Talk:Teva Learning Center

COI[edit]

It seems that Tevacenter (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is a role account from the actual organization. I have tried to make the article more WP:NPOV and use WP:RS but the role account is continuing to edit. I have been trying to chat with them on the user talkpage but haven't yet gotten a response. I requested a short-term semi-protection while this is straightened out. Basket of Puppies 18:31, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry[edit]

Hi. I don't really understand the entire site and it's functionality. I am not a computer programer, and I am in fact a volunteer at the Teva Learning Center. I am not intentionally trying to create COI obviously. I do, however, like the multitude of other companies and organizations on Wikipedia, wish to put the basic information about Teva and what they do up onto the site for viewing. I don't really understand how this whole "conversation" works, so it's not that I have tried to avoid you... whoever you are... and it seems to be more than one person. Sorry! Tevacenter (talk) 18:39, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, I don't even know where the "user talkpage" is... Tevacenter (talk) 18:41, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, Teva volunteer! Welcome to Wikipedia! First, let me just reassure you that we don't help you personally responsible for this innocent mistake. It happens pretty frequently and I assure you that we are very happy to help you out. However there are a few things you need to understand about editing Wikipedia. First, we generally ask that people edit as individuals, not as a "role" account. Your username seems to imply that you are the Teva Learning Center. That also causes a Conflict of Interest. See, wikipedia is an encyclopedia and as such as much uphold certain standards. Among those standards is a Neutral Point of View for all articles. Also, Wikipedia can't be used as advertising. My first suggestion is that you go ahead and make a new account, one that will be specific to you. Then, I suggest you have a look at some of foundations of editing Wikipedia, such as WP:NPOV, WP:RS and WP:V. Please- feel free to ask a million questions. We're very patient and only want to help. Thanks! Basket of Puppies 18:51, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, but even if I have a new account that is not my Teva related, you are saying that I won't be able to post information that is available on their website? How do the other companies on there do it? I don't understand how listing the organization's philosophies, history, affiliations, and programs is an "advertisement". I mean, a company profile is a company profile. I don't see how there is a conflict of anything!... :-/ Tevacenter (talk) 18:59, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Teva, having a COI doesn't necessarily mean you aren't allowed to edit the article. However it requires you to do so with a great deal of caution and perhaps some help in the beginning stages. See, Wikipedia doesn't write "company profiles". Rather Wikipedia has articles about groups (including companies) which are notable and can be included in an encyclopedia. However this usually means that the article must not be used as a source of advertising. You can't put up a list of future events or anything that wouldn't be neutral. Saying "Teva does a great job and inspires young kids to love the environment" would likely violate the neutral rule. I suggest that once you make a new account you come back here and propose what you want to be on the article page. Then we can sort through and help you make edits which are neutral and supported by reliable sources. I'll check bakc here every 10 min or so to see how you're doing. Basket of Puppies 19:04, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay Basketofpuppies... you're making me a Basket Case, ya know! ;-) New username, check. Now I don't understand, after reading about the rules of all the links there, why a company profile is not allowed. I see many organizations have this and I could perhaps be more diligent about editing out qualitative statement about the Teva Center work. Can I post work on the page on my own userpage and then this way I don't get anything deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by WikipedianDAK (talk • contribs) 19:17, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome, WikipedianDAK! Now that you've set up your individual account we can get to work on this article. You seem to be mistaken about "company profiles". I assure you, Wikipedia only has articles for companies which are truly notable. This means they have a good measure of news and press coverage. Companies like Nike and JP Morgan obviously do. Small mom-and-pop businesses usually don't, and so they can't be included on Wikipedia. You see, everything that is on Wikipedia has to be verifiable. How do we verify? Through press and news (most of the time). I've found a few articles in the press about Teva Learning Center. Now I need your help to find even more, so we can make a case for the continued existence of this article. Regarding article content we cannot use information that is right off the Teva website. That would be a copyright violation and it's something we're super sensitive about. However based on the news articles we can likely recreate the information. It just needs to be cited appropriately (but not copied). Remember, this is an encycopledia, not a commercial venture. Please write back and let me know. Thanks! Basket of Puppies 19:31, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Prod[edit]

