Talk:Generation Progress

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article has been mentioned by a media organization:

Olson, Walter (2016-03-15). "Disrupting Political Assemblies: Preserving the Liberal Tradition". Cato Institute. Archived from the original on 2016-03-20. Retrieved 2016-03-20. That group, whose staffers talked on Twitter of their role in the episode, turned out to be Generation Progress, a group whose Wikipedia entry notes that respectables such as Pres. Barack Obama, Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Tammy Baldwin, the League of Women Voters, and Ambassador Samantha Power have cooperated in its activities.

Untitled[edit]

I don't know how to edit articles in the new system, but Campus Progress has changed its name to Generation Progress, and I was hoping to make edits to reflect this change. Maybe someone who knows the system can do it, and in the meantime I will try and get the editing process down. --Kilgore the Fish, Wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kilgorethefish (talk • contribs) 12:41, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that this article was written by someone who is not familiar with the neutral, factual style expected in Wikipedia articles (or possibly not even with encyclopedias in general), but instead used to the fluffy marketing writing which is common in ads and self-portraits of organizations. Also, the external links should be restricted to a small selection at the end of the article (see WP:EL#External_links_section), except for those needed as citations for facts (see Wikipedia:Citing sources), which should come from reliable sources not affiliated with this article's subject. Regards, High on a tree (talk) 02:35, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism section=wtf?[edit]

The criticism section has two paragraphs each with some equally inane ideas: [1] that campus progress is offers "socialist solutions" (as if socialism should be considered "evil," which, objectively speaking, evil it is not) and only according to one dude who probably constantly spits that word out as often as his old gum and [2] that Campus Progress is partisan and a feeder program for the Center for American Progress (these are nothing short of obvious). Here's the paragraphs:

Campus Progress is frequently criticized by a number of conservative groups for its policy positions and activities. In a 2005 piece for National Review Online that took issue with Campus Progress’ national conference, Jason Mattera of Young America's Foundation asserted that “...students seeking guidance were given socialist solutions.” In a video for Michelle Malkin's Hot Air in 2008, Mattera criticized Campus Progress for their fund-raising tactics and questioned their relevance to young voters, criticism that Campus Progress addressed via their own taped response.

Front Page Magazine, operated by prominent conservative commentator David Horowitz, has also frequently targeted Campus Progress. Jacob Laskin, a senior editor of the magazine, wrote that Campus Progress “has clearly partisan goals.” Horowitz himself has referred to Campus Progress as “the baby farm of the Center for American Progress.” Despite his public disapproval for Campus Progress, Horowitz agreed to an interview in December 2007.

I've cut the whole and pasted it here, but I did leave in the article what is not completely worthless.--71.10.64.144 (talk) 16:28, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Non-partisan" label inappropriate here[edit]

Campus Progress is an inherently political organization, with nearly universal support for Democratic politicians and the most liberal of their causes. It is an extension of and a feeder to the Center for American Progress, which won't reveal its funding sources but is essentially a project of left-wing advocacy groups and individuals (prominent among them, George Soros). How then does it merit the label "non-partisan" (which I have removed)? It is no less partisan than similar organizations and think tanks described on Wikipedia as "liberal" and "conservative."

Because people come to Wikipedia seeking independent, dispassionate descriptions of groups such as this, the label "liberal" is the clearest and most accurate shorthand for understanding Campus Progress' positions and aims. I have therefore added it to the first paragraph. "Progress" and "progressive" are euphemisms that liberals are promoting to distinguish themselves from a tradition they seem to feel is discredited or burdened with negative connnotations. That's fine; they're entitled to shape their image, as are conservatives and people of all political stripes. But Wikipedia is not the forum for resolving what is essentially a public-relations problem. In the U.S. today, the term "liberal" better captures the array of policies that Campus Progress promotes.

As noted by the "advert" tag, this article still reads more like a press release than an encyclopedia entry. If the group weren't notable as an offshoot of the Center for American Progress, charged with advocating progressive/liberal positions on American campuses and, by association, Democratic politicians, this entry would deserve a speedy deletion "db-g11" tag. With the article's defenders anonymously stripping away "criticism" they oppose, it's likely that attempting a full rewrite, backed by necessary investigative work on the group's funding and involvement of the Center for American Progress in policy formulation and activity planning, would start a fruitless battle against Campus Progress advocates. But Wikipedia needs a more illuminating representation of the group than this.

Simplemeasures (talk) 02:56, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]