Talk:Academy of Achievement/Archive 1

Archive 1

Proposed Deletion

Hi there. I don't know Wikipedia procedures very well, but can see that a single article can only be a proposed deletion once. Too bad. Here are the proceedings: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Academy of Achievement. While I applaud user:DGG's efforts to come up with references to improve this article (found here: DGG's refs) unfortunately this PROD came a bit too soon. Four months later The Washington Post' published a three-page article that explains the Academy of Achievement's relationship to EduCap (why don't we have an article?). Two weeks later, The Chronicle of Higher Education reported that EduCap was under investigation and that it decided to reduce its loan operations. Two years later, The Wall Street Journal reported that Leon Panetta only took two rides on EduCap's Gulfstream IV. So I do believe that the first proposed deletion was correct. Comments? -SusanLesch (talk) 02:33, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Oh yeah. Two years later came CBS 60 Minutes with "Loan Charity's High-Flying Guests Exposed", "Student Loan Charity Under Fire", and "Who Is Catherine Reynolds?". -SusanLesch (talk) 02:37, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

• I had forgotten about this puff piece. Susan, what is the gist of the articles you list here? And how does their content relate to deletion? Drmies (talk) 03:05, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

• What used to be "unimpeachable sources" referenced in the original deletion request need to be revisited in light of these newer articles. The Washington Post said that EduCap and this Academy share offices and staff. Bongomatic just removed the long list of "gold plate" achievers which was what I objected to. The whole thing reminds me of the spam I have been getting for about twenty years to join a "Who's Who" book. I could just add these articles as sources here instead of deletion I guess. But it will spoil the "honor". -SusanLesch (talk) 04:19, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

• SL, that an article can only be a proposed deletion once refers only to the specific expedited WP:PROD procedure, where any challenge stops the deletion. If an article is kept at an AfD, as this was in 2007, and you still think it should be deleted, you can nominate it again. But like Drmies, I do not see how anything that has happened since--especially anything relative to what you've linked -- makes it less notable. (and we do have a rule that if it was notable once, it remains notable.) If the nature of the group needs to be more precisely stated on the basis of your sources, add them and, since it may be controversial, support the additions with quotations in the footnote. As for EduCap, nothing stops you from writing an article. It'll be judged on its merits, like any article. Just be careful about the WP:BLP policy--it applies to all articles. even those not explicitly about individuals. DGG ( talk ) 05:15, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
  • I agree; DGG's advice is sound. Even if the finances are fishy, morally or otherwise, coverage simply exists and notability cannot deteriorate, so to speak. I agree with Bongo's removal (as a matter of fact, I thought I did just that in the past, but I guess I didn't), and it is clear that there may be some COI and POV issues in the history--we'll need to keep an eye on it. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 19:39, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, both of you. I will just add to this article. -SusanLesch (talk) 16:20, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

• It is a beautifully crafted advertisement. Just as it always has been, in fact. Guy (Help!) 07:46, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

An attempt to resolve outstanding issues with this article

I've come here at the request of the Academy of Achievement to see if I can help resolve some of the issues with this article. Based on my analysis, it seems that before November of this year, the article was too much of an advertisement, and yet now I believe the article has swung too far in the opposite direction. Because I'm sure some will wonder, I should say now that this is my first engagement with the article; the identity of User:Aaaeditor is not actually known to me, but I'm confident in saying that editor is unlikely to return.

Anyway, to the matter of this article: as noted, for a long time it has been problematic for various reasons and, in order to help bring the article into line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, I've prepared a newly researched, completely rewritten draft, which aims to describe the organization's history and operations in a neutral, encyclopedic manner. You'll find it in my user subspace here, with the non-free logo disabled, likewise the categories: User:WWB_Too/Academy_of_Achievement

Unlike past versions (this one for example) the article contains limited information about past delegates and honorees, and provides a citation for each one. Unlike more recent versions (as of this writing, here's the current version) nearly half of the article's text is now devoted to controversies about a related organization.

About which, I refer to the section currently titled EduCap. With all due respect to its creator, I think the resulting section is a problem—specifically, one addressed by the WP:COATRACK essay; whatever one can say about the controversy, the Academy of Achievement was itself not a central actor. Indeed, only two of the sources used to support this section mention the Academy (here and here), and the latter merely in passing. I'm surely not saying there is no connection, and I have not eliminated mention of the criticism entirely. Others may have a different view about how much to include, but I hope we can agree its current importance to the Academy is vastly overstated. I hope this new draft represents an acceptable compromise, or at least a starting point toward one.

For what it's worth, I take no position on whether this material is at some point addressed in a separate article about EduCap (note: that link currently redirects to this article). I just don't think the detail belongs here.