Dear WikipedianDAK, this article has been nominated for deletion via the PROD process. It's important to immediately start work on this article in order for it to pass the deletion process successfully. What will be needed is a listing of all the newspapers and press materials that have written about the Teva Learning Center. I have found a few already but I hope you have a better list of them. Feel free to post them here and we'll get to work on this! :) Basket of Puppies 05:27, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The speedy deletion tag was removed with a summary of "Being part of a notable entity indicates importance/significance", which is absurd: notability is not "contagious". --Orange Mike | Talk 13:30, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've added text and included references from the 10 WP:RS articles. I propose that notability has been established. Thoughts? Basket of Puppies 06:00, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a number of new pieces, all cited with accredited sources. I have restructured the text to make it easier for people to add to this article as well as to read it. I would also argue that this organization has been around since 1994, press is available "publicly" since 2005. The reason that I say publicly in quotes like that is because this organization is very well know throughout the Jewish community and has been featured in periodicals not published online. Seeing as the Jewish community is such a small number of people in contrast to the world population or United States population, it is difficult to say that it is not notable. It depends on who you are asking. This organization has been on the leading edge of environmental education within the Jewish community and for Wikipedia administrators to discount its value, I think, is bordering on something that is unethical in itself. Those are my thoughts. And besides, when 5 or 10 different editors are asking for deletions and notability this-and-that, how is anyone supposed to be able to work with that. Too many captains steering the ship and not enough communication to the sailors if you ask me...WikipedianDAK (talk) 07:03, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Never let anybody mislead you: there is no requirement that a reference be available online in order for it to be an acceptable reference. As to the other: 5 or 10 or 50 editors working on articles is how we get things done around here; it's the collaborative open-source model at work. In this case, with the help especially of the Basket, but others as well, we've got a solid set of references and no questions of conflict of interest to taint anything. Mission accomplished. --Orange Mike | Talk 23:47, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"The Basket"? Hehehe, I like it. Basket of Puppies 01:51, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

News and press references[edit]

The following is a list of news and press articles which have written (in greater or lesser detail) about the Teva Learning center: 2005 JTA Eco-Conscious day schools... http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P1-104614462.html

Washington Jewish Week http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1P3-867591871.html MEMBERSHIP REQUIRED

2006 Iranian Jewish Chronicle 2006 Judaism in an Ecological Age by David Feinberg www.ijchronical.com/article.php?idcat=16&idart=121 WEBSITE NO LONGER EXISTS; PRINT COPY AVAILABLE

2008 Jewish Week Jewish Education Getting Greener http://www.thejewishweek.com/viewArticle/c36_a13447/News/New_York.html

Jewish Week It's Not Easy Being Green http://www.thejewishweek.com/viewArticle/c372_a12455/Special_Sections/The_New_Activism.html

JVibe Using Religion to Save the Planet http://www.jvibe.com/Real_life/Renewal.php

Muslim Public Affairs Council Faith Goes Green http://www.mpac.org/article.php?id=663

The Lookstein Center for Jewish Education in the Diaspora Starred Students at Teva http://www.lookstein.org/online_journal.php?id=191

Original Publication is the NJ Jewish Standard NO LONGER AVAIL ONLINE Greening a Sleep Away Camp http://www.campramah.org/content/GreeningaSleep-AwayCamp.php

The Jewish Daily Forward Farms School Bring Students Back to Their Roots http://forward.com/articles/13968/

JTA Jewish food movement comes of age http://jta.org/news/article/2008/12/30/1001876/jewish-food-movement-comes-of-age

2009 Keshet: Official Newsletter of the GBDS GBDS Hosts Green Fair http://ssnj.org/Content/Newsletter/Attachment/01-22-091.pdf

JTA Farming the land, Torah in hand http://jta.org/news/article/2009/02/02/1002523/farming-the-land-torah-in-hand

The Jewish Daily Forward Digging Deep on Tu B'Shvat http://forward.com/articles/15080/

Hadassah Magazine finding (Jewish) roots by Rahel Musleah http://www.hadassah.org/news/content/per_hadassah/archive/2009/09_Feb/feature_2.asp

The Jewish Daily Forward Blessing of the Sun: A teacheable moment http://forward.com/articles/104024/

The Jewish Week Where to Catch the Sun http://www.jewishweek.com/viewArticle/c37_al5299/News/National.html

The Jewish Week Cutting The Budget, But Not The Joy http://www.thejewishweek.com/viewArticle/c227_a15272/Special_Sections/Celebrate.html

The Brooklyn Daily Eagle Celebrating the Sun at Hannah Senesh http://www.brooklyneagle.com/archive/category.php?category_id=31&page=28

New Jersey Jewish News School recycling effort earns state recognition http://www.njjewishnews.com/njjn.com/062509/sxSchoolRecycling.html

I believe that this amount of press may show that the organization is non-trivial. Thoughts? Basket of Puppies 19:38, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Advert tag[edit]

