Talk:Jack.org

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Jack.org article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE.

itsangelaw (talk · contribs) has been paid by Alex Johnson on behalf of Jack.org. Diff, as of May 16, 2018

COI and UDP tags[edit]

I have added conflict of interest and undisclosed paid editing tags to the article. I have done so as the article creator (per their talk page at User talk:Itsangelaw) is editing from same IP address as User:Jackdotorg, who had an obvious COI. They also noted that they are an intern working for Jack.org at [1].--SamHolt6 (talk) 20:24, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User Statement[edit]

As previously mentioned on my user talk page, I am currently (as of May 16, 2018) working as an intern at Jack.org. However, I have consistently put in measures to refrain from WP:PROMO. I only consulted with my superior to verify facts, not to get approval for phrasing. As someone who has written many papers for school - particularly in psychology and the sciences - I am very capable of writing objectively. I personally believe (and you can read the page to verify) that the Jack.org Wikipedia page reflects this objectivity. However, to prevent any further points of contention, I will refrain from editing/linking the Jack.org Wikipedia page in the future. — Preceding unsigned comment added by itsangelaw (talk • contribs) 13:40, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request Removal of UDP Tag[edit]

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered.

As I've disclosed my financial COI, can somebody please remove the UDP tag? — Preceding unsigned comment added by itsangelaw (talk • contribs) 15:56, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I've converted the UDP and COI tag into a Paid contributor tag, as you (who has disclosed they edited for pay) are the only substantive editor on this article. I am going to insist on the new tag until other editors have O.K.ed the page or edited it themselves.--SamHolt6 (talk) 03:37, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reply 17-MAY-2018[edit]

Please discuss this change with the editor who placed the template first, in this case, SamHolt6, to see whether the conditions for removal have been met. If that editor does not respond in a reasonable amount of time, you may reopen your edit request and seek assistance from other editors. Also, please be sure to sign all posts that you make, by adding four tildes ~~~~ Regards, .spintendo⋅⋅) 03:33, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I see the editor has responded, so you may disregard my previous post. Changing template to "answered"..spintendo⋅⋅) 03:39, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References to Website[edit]

Hi. I'm a new editor, so please don't bite. While I've fixed the reference templates within the article, I noticed a LOT of references leading back to the website of the company itself. Wouldn't that not count as a third party reference? In that case, do we remove all such references? TheOneWorkingAccount (talk) 10:30, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A reasonable question, TheOneWorkingAccount. As stated in WP:SELFPUB Self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, usually in articles about themselves or their activities,... subject to limitations listed there. Thus we do not normally remove such citations unless they seem excessively promotional (one of the listed limitations). However it is very useful to provide proper citation metadata so that readers can see just which sources are from the organization itself, or are otherwise not independent. And in general such sources do not count towards establishing notability, when that is in question. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:32, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Understood DESiegel, thank you. This, and observing the edits made to the page along with its reasons has given me a fair idea of what can be on an article and what doesn't deserve to be there. Thanks! TheOneWorkingAccount (talk) 17:46, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Questionable sections[edit]

Both the "Board of Directors" section and the "Corporate partners" section are currently totally unreferenced, and seem to me of very little encyclopedic value. Does any editor think they should be retained at all? ((if so, please indicate why.) If not, I propose simply removing those sections. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:44, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Program Section Fix[edit]

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered.

Hello! Going to preface with my COI, but I noticed the entire program section has been erased, with the exception of one random sentence. I believe the previous text about Jack Summit, Jack Talks, Jack Chapters, and Jack Ride were necessary to provide context for the actual operations of the organization. While those sections did rely partially on internal resources, this makes sense, since program descriptions are something the organization itself would know best (with respect to descriptions and numbers). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Itsangelaw (talk • contribs) 22:55, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

2020 update[edit]

Update to 2020 revenue and expenses. Updated data is here, but my editing skills are not good enough to edit the info box.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Aq7cCT9GTW0QNy4aF6B6PsWfkdqpnN05/view — Preceding unsigned comment added by CT55555 (talk • contribs) 15:17, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]