Misplaced Pages

Talk:Effective altruism/Archives/ 1

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Talk:Effective altruismRedirect page

Redirect to:

This talk page is a redirect. The following categories are used to track and monitor this redirect:
  • From a page move: This is a redirect from a page that has been moved (renamed). This page was kept as a redirect to avoid breaking links, both internal and external, that may have been made to the old page name.
When appropriate, protection levels are automatically sensed, described and categorized.

Newsrelease template justified?

I saw this was added and proceeded to check for any oddities that may have caused it to be added but found none. I'm sure this article is largely written by people from the EA movement (but I can't prove it), but as far as I can see they have not done anything to justify the Newsrelease template. So, I'm removing it for now, please let me know if there is disagreement about this. Erik.Bjareholt (talk) 20:26, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

I agree, that seems clearly reasonable to me (though I'm loosely in the movement, and recognise the names of many editors as being well-known people in it. there's a list of people somewhere.) Nkn7391 (talk) 00:26, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Room for more funding

Seems more appropriate as a (shorter) sub-section of the Effective altruism page, the sources are largely from one source and some show deviation from the exact framing in the lead. Mountain 11:50, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

I know, I was verging on delete but do think it could be stripped right back for a merge here. Mountain 12:46, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
  • I agree. I wrote on the talk page: "I think this article should be deleted. Out of the 13 citations, 10 are from GiveWell or Holden Karnofsky, the founder of GiveWell. One is from Giving What We Can, an organization associated with GiveWell. One of the only two external citations does not meet the "significant coverage" aspect of the notability guideline." Pawg14 (talk) 23:23, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Edit warring by David Gerard

@David Gerard: is edit warring. He is repeatedly deleting several animal-focused sections of the page without providing justification. David, please provide justification of your proposed edits. Your edit summaries only discuss the mention of the Copenhagen Consensus in the intro and the Animal Charity Evaluators link, not the other problematic edits you're making. Utsill (talk) 13:32, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Additionally, you cite WP:NOTDIR for excluding the articleless link, but nothing in that section precludes such links in such lists. Please provide a more specific citation. Utsill (talk) 13:36, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
We don't commonly include long lists in articles that include non-notable organisations, which means for our purposes ones without articles themselves. This article has suffered terribly from these in the past, to the point of being frankly spammy; it's largely been fixed now, but Misplaced Pages does in fact have standards. I appreciate that as most or all of your edits appear to be on a single topic, you may not be familiar with this.
You also appear to be insisting your organisation be added to the WP:LEDE. This also comes across as spammy and clearly violates WP:WEIGHT. I see that, from the article history, you've been trying to edit-war this link in. Please don't do that - David Gerard (talk) 13:46, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
I'm not suggesting any organizations be added to the lead section. You're not providing any justification for the big deletion you made, including deleting the entire Animal Welfare section. Please actually engage with some reasons, or stop warring. Utsill (talk) 13:49, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

One excellent reason to revert the edits is that they appear to be part of a call to action on Facebook (archive). Brigading is really not how we do things here. I note also someone on that post who has a similar name to a banned editor. Please do not do this. I've noted this on the conflict of interest noticeboard - David Gerard (talk) 15:00, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Please do not edit war the section I created on this talk page (you changed its title). Please engage with my attempt at constructive discussion above re your unjustified edits on this page, as per the edit warring policy, rather than making accusations of brigading. (Of course, you're welcome to make those accusations in addition to constructive discussion.) Utsill (talk) 16:10, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
Personal attacks in section titles are unlikely to get you your way - David Gerard (talk) 16:31, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
It's not a personal attack. It's the subject of my concern, i.e., the reason I made the section. It's clear you're not interested in engaging in productive discussion though. Please don't revert the same edits again. Utsill (talk) 17:45, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
This is getting ridiculous. Whether canvassing is occurring or not doesn't change whether content should be included. I don't think the above accusation even falls under WP:CAN except under an extremely broad sense, since whether or not effective altruists care about animal welfare is not considered to be a controversial topic by normal people as far as I know.K.Bog 05:15, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

EL cull, moved here

ELs were growing yet again. These should be reviewed and if they're references, make into proper references.

It is possible there are no canonical ELs for this article - since EA is a subculture/movement, not a top-down organisation of any sort - and that we should stick to linking organisations that are individually notable (as in, have a Misplaced Pages article) in the body text as appropriate. We should not, however, per WP:ELNO and WP:NOTDIR, have the ELs turned into a directory of EA organisations - David Gerard (talk) 16:49, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Yes, forums and blogs are specifically excluded per WP:ELNO. There is no reason to debate this. - Brianhe (talk) 18:08, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
Effective Altruism Hub is a tool/resource aggregator, so it's not clearly excluded. I'm not sure about the details of this policy enough to have a good opinion on it. Utsill (talk) 18:23, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
Same cruft deleted from lede . - Brianhe (talk) 23:22, 4 October 2016 (UTC)