My first step following this note will be to notify recently involved editors about my proposal here, and add a message on a few relevant noticeboards. If anyone reading this note is aware of a good forum to bring this discussion, please do so. I look forward to seeing through this matter to a mutually agreeable resolution. Cheers, WWB Too (talk) 18:24, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

• [Continued from my talk page:] As far as your comments go, WWB, in a nutshell, the EduCap section is the best sourced in the entire article and doesn't really take up half. I do agree that not all of it seems directly related to the academy, though it is possible to argue that in a roundabout way it is--and that the roundaboutness is precisely what should be made clear: collusion, etc. I think that the section needs to be rewritten, that probably parts of the second and the third paragraph should be cut, and that it needs to be made clear from the outset what the topic of discussion is--the academy. But Susan needs to weigh in here as well, and I say this without having looked at the sources (whose authority, BTW, I don't doubt--and I would not go so far as to say that the importance of this material is "vastly overstated"). Thank you, Drmies (talk) 20:26, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Drmies, I appreciate the note. While undoubtedly true the EduCap section is the best-sourced in the current article, I think that is of a piece with the coatracking issue I've raised. Additionally, the alternative version I offer for consideration is meticulously cited to reliable sources (online where possible, though many are older), and I think would be a clear improvement over the other existing sections.

Perhaps I've somewhat overstated "vastly overstated", but I would ask you and others to read through the sources and see for yourself. It may be that some material in the section's first paragraph is appropriate, but I believe the second and third paragraphs are very much off-topic. I've pinged Susan as well, and I agree that I would like to see more discussion here. Cheers, WWB Too (talk) 23:15, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

I have read the proposed new article by WWB and the existing article. It seems a balance is needed between the two concerning the EduCap issue. The proposed article on WWB's user page mentions nothing about EduCap and the Catherine Reynolds questions. Sources do not seem to indicate any wrong doing by the Academy but in keeping with the Wiki policy of creating an informative encyclopedia, there should be some mention that the actions of the Academy's executive have been called into question. The current article's section on EduCap devolves into what appears to be a separate topic. Changing the approach/focus of the text could help create the needed balance. As the section is now written, it seems extraneous.Coaster92 (talk) 23:41, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi WWB Too. Sorry, I read your article and am afraid it reads like an advertisement. (See for example WP:NOTADVERTISING.) Ending every paragraph with a list of famous people is not a solution in my opinion. Five of seven sections are treated this way. Also I question your treatment of sources (for example, one page at the academy's site includes everybody in one place; but instead we have in the lead The Washington Post (twice) and USA Today listed, and though they are good reliable sources, makes them seem superfluous and artificial). Next I question your omission of the founder's name, Hy Peskin. And finally I think your treatment of EduCap is lacking. It took me a long time to get to the bottom of this. I suggest shortening the section and leaving it here. -SusanLesch (talk) 00:16, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

• I was asked to comment also. I disagree with Drmies that the Educap material belongs here. It's prejudicial, to say the least. I think it much better that the material on Educorp goes elsewhere, except for a short statement about the existence of a connection, to be given in as neutral terms as possible. Educorp is probably notable, but even in an article about it by itself, the material here would have to be severely edited to remove bias against the company. In particular, that various politicians resigned is only relevant if they resigned because of their connection with the company.

As for the suggested material of the AofA, it's excessive. Perhaps some of it can be used. The names of performers at its meetings is not appropriate content. Probably the names of speakers is not either. For both performers and speakers, even the most distinguished come, if you pay them enough of a honorarium, so their attending does not show they think it important. The names of colleges that nominate students is not, either. That the students listed were delegates has to be proven from some other source than the AofA website. As for the awardees, likewise. It would greatly help verify them if web links could be given for the references. I see no evidence that the awardees attend to accept their awards; it would need verification.

• I note there is considerable duplication between this article and the one on Hy Peskin--a very problematic article from which I have removed a good deal of negative unsourced material. I know he;s no longer a BLP , but that sort of rumor neerds good sources in any case.

Some of what I say here is not compatible with what Susan L says above: I see her comments not just as a desire to avoid advertising, but also as a desire to include negative material. (I gather from what was in Peskin's article before I removed it that his role is quite disputable). Susan, have you any coi over this subject? I am quite puzzled at her suggestion that we use the web page instead of Reliable newspapers as sources. DGG ( talk ) 00:54, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello, DGG. Reliable sources are a requirement. I thought here they were being squandered. There's no reason I know of to cite every famous person. Not a big deal. And no I have no COI. P.S. I wonder, after your deletions to Hy Peskin, do you? -SusanLesch (talk) 03:08, 29 December 2011 (UTC) and SusanLesch (talk) 17:35, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm grateful that others, particularly Coaster92 and DGG, agree there are problems with the current EduCap section. Although Susan says she thinks my coverage of this topic is "lacking", this is in fact the key point of our disagreement: however well-sourced it may be, however long it took "to get to the bottom" of it, I just think this is not the place for it. However, I'm not opposed to a compromise regarding material that is specifically about the Academy and, if any is to be retained, agree with Coaster92's suggestion that it be rewritten.

I'm also open to a compromise regarding the list of notables, per suggestion by DGG and Susan. On balance, I think the names of participating universities is more important than performers, but because there is no clear guideline on how many names is too many, I'm curious what others think. For what it's worth, I have dramatically scaled back the names of awardees and attendees compared to past versions, and most of the names I have included were mentioned by third-party sources. As to whether they are paid an "honorarium", a 2004 Chicago Tribune story cited in my draft states "(expenses are paid but that's it)", so I don't see any reason to exclude names on that account.

