Talk:Thayer Learning Center
 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. |
POV problems?[edit]
The very, very long list under "Further Abuses" seems a bit out of place in an encyclopedia article. After all, we don't list every single abuse reported by victims of the Nazis, to use the most obviously extreme example. The fact that almost all the external links are to ISAC pages is a potential problem as well; good as they might be, the one thing they aren't is neutral.
I'm not doing any editing as I have very strong personal feelings about this place - basically, I hate and detest it - but someone should. If we can have a neutral article on the likes of Stalin, then we can have a neutral article on this. 86.136.253.163 23:25, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Disputing Nuetrality of this Article[edit]
The allegations in the "Further Abuses" section of this article have not been credibly sourced according to Wikipedia standards (WP:SOURCE). If there are no credible sources provided, they should be taken out.
For further information reguarding Wikipedia standards please see WP:NPOV.
ThayerLearningCenter 18:11, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
Credible Sources? Following Wikipedia's Policies?[edit]
According to the five pillars of Wikipedia ([[1]]) "All articles must follow our no original research policy and strive for accuracy; Wikipedia is not the place to insert personal opinions, experiences, or arguments..." "Wikipedia has a neutral point of view, which means we strive for articles that advocate no single point of view. Sometimes this requires representing multiple points of view; presenting each point of view accurately; providing context for any given point of view, so that readers understand whose view the point represents; and presenting no one point of view as "the truth" or "the best view". It means citing verifiable, authoritative sources whenever possible, especially on controversial topics."
I would say this is a controversial topic, and this article does NOT cite verifiable, authoritative sources. Furthermore, I would say it definitely advocates a single point of view, and is full of personal opinions and arguments. All of the "sources" are either from the ISAAC website, which is obviously not neutral, or the Thayer website, which is obviously not neutral either.
--Spencerj02 04:00, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
Removal of sourced info in Controversy section[edit]
I have reverted part of this article with regards to a controversy at the school. The infomation in this article is well sourced, with links to news sources regarding this incident. The info is replaced with a description with words like "an unfortunate incident" describing this. This is NOT encyclopedia and is not from an NPOV. Please refrain from replacing this section, and explain why this is "hearsay" if you believe it is so. Wildthing61476 (talk) 21:37, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Additional sources=[edit]
From Thayer Learning Center - Fornits Wiki copy in Denmark:
- Teen boot camps under scrutiny, by Tom Walker/Eyewitness News, WTHR - Indianapolis, April 30 2008
- Ex-employees sue boot camp accused of abuse, By STEVE ROCK, The Kansas City Star, June 03 2008
81.19.225.98 (talk) 13:05, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Copy Edit in October 2012[edit]
I did some minor copy edit. Did the POV issue ever get cleared up? Geraldshields11 (talk) 00:46, 13 October 2012 (UTC)