbus, Ohio)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Christianity This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.
Stub This article has been rated as stub-class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Organizations WikiProject This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Organizations. If you would like to participate please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Stub This article has been rated as stub-Class on the assessment scale.
Low This article is on a subject of low-importance within Organizations.

Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

Wikipedian An individual covered by or significantly related to this article, Mission America (Columbus, Ohio), has edited Wikipedia as
Lpharvey (talk · contribs)

[edit] Bias

This is absurd. This organization should be described for what it really is, not the way someone "feels" about it. I thought Wikipedia was a fair encyclopedia. I was wrong: you are a political --Left-wing, that is-- group out to get honest people! Let at least people decide by posting Mission America's web site: http://www.missionamerica.com/ .

If you feel the article is one-sided, feel free to improve it! However, please keep Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy in mind, we strive to make every article as unbiased as possible. Please don't judge Wikipedia based on one short article - we are a permanent work in progress, and whilst many great articles have been written, many others are still in their infancy. Also, I think you'll be disappointed that there is no vast left-wing conspiracy on Wikipedia, just lots of individual editors. :) — QuantumEleven | (talk) 17:10, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Expanded article, adding back some material from original version. First stub version was too anti, but did have some material needing to be kept. -- Paul foord 22:15, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
After going to the website this seems NPOV to me.Trieste 20:24, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Who said anything about a "vast left-wing conspiracy," QuantumEleven?

Somebody went through adding a bunch of weird inline URLs and dereferencing content links. Please note (whoever you were) that external links have their own section. You can see it down below the main article, labeled external links. Also, the 'very, very wrong' comment is a quote from Linda Harvey speaking for Mission America, and can be found by chasing the References section link, also previously provided. I don't believe that quoting people in context can count as a violation of NPOV. They're proudly against all of the things that they're listed as being against, so I don't see why including that is supposed to be a problem. --Solarbird 19:38, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Christianity is Skewer Used to Brand Mission America

I just read this page through for the first time. Besides numerous spelling and grammar issues, the impression I get is that this article is written by people opposed to Mission America. Particularly thick is the religious angle. Mind you, this is just my opinion on reading this article for the first time. For example, it's possible Mission America makes great points, but the article is written to cast these great points in a religious light as if to denigrate the points merely because they are based on a religious point of view. Does one really have to be Christian to oppose what Mission America is reporting? The author of the article writes as if people who are not devout Christians should immediately discard Mission America's assertions precisely because Mission America is a Christian organization. I do not think this kind of writing complies with wiki policy.

I would like to see this article rewritten in a fair fashion. Now I'm no expert. Perhaps there could be a "Critical Response" section for those opposing Mission America.

I'm not against informing people of the pros and cons of an organization. But when the article is entirely written from one single point of view, that's not good. This article is clearly written from one point of view -- one opposing Mission America specifically and Christianity generally. I say this article needs to be seriously revised. --SafeLibraries 03:30, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Weasel words avoiding stating MA's opposition to homosexuality, paganism and feminism

I assume this is a statement of opposition but avoids being explicit about it.

The organization's major area of focus is homosexuality from a conservative Christian viewpoint, particularly as it relates to American youth. The group is Christian in its worldview, and discusses paganism and feminist spirituality in relation to traditional Christianity.

-- Paul foord (talk) 10:32, 27 December 2007 (UTC)