Regarding Susan's question about Hy Peskin vs. Brian Blaine Reynolds, most third-party sources discussing the Academy refer to him as Brian Reynolds, so I believed that to be more relevant. Perhaps a parenthetical statement like "(formerly Hy Peskin)" would be appropriate, but that seems more germane to his Wikipedia article.

Looking forward to continued input, and working toward consensus. Cheers, WWB Too (talk) 17:37, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

 Done I used your lead and removed an entire paragraph about a Gulfstream jet. Hope this helps. -SusanLesch (talk) 17:35, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

User:WWB Too is a Paid Contractor for the Academy of Achievement

All,

It is important to note that, to the best of my knowledge, User:WWB Too is being paid by the Academy of Achievement to rewrite their Wikipedia entry in a manner that will allow it to remain consistent with Wikipedia rules while minimizing any references to scandals in the company's recent history. Editors should understand that edits by WWB Too are primarily motivated by his financial interests, rather than being motivated by a desire to improve Wikipedia. WWB Too, please respond if you would like and feel free to offer any corrections to my statements, above. Ebikeguy (talk) 05:03, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

What Ebikeguy writes is correct insofar as I've been hired by the Academy to see if I can encourage the improvement of this article, and indeed I mentioned I was working on their behalf at the outset. If he means to imply that my financial interest comes before making suggestions consistent with making Wikipedia better, I strongly disagree with that. I hope that you'll see my disclosure, my solution-oriented approach, and my efforts to bring all involved editors back into the discussion (even those who disagree with my position) as evidence of that.

Anyhow, the article is now better than it was before, but the EduCap section remains a problem (and a bit of a mess). And though I appreciate that Susan has used most of my lead section, I believe there are aspects of my suggested draft that remain an improvement in several ways. Meanwhile, I'm also persuaded that I should revise my own draft to remove some of the celebrity names. So I'll put together an updated draft and explanation this week, and I think we'll be able to find common ground here. Cheers, WWB Too (talk) 20:00, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

WWB Too, I'm glad you think the article is better. Are you going to ignore the wishes of Jimbo Wales? He wrote on the topic of paid editing: "I will personally block any cases that I am shown." I personally have gone as far down this road as I can. I don't plan to sit around waiting for your drafts later this week. Sorry. -SusanLesch (talk) 22:01, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry to hear that. Regarding Jimbo's comments from 2009, I've explained in the relevant discussion over at Jimbo's Talk page why I believe my involvement here is entirely consistent with what he wrote then. Please note, the exact number of direct edits I have made to this article, at this writing, is zero. My goal is to make the case that this article can be better still, and I'm open to working with anyone who's willing. Best, WWB Too (talk) 22:33, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Jimbo does not block such cases. His statement that he would do in this situation (and elsewhere) encountered so much opposition recently, that he voluntarily given up the use of his right to block on enWP. As for me, I will work with anyone who will work in good faith; I judge the good faith by what they do. For those who will not cooperate, I have the authority to block, and have done so dozens of times. People who insist on inserting irrelevant or inadequately sourced negative material on a page can be blocked also if necessary; I have sometimes done that also. DGG ( talk ) 19:28, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Educap

the material is inappropriate here. We do not engage in assigning guilt by association. I have moved it to a separate article that I shall work on; there are multiple additional sources, many of them positive. DGG ( talk ) 19:35, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

You may be aware that there is now a circular wikilink in your new language, and you may be working on fixing in by creating a separate article for EduCap. As of now, Educap redirects to Academy of Achievement. Ebikeguy (talk) 19:59, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

I humbly suggest that when RS sources closely link two organizations, as shown here, here, and here, that it is appropriate to mention that connection in one or both of the articles on each organization. When both organizations are controlled by the same person (Catherine B. Reynolds), such scrutiny is even more appropriate. Some may feel the language you just inserted glosses over the potential problems in the relationship between the two organizations. Perhaps a compromise is in order? Thanks, Ebikeguy (talk) 20:09, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

It seems to me that the link is not very tenuous. According to these sources, the Academy paid Daschle and Daley, characters who are brought into the news via their EduCap connection. I think that this deserves mention, more than in WWB's draft (linked below), where they are just office mates. Drmies (talk) 03:59, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

Possible compromise

While I agree with DGG that the controversies concerning EduCap do not belong here, I take Coaster92 and Ebikeguy's point that a compromise should be found. The 2007 Washington Post article does contain some material that is specifically about the Academy, and it would be reasonable to include. I have edited for clarity what was Susan's original first paragraph, and it's included as a new EduCap section in my proposed draft article. I've made it a second-level heading, immediately following Organization and funding, which flows naturally.

Doing so should probably also mean including the whole of the Background section I have prepared. This section is not duplicative of anything in the article, I believe is neutral in its presentation, and is supported by eight newspaper sources, half of which are available online.

