Talk:People's Action

National People's Action

I see the article was already deleted once. I tagged your new version to highlight some problems it has. The principal issue is the lack of reliable third-party sources that can help establish the notability of this organization. Wikipedia is generally very inclusive when it comes to these types of subjects, but if you do not add references that help establish notability, it will probably be deleted. See WP:FIRST for a general guide on how to write articles and WP:CORP for information about what constitutes notability for organizations. And don't hesitate to ask for help if you need it. §FreeRangeFrog 05:21, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I came by because the addition you made to Community Reinvestment Act was unsourced. I did a search for: "Gale Cincotta" Community Reinvestment Act and found and added a source, but came by to tell you that if you add unsourced statements to articles, they're likely to be reverted. So it's better to do a google search for a source before adding anything.

I see that you are having trouble with your new article. After doing a bit of googling, it seems obvious that the group is notable and should have an article. But, you have to cite sources, otherwise it'll be deleted again. To help you out, here are the results from a google search on news articles for the group's name "National People's Action". Drop me a message if you need help on how to do google searches. Also drop me a message if the article is the subject of an WP:AFD again.

LK (talk) 12:05, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

I agree; NPA is a notable network of community organizations and has long been in need of a credible article, particularly in the light of the recent burst of interest in community organizers. It does need the kind of work specified above, and more. Please allow us some time to get it shaped up. Dwalls (talk) 08:31, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

The above material copied from User talk:Gmforrest for the record here by: Dwalls (talk) 08:42, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

NPA/NTIC

I'm puzzled by your actions that moved National Training and Information Center into National People's Action, but now (still) there is no mention of NTIC in the NPA article. Yes, they are more or less one entity with a 501(c)(3) -- NTIC -- and a 501(c)(4) -- NPA. But this needs explaining, wouldn't you say? Dwalls (talk) 03:08, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

I saw a CSD request saying that NTIC was now NPA, and I appropriately merged NTIC into NPA, as there were articles on both simultaneously. Did I miss something here? MuZemike 03:17, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

As far as I know, both groups still exist. They are related entities, as I said above. Something like the American Civil Liberties Union -- 501(c)(4) -- and the American Civil Liberties Union Foundation --501(c)(3), Or the Sierra Club -- (c)(4) -- and the Sierra Club Foundation -- (c)(3). The related groups have different responsibilities, in order to benefit from U.S. tax law allowing charitable deductions for contributions to 501(c)(3)s. Only in the case of NPA/NTIC the organizations have names that appear unrelated. Language should be added to the NPA article describing the role of NTIC as a related entity. I'll try to get around to this, but I can't promise immediate action. The whole NPA article needs reworking. Dwalls (talk) 18:13, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

This section copied from User talk:MuZemike for the record here by Dwalls (talk) 17:17, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Help with new edits

Full disclosure - I currently work for NPA and want to be respectful about overstepping bounds. Would really appreciate some help here. NPA has recently come under attack from right-wing consultants and blogs and a few days ago the page was pretty radically re-written by a new, anonymous user basically cutting and pasting from those attacks. I believe the entry no longer adheres to a neutral POV - but, I don't think it's appropriate that these edits come from me as an employee.

Would appreciate the help, in particular of former neutral editors, to clean this up. Thanks. LizRyanMurray (talk) 07:11, 14 December 2014 (UTC)LizRyanMurray

Edited to add: To be more specific, the sections I believe are problematic are the description...where "left-wing" is over-used to the point of parody and the actual description of the organization has been mostly removed. The History section removed most of the accomplishments and 40 year history to focus on one event - verbiage also recast to be less neutral. The section on Joe Mariano and the DOJ controversy is accurate, if unfortunate, and belongs in the Criticism section. The Program section was also edited to pick one article to cast a specific and non-neutral POV on the entry. Again, a section listing legitimate and documented Criticism obviously wholly appropriate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LizRyanMurray (talk • contribs) 04:04, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

I only see "left-wing" used once. Meanwhile you say, "right-wing consultants". Maybe this has been edited since 2014 to cut down on the phrase "left-wing", but if it is left-wing, it's left-wing just as much as those are "right-wing" consultants. Redraider89 (talk) 20:04, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

There is at least one false statement in the article

The article starts with:

"Founded in 1972 by Cincotta and Trapp, NPA pushed for federal housing legislation including the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act of 1975, the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977,"

And says:

"National People's Action (NPA) is a community organizing network of 29 grassroots organizations in 18 states working together to advance a racial and economic justice."

The article claims that "National People's Action" us a direct result of the above acts but neither of those acts listed above says anything about "social justice" or "economic justice" in the laws. As is typical of this article, it makes claims, such as this, without any source or authority being cited, that those laws give them the authority to enact social and economic justice when they don't. It's also doubtful that even the National Affordable Housing Act of 1990 gives them that authority. If any of those do, they need to cite the section of any of the laws that says the law is designed to enact "social justice" or "economic justice". Redraider89 (talk) 19:51, 7 August 2017 (UTC)