Talk:Youth for Human Rights International
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Youth for Human Rights International article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 3 months |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
COI tag (March 2023)
[edit]Much of the article was edited by Scientology socks and accounts that were sanctioned through arbitration. Grorp (talk) 00:18, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
Affiliations, multiple organizations
[edit]After noticing too many matches between United for Human Rights and Youth for Human Rights International, including California corporation number (C2728885) and IRS tax ID (20-2661767), I went digging. The California Secretary of State business search tool has become worthless, so I checked with the IRS Tax Exempt Organization Search. The tax ID is registered to the name "United for Human Rights". Their 990EZ form does mention "Youth for Human Rights" in some of the form's answers. So that confirms for me that the parent organization is "United for Human Rights", and "Youth for Human Rights" is probably just a 'project' or DBA.
The article, however, mentions YHRI's parent organization International Foundation for Human Rights and Tolerance
. So I went digging on that, too. It looks like these were likely started around the time Germany was hot on Scientology's case (1990's?). I found the old archived website, advisory board, board of trustees, history of the foundation, goals and purposes, activities and projects, and finally a Scientology.org page referring to "the Church of Scientology International’s Human Rights Department" tying in some of the Foundation-Tolerance activities as well as YHRI's.
So these three organizations are likely all just pieces of the Church of Scientology's "Human Rights Department" (pardon while I choke on that concept) with the creation of fictitious names (DBAs) and new corporations when it became necessary or desirable. These should ALL be mentioned in this article (preferably after stripping the PR fluff from it).
Grorp (talk) 01:09, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
Update on recent changes
[edit]I went through every one of the citations and updated them: if the link was dead, I found an archive version, I updated titles, dates, websites/publishers, etc., and most were changed to use the "cite web" style of citation. I looked up several of the news titles that had no web links and found several, which I updated.
Since it was discovered that the corporate name had changed and that "Youth for Human Rights" is basically a brand, I can see that the article needs a new logo for YFHR and United for Human Rights. (see their websites to see the difference) I am not really surprised that their websites haven't been completely revamped with the new name and brand.
The article still remains a huge advertisement sourced with primary sources, and needs a massive trimming.
- 40% of the current 54 citations are primary sources (Church of Scientology 10, Youth for Human Rights 8, TXL Films 3, United for Human Rights 1).
- The entire section of "Leadership" is cited with primary sources (9-18).
- The entire section of "Programs" is cited with primary sources (19-21).
- The rest of the article seems sourced with non-primary sources (22-52) however 13 of the 17 citations in the range 23-39 have no URLs and I suspect some might well be press releases in disguise (aka, primary sources). If anyone is able to find links for these non-linked citations, please add those links.
- Much of the section "Activities and events" seems self-serving, such as "In Belgium, it handed out a prize" and "YHRI awarded one prize to a Chinese actress, who promoted the group's views on her web site". Far from encyclopedic content.
- What are needed are real secondary and independent sources explaining what programs YFHR has been involved in, not a long string of "we were here and here and here... and here, too" sources.
Anyway, I'm done with the massive cleanup and reorg of the article, and I'm removing the "In use" tag. There should be no more dubious excuses by novice editors removing blocks of content due to '404 errors' and 'links not working'. Grorp (talk) 08:01, 18 April 2023 (UTC)