Meanwhile, I would like to suggest the sentence about EduCap be removed from the introduction. All it says is that there is a relationship between the organizations, which is essentially a non-sequitur, and is confusing. Plus the Academy has a 50-year history of its own, and its association with EduCap has appeared in just a few news articles. In the interests of compromise, I think the balance can be found be in giving "EduCap" its own sub-heading, as I have done above. Under other circumstances, it probably could fit very well as a second paragraph of "Organization and funding", but I hope this helps find a balance. Thoughts? WWB Too (talk) 18:38, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

I've just repositioned my last comment as a new sub-section, making the case for a possible compromise on the "EduCap" issue. In case anyone is seeing this for the first time and hasn't read my initial comment on this page, it's in a previous thread here. However, I've revised my draft some, including a short paragraph about EduCap and trimming some of the notable names. Because of my conflict of interest regarding this topic (also much discussed above) it's better that I not make any direct edits, so I'd like to encourage others to be bold in addressing the matter. Best, WWB Too (talk) 23:07, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Actually, one more point: another reason to recommend someone use the last three sections I prepared is not just the clearer writing and more complete sourcing than the equivalent sections of the current article, but Student Delegates in particular lists Larry Page and Sergey Brin as attending in the wrong year. Right now it says 1974... about the time both were celebrating their first birthday. WWB Too (talk) 23:51, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

I have reviewed the references and I should have more time tomorrow to compare the proposed and current articles. One first impression I have looking at WWB's proposed article is why is EduCap a separate section. Why wouldn't that material be included under funding? Hopefully more tomorrow.Coaster92 (talk) 04:55, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

I have reviewed WWB's proposed article and the current article. I agree the one sentence about EduCap in the current article lead, as now written, seems adrift and out of place. Re-writing could remedy that, just adding some language to connect the topic to the article and help the reader to understand why it is where it is. WWB's proposed article looks reasonable to me, not particularly biased that I see offhand. It is more complete, more informative, and consequently more interesting than the current article. I do not understand why WWB, as a writer for AoA, wants to include the EduCap section. I do think the EduCap section, as it is now written in the proposed article, belongs under funding. I do not see why it is a separate section. Any thoughts on any of this?Coaster92 (talk) 05:50, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Coaster, glad to see you here again, and I'm very glad to hear you like my proposed draft. As to your question about why I would seek to include the EduCap subsection: the simple reason is that I'm trying to find a compromise that can attain consensus. I do like your suggestion that the paragraph itself be included, but as a paragraph under Funding as opposed to a separate subsection. If you prefer my version otherwise, I'd encourage you to be bold and add it as much as you see fit. Cheers, WWB Too (talk) 18:07, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Proposal for revision

I have compared WWB's proposed article with the current article. The proposed article does present a more complete picture and the content looks appropriate. I would propose to revise the current article in this way:

1. The introductory paragraphs in both articles are about the same so I would propose keeping the first section of the current article but taking out the sentence there about EduCap. It does not seem to fit there and could be included later on under Funding.

2. From the proposed article, add the sections entitled Founding, Mission, Organization and Funding.

3. Move the section about EduCap in the proposed article to the Funding section and make it part of that section.

4. Blend together the International Achievement Summit and Golden Plate Awardees sections in the current and proposed articles.

5. The Student Delegates sections are very similar in both articles. These sections could be blended. There probably does not need to be colleges and universities listed. Those could be found at the AoA website instead.

I will wait for a few days for any comments and discussion before making any of these revisions.Coaster92 (talk) 04:52, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

There hasn't been any comment to my proposal so I went ahead and started on the revisions and incorporated the Founding, Mission, Organization and Funding sections from the proposed article by WWB Too. I also combined the proposed EduCap section into the Funding section. I'll continue with my proposed revisions as well.Coaster92 (talk) 23:00, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, Coaster—it's certainly an improvement. I'm grateful you used my Background section, and your changes to it are fine by me. That said, a number of issues remain from the discussion above, including the fairly obvious Larry + Sergei error. You'd mentioned "blending" some existing and proposed sections, including International Achievement Summit, although I see you've left it alone for now. Let me know if your thinking has changed; I'd certainly like to make the case for improving the rest of the article. Cheers, WWB Too (talk) 18:52, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

WWB Too, I blended the International Achievement Summit and added your Golden Plate Awardees section. I see that references 3 and 4 appear to be the same. Is there any reason to believe they are not the same? If they are the same, I will fix this and get rid of the duplication in the reference list. Regarding the Student Delegates section, you said Larry and Sergei are not the class of 1974 but I was not able to find info about their graduation dates. Do you have it? The other alternative is to just take that out but that info does tend to add to the article. I will look at the Student Delegates section and revise if/what is appropriate.Coaster92 (talk) 23:41, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Oh, cool—very appreciated. I'll see what I can find on when they attended (and my error, Sergey, not Sergei, though the article has it right) and look at those references as well. It might take me a couple days, but I'll follow up soon. Cheers, WWB Too (talk) 02:36, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm afraid I can't find the year in any public listing, whether from a third-party source or the Academy's website. I do find an interview with Page and Brin from 2000 they did for the Academy, but it doesn't seem to indicate when they attended. I think there's an effort under way to update the Academy's website with more detailed information, which could help verify their listing and the rest. I hope to have more soon. Cheers, WWB Too (talk) 02:46, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