I see that Shadowjams (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has added the advertisement tag to the article. I will admit I wish he would have taken a look at the discussion here first before labeling it as such. I am tempted to remove the tag as I think the article is pretty neutral, and is very well sourced. Perhaps we can have some outside eyes to judge the advertisement grade of the article? Basket of Puppies 17:43, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Notability was cleared up, but Shadowjams is right; there's still a strong reek of advocacy there, with multiple reiterations of its alleged mission, an inappropriate format (all the blockquotes; and those handpicked to favor the organization) and lots of "we've taught our students well and now they're carrying our teachings on" language. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:20, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I actually just checked and I don't see that the article is written too strongly from a first person (aka "we taught" etc). In fact the word "we" doesn't appear even once. I will go ahead and begin checking it line-by-line in order to make sure it's NPOV and not an advert. Basket of Puppies 22:48, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You misunderstood me. It's not actually in first person, but the tone is there, of "look what a fine institution this, what good intentions they have, what fine work they've done and what good alumni they're producing." We don't need quotes from their fans, like a bookjacket blurb; we need bald, factual statements of what they have done and are doing. --Orange Mike | Talk 23:10, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, I understand now. :) I am going through and trying to make things present to be facts and not influenced. Basket of Puppies 00:12, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a late comer to this discussion. I removed the tag because I had missed the discussion going on here. I think the advert tag might be a little strong, maybe the press release tag is better, but I don't feel strongly enough about it either way to change it. All of Orange Mike's advice is exactly right, and that was my original thought. Shadowjams (talk) 03:43, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You know, maybe it's because I am a newbie on the Wiki-scene, but I am feeling an extreme amount of confusion with this. I have worked on this article and done everything that I have been told to do. First I had a bad username, so I changed it. Then it wasn't cited enough so I went through and cited everything. Now it's being censured for seemingly advertising and I just don't udnerstand. This article clearly is to provide information about what Teva is and does. The "History" of the organization is important to those that may be interested. I would contend that it is a far cry from a website, and I assure you the official website is a much better advertisement than Wikipedia. If Wikipedia can't be used to describe an organization, then what can it be used for? It just seems like this article is being picked-on. And to all of you admins: it's so easy for you to slap around tags, but if you have no constructive criticism and offer no solution to these alleged issues. If you think that the article needs to be wikified then just do it. I have tried and many would-be links do not have articles to attach to and, thus I cannot link to them internally. As an aside, if all of the sources about the organization offer positive critiques, comments, news, or whatever, then that's what are we to do?. Anyone in the world can sign up and offer something negative, contraversies, etc. No?WikipedianDAK (talk) 21:18, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dear DAK, I understand your frustrations. The article is progressing nicely and I think it'll be in good shape in just a bit of time. Please be patient. :) Basket of Puppies 22:50, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism and rm of alumni sections[edit]

Hi, folks. I see that a "Criticism" section has been added. I'd like to open a discussion about this in order that we can come to an agreement of it. I believe that there may be some disagreement about this and, as such, thought I would try to preemptively create a space to talk about it. So, please chime in here. Thanks!! Basket of Puppies 05:17, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was bold and removed the alumni section because it didn't actually say anything substantial. I added the criticism section because the centre emphasises again and again the environmentalism it claims is inherent in Judaism, and a highly notable figure (far more notable than the centre itself) has criticised this. It also adds balance to an article which was pretty much a puff piece for the TLC.VsevolodKrolikov (talk) 08:15, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to OrangeMike for integrating the criticisms. I have one suggestion - that in order to accommodate the criticism in question, we separate history and mission. There isn't enough material to make either look substantial yet, but perhaps the stubbiness of each section will encourage editors to add more material. As an aside, I acknowledge the trend is away from criticism sections, but it's one that for a wiki I personally have reservations about as it makes editing by many people more difficult. We can get chaotic prose or those wishing to add criticism run into a wall of WP:STRUCTURE where it becomes easier for POV people to say cry UNDUE or claim it disrupts flow. The solution appears to me to be have more aggressive compartmentalising of themes. Not that there are POV people here, I just wanted to articulate a general idea.VsevolodKrolikov (talk) 03:09, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I moved your added criticism to the Birkat Hachama section because that is where it really belongs. As well, I changed the language you had because the Rabbi isn't criticizing Teva Center's interpretation of Judaism, but rather any interpretation of Judaism as an environmental religion specifically in the context of Birkat Hachama. TLC is not the only Jewish organization that believes in Judaism as an environmental conscious religion AND is not the only organization to combine prayers that are not normally recognized as "environmental." Finally, I am not sure if you are Jewish or not, but the Orthodox are critical of a multitude of nonOrthodox denomination interpretations of Judaism in general. For these reasons I changed the "critical of Teva Center's interpretation..." language. WikipedianDAK (talk) 14:16, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Teva Learning Center. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:37, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Teva Learning Center. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:33, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]