You know what? I take it back, actually the Academy website does list them, under "The Academy Student Delegates". And it was in 2000, just like the interview. Moreover, the other names currently listed are also included in this list, making it very likely the list in the article originally came from this page. And I've created a formatted citation, if you want to use this:

<ref name="About_Academy">{{cite web |url=http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/pagegen/brochure/p1.html |title=About the Academy |date= |work=achievement.org |publisher=Academy of Achievement |accessdate=3 February 2012}}</ref>

Hope that helps. Cheers, WWB Too (talk) 17:25, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

I have blended in all that seems appropriate from WWB Too's proposed article. I am in the process of double checking references. If any adjustments are needed based on the reference check, I will make those. WWB, the Academy's website was already on the reference list so I kept that citation. Thank you so much for your efforts.Coaster92 (talk) 21:20, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

A couple additional requests

{{Request edit}} Hello again, to anyone watching this page. I'd like to ask for an un-conflicted editor (i.e. not me, see above discussion) to consider a couple of additional minor changes, one regarding accuracy, the other regarding context:

• In the Organization and funding section, the article states that EduCap "sold 350,000 private student loans." The Washington Post article cited does not use the word "sold", but rather "provide". Would it be possible to update this to read: "provided 350,000 private student loans" so that it is in line with the term used in the source material (and common usage in general)?
• Also in that section, the Post article is quoted stating that the Academy is "one of the largest beneficiaries" of EduCap. There is currently no context for this statement without providing some reference to charitable donations to other institutions. This information is included in the same Post article, so I'd like to request that a sentence be added here regarding the $100 million plus that EduCap / Catherine B. Reynolds Foundation has donated to organizations since it was founded. Here's what I'd suggest:

Since its establishment, The Catherine B. Reynolds Foundation has donated over $100 million to beneficiaries including the [[Kennedy Center]].<ref name=Paley>{{cite news|author=Paley, Amit R. and Valerie Strauss|title=Student Loan Nonprofit a Boon for CEO|date=July 16, 2007|url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/15/AR2007071501448.html|work=The Washington Post|accessdate=November 20, 2011}}</ref><ref name=Montgomery/>

I think this should go between the sentence beginning "In 2007, The Washington Post..." and the one beginning "Per the Post...". In case you're wondering, the Montgomery reference establishes the Kennedy Center as a key beneficiary, and is currently used in the article.

Any assistance and / or feedback would be very welcome. If you happen to find this and agree with the changes, please consider this a request to be bold on my behalf and make these changes. Cheers, WWB Too (talk) 18:07, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

I agree the term "sold" could have created confusion so I substituted "provided" for "sold" as suggested. Regarding the sentence about Catherine Reynolds Foundation donating $100 million, this seems to be off topic to me. It does not seem to be needed to keep the article clear and informative and looks like it could be contrary to WP:PROMO. Do you see my point?Coaster92 (talk) 21:31, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi again, Coaster. The primary reason I sought to include the mention of the $100M donation to the Kennedy Center is because the current version says:

In 2007, The Washington Post reported that the Academy is one of the "largest beneficiaries" of EduCap (of which The Catherine B. Reynolds Foundation is part), receiving at least $9 million from the student-loan company.

While the quotation is accurate to the source, it seems misleading to call the Academy "one of the 'largest beneficiaries'" when it received less than 1/10th of EduCap's overall giving. The same Post article states:

The Catherine B. Reynolds Foundation, established in 2001, has donated more than $100 million to major cultural institutions across the country.

Perhaps an alternative solution would be to forget about the Kennedy Center and other beneficiaries—as you note, they're a bit off-topic—and simply rephrase the sentence to say:

In 2007, The Washington Post reported that the Academy received at least $9 million from EduCap, of which The Catherine B. Reynolds Foundation is part.

Does this make sense? WWB Too (talk) 17:00, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

WWB, the sentence says that AoA is one of the largest benis of EduCap. (and notes that CRFdn is part of EduCap). So isn't the more relevant point the total amount of donations by EduCap, not CRFdn? It seems relevant to the section (Organization and Funding) to mention a major source of AoA funding and noting that AoA is "one of the largest beneficiaries" of that source also appears relevant. But a discussion of CRFdn donations, as worded, does not seem relevant in this article. At this point, I am not seeing that it is appropriate to change the sentence. Any other thoughts?Coaster92 (talk) 22:19, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Coaster, I think the Post's wording causes some confusion: EduCap doesn't give directly to the Academy, but through its CBR Foundation. So to say that the $9 million from the parent company makes the Academy one of the "largest beneficiaries" of that company when the parent company's charitable foundation has given away $100 million renders the quoted phrase somewhat misleading.

The Post is saying that the Academy is one of the biggest single recipients ($9 million) out of a very large overall donation history ($100 million). If Organization and funding is going to mention the Academy's position relative to the charitable donations from EduCap, it should probably put the figure in context. If one is relevant, so is the other. Does that make sense?

In my first attempt I suggested adding context so the quote didn't mislead; in my second I've suggested avoiding it altogether. Given the incomplete information, I wonder if you'd agree that simplifying it would be playing it safer. That said, I recognize it is a nuance, so if you still disagree, I can let it go. Let me know what you think. Cheers, WWB Too (talk) 19:41, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I'll have a look at the Post article again and try to unravel this, then see what looks best to do. Not today, hopefully tomorrow.Coaster92 (talk) 22:32, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

WWB, the Post article says that EduCap operates under three different names, one of which is the CBRFdn, and that EduCap donates to AoA. As I read the Post article and the Wiki article, the facts stated match. Is there a reference that says CBRFdn makes the donations to AoA?Coaster92 (talk) 21:53, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Coaster. True enough, the three entities are legally the same, with different roles as described in the Post article. EduCap is the parent company, the foundation is its charitable arm, and Loan to Learn is the brand under which it provides student loans. Meanwhile, the same article also mentions the Foundation as funding the Academy, in fact in the very sentence quoted in the article: "One of the largest beneficiaries of the foundation has been the Academy of Achievement." Funny, I think I spaced on the fact that the original sentence didn't refer to EduCap but the CBR Foundation.

Meanwhile, the Foundation website says the same: "The Foundation sponsors the Washington, D.C.-based Academy of Achievement's annual International Achievement Summit..." And the Academy's website does, too: "The Catherine B. Reynolds Foundation is also a longtime sponsor of the Academy of Achievement..." Again, I'd be happy whether the context of the Foundation's overall giving was added, or whether the sentence was simplified per my suggestion on March 14. What do you think? WWB Too (talk) 19:34, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

WWB, how about this:

In 2007, the Washington Post reported that the Academy is one of the “largest beneficiaries” of EduCap, which is run by Catherine Reynolds. EduCap is parent company for a student loan company (which has provided 350,000 loans) and The Catherine B. Reynolds Foundation. The Academy has received at least $9 million of the $100 million total donations made by the Foundation. Per the Post, the Academy shares office space and staff with EduCap. The Academy has paid at least $1.7 million for management services to ASC Management Co., whose sole shareholder is Academy of Achievement Chairman and CEO, Wayne Reynolds, who is also Catherine Reynolds' husband.Coaster92 (talk) 20:59, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Done It's been a few days, so I've made Coaster's suggested edit in the hopes that it fulfills this request. I've also made a few bold changes to trim the content down. We were talking about EduCap a lot in this section, which is peripheral to the article IMO; the wikilink to EduCap should suffice. I've disabled the Requested edit template, but if this doesn't solve the request, or there are additional concerns, please feel free to turn it back on. Thanks.  —Jess· Δ♥ 15:35, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Jess and Coaster, thanks very much to both of you. Coaster, great suggestion. Jess, your additional changes happen to be exactly what I would have asked for, had I responded sooner. I agree EduCap details belong on that page, which I've actually started seeking to improve as well, in case one or the other of you are interested in looking at that. So far I've been working through the details on that article's Talk page with another editor (User:DGG) but DGG has had limited attention, and I'd like to get input from others as well. Cheers, WWB Too (talk) 18:50, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Missing student delegate

{{Request edit}} As I mentioned above, the current list of student delegates in the article appears to derive from a paragraph on the Academy's website, however there is one delegate listed on the website who is missing from the article. Eric Lander (Class of 1974) is listed on the website, along with the others currently included in the article. Since he is notable, and I see no other reason not to include him, I believe this may just be an oversight. On account of my COI (detailed above) I'd appreciate if someone else made this addition, provided one agrees with the proposed addition. Cheers, WWB Too (talk) 19:17, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi WWB Too, I went ahead and added Eric Lander and put the student delegates in chronological order according to when they attended the summit. All of the information about delegates is on the Academy's website so I don't think there is a need to add to the list. The reader is able to get a good picture of the AoA operations without the article becoming promotional, which would be contrary to WP:NOTPROMOTION: "Wikipedia is not a soapbox, a battleground, or a vehicle for propaganda, advertising and showcasing..." All the best.Coaster92 (talk) 20:34, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Coaster, very much appreciated. Good call on the chronological listing, too. WWB Too (talk) 21:47, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Some years on, and after a spate of recent changes, I see that the Student Delegates section no longer has any student delegates listed. Without some truncated list of student delegates and awardees, it is somewhat difficult to understand and assess the Academy of Achievement (along the lines of Coaster92's comment). I'll plan to work in a truncated list accordingly. Qalandariyya (talk) 21:59, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Request help to repair article

I just restored several items that were deleted by user/admin JzG/Guy. This is an interesting article. I first heard about the Academy of Achievement when I came across the Steve Jobs interview from 1982. Surprised to have never heard of this group, the first place I went (of course) was the Wikipedia article. Reading the history and talk pages, I noticed that most of the sources were on a private Amazon server, which struck me as odd. Since no independent editor would have access to those files, something strange was going on. It does appear as JzG/Gus says that an insider had a big part in writing this article. Reading the other talk notes I can see that user:WWB too was paid to help with the article, and indeed that info was disclosed. User: Desiderata45 has also done a lot of intricate edits to the citations so it's unclear what his or her role is but it does seem suspicious. It was also strange that so many sources were used to substantiate simple statements - kind of overkill in my book. Having spent some time on the Academy's website and read the many interviews and transcripts, I'm supportive of what they are trying to do, and so will do what I can to fix this article. The first thing I did was add info substantiating notability to the lede, which I sourced with a good Wall Street Journal article. That was I also added a list of notable recipients and guest speakers, and sourced the info with speeches I found on YouTube or the honorees' Academy pages. Normally I like to avoid citing an organization's own web site, but in this case the item being sourced is substantiated by showing their presence on the site. The other issue is that so many of the press clippings are not available online. I'm going to keep looking and would like to ask for everyone's help. Since there are some links to archived PDFs on the company's server, is it better to use those, or simply cite the original publication and just name the publication without using the link? My goal is to eliminate as many of these self-hosted sources as possible. TechnoTalk (talk) 21:14, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi TechnoTalk (talk) 21:14, 20 July 2015 (UTC). I'm not editing the article directly as a friend-of-a-friend is involved with the Academy of Achievement and my initial exposure to it was at his request. Last time I looked at the article there was a certificate error on the server used to host the PDFs and they were not accessible. I don't think anyone will have a problem with using the articles hosted on the site if they can be viewed and, as such, verified. Any fluff needs to be removed though - if the article ends up just-the-facts and solidly verifiable edits should stick. JSFarman (talk) 13:06, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Here's the problem. This is an article much of whose editing is by people with little or no other experience of Wikipedia. It has repeatedly been stuffed with laundry lists of names to whom the organisation has made awards, and this is the Wikipedia equivalent of resume-padding. The Nobel prize is notable because of what it is, the award confers notability. Here, the award itself confers no additional notability. Not one of the awardees is likely to have this award mentioned in the first paragraph of a profile. Or indeed anywhere at all in said profile. The founder is not Alfred Nobel, the founder is someone for whom I cannot trace a single decent biography establishing notability. Ditto the current incumbent. There are few, if any, articles in which notable individuals cite the influence of the organisation in helping them to become notable. It is, in short, a very minor player, and Wikipedia has no interest in being a part of the PR effort to change that. Guy (Help!) 12:28, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi - I started to remove the links to the PDFs on the Amazon server, to follow proper sourcing protocol. If anyone wants to actually read the original articles that are being cited, they can go to the article history to find the old server links. I found a few third party sources mentioning the speakers and awardees and included those in the lede, with names. Including the notable names gets us past the notability paradox. I included links to the actual speeches and interviews as extra info, even though many of them are primary sources. I'll go with group consensus as to whether the article would be better with just the third party links and not the speeches. I also removed a few sources that didn't actually substantiate what they said they were going to, and will go through the other citations to make sure everything is proper. I also moved the mission info to its own section to shorten the lede.TechnoTalk (talk) 19:15, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Laundry lists

This is a group that likes to associate itself with notable people. It does not confer notability, and the things it confers are not notable in the context of those lives. The constant inclusion of laundry lists of people the company has decided to "award" is simply resume padding. Guy (Help!) 21:52, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

As previously noted, the head of the organization is a friend of a friend, so I am not editing directly.

I disagree with you on the content of the article and the apropriateness of including people who have particpated in the Academy of Achievement's events. Those people didn't passively receive the award -- they participated in the events related to it. The group may associate itself with notable people, but the notable people associate back. Their participation is significant in and of itself -- I would argue that it does confer notability.

That said, the article needs an edit for tone, as in places it reads fluffy/promotional.("...a non-profit organization that brings high profile, successful people from various fields together with promising young achievers to inspire them to succeed"). I will sandbox a revision for review as soon as I have the opportunity. JSFarman (talk) 23:20, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Guy - I reverted your revert of my edits. You may not have realized that you removed the legal name of the organization from the lede, added inappropriate primary sources to the article and added sources that do not substantiate the accompanying content. Also, by removing the names of the speakers and honorees, you have removed the much needed context for the group, context which address your concerns of notability. A sampling of high profile names isn't a laundry list, but a quick way to convey the scope of the organization. I encourage you to read the information and the sources before removing any appropriate content.TechnoTalk (talk) 13:49, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

It appears that newcomers to this article trying to follow the rules and make good faith edits have their work cut out for them. For those of you who have made your way down to this thread, User:JzG has again reverted my edits, claiming that even a handful of names of awardees and speakers does not belong in an article about an organization whose notability comes in large part from hosting private award ceremonies with very notable speakers and honorees. What's troubling is that this person, not a normal user but an admin no less, has spent the past four years deleting media coverage citations from this article, and then defending these deletions by paradoxically claiming the organization is not notable because there's no media coverage. Indeed, since all evidence of awardees and speakers and student attendees has been removed, any newcomer would seemingly be able to assume that this article should be deleted altogether. Is that the endgame? In the meantime, I've found some more good sources and will add good additional info as time permits. Of particular interest will be building a history section. I'd appreciate if everyone, admins and regular users like me, would review in good faith the content and sources that are added rather than just doing a blanket revert. I know it's hard to change four years of behavior, but let's wipe the history slate clean and judge new edits on their own merits. To do otherwise would seemingly be an affront to the spirit of Wikipedia.TechnoTalk (talk) 20:43, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Repeated blanking of information that provides context

I restored the key context info in the lede, to provide a basis for readers to learn about the type of honorees and speakers the Academy attracts to its events. All the info is properly sourced, and as such, should meet Wikipedia guidelines. I also previously restored the vandalism whereby User: JzG tried to insert a fake motto into the infobox. I've alerted him of my reversion on his talk page, and want the community to be aware of his actions in case he continues. Let's be civil folks.TechnoTalk (talk) 00:24, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Names of speakers and honorees

I'm starting a new section to reframe this discussion in less loaded terms than employed by user: JzG when he refers to this as a laundry list. The info is properly sourced, and I do not agree that an article about an organization with a long history of ceremonies with notable speakers and honorees does not benefit the reader by having at least some of the names of those speakers and honorees. This provides critical context. When I first found this group through Steve Jobs' 1982 speech, I didn't know of it and didn't think I would find very much coverage. However, the media has been covering this event since 1961. Indeed, the Wall Street Journal itself noted that there's less coverage than you'd think for an event of its magnitude. I will be adding more info, properly sourced, to flush out this history. Michael Dell, JzG's CEO is also an honoree. I want to point out a few things. This is clearly personal for JzG, as evidenced by his vandalism of the motto, but I'm going to remain civil and let the community help as necessary. I'm adding Edward Teller the first speaker becuase that's notable, and to suggest that I should remove him because it puts the group in a bad light is not in good spirit. Are you suggesting I introduce bias? Also, saying the speakers are not valid because they are paid is a leap of logic. I don't know, and neither do you, who was paid what, if anything, to speak. Some of the articles I've read suggest that the awardees (ex: Issac Asimov) invite others to come to the event, because they are proud of their association with the group.TechnoTalk (talk) 00:42, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

I've reverted the edits and continued vandalism by user JzG. Per WP:RV, he is required to build consensus before further reverting, but has not. I've flagged him again for repeated vandalism - he continues to add a nonsensical motto to the infobox. It's not easy going up against an experienced administrator, but if other impartial users would care to comment, we can build consensus and hopefully keep the context that is necessary to show the notability of this organization.TechnoTalk (talk) 21:52, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Outside opinion

@TechnoTalk: requested my opinion on whether @JzG: was inappropriately removing neutral, well-sourced content under the premise of it being promotional, when it wasn't actually. Name-dropping is a very common source of promotion, but in this case at least some of the sources I've glanced at suggest that the organization is in fact primarily notable as a gathering of famous people and such content may be warranted.

That being said, in a more general sense, the article is so over-the-top promotional, it would definitely justify an advert tag or some heavy trimming. Just in the Lead we have stuff like:

• "that brings high profile, successful people from various fields together with promising young achievers to inspire them to succeed."
• "which the Wall Street Journal called "perhaps the glitziest gathering of intellect and celebrity that no one has ever heard of,"
• "the Washington Post called "one of the world's most dazzling gatherings of international celebrities."

Per Wikipedia:Quotations quotes are often used as a way to insert non-neutral language that would not otherwise be considered acceptable. The Lead is suppose to define the subject, explain its notability, then summarize the entire article (including history), but the current Lead does nothing but repeat over and over how super-amazing their event is. Meanwhile, after reading it I'm still unsure what they do in a literal sense, phrases like "inspire them to succeed" not being a very clear description of what they do. CorporateM (Talk) 23:00, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

I have done the necessary trimming of promotion throughout the article. Happy to look at any specific sources/content at this point. CorporateM (Talk) 23:23, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

OK - I can't say that I expected to see so much of my properly sourced content deleted, because there's even less info now than what Guy left, but we at least have a new starting point. I'll take responsibility for the promotional statements that were added, but they are valid quotes for context, and I added them to the lede (I thought it was spelled lede) because Guy kept insisting the group was not notable, while he simultaneously deleted all the media sources I added. Nothing tells teh reader more that the group is notable than those quotes. The sources I have found also suggest much more info could be added to flush the article out than what is there now. Without any info about who the speakers are and who the honorees are, this becomes another article with a big hole in it. At least you removed Guy's vandalism, which he then tried to distract from by bringing suspicion of COI action against me.TechnoTalk (talk) 00:37, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

It doesn't look like notability should be a problem, but sometimes editors lean towards deleting an article when it is promotion or an attack page, even if the org is notable. That shouldn't be a problem anymore. Generally speaking we don't want promotional quotes, even if they are cited to reliable sources, or an indiscriminate list of award winners. WP:ORGLISTS provides some guidance on when identifying award winners (as an example) is considered encyclopedic - which is whenever there is substantive source material on it. This can include a press article that is wholly focused on an individual winning the award or a profile story on the org that mentions a specific person and the significance of the award with respect to them, but not brief mentions made in passing or trivial announcements/listings. List articles and categories are also sometimes used, such as List of winners of the National Book Award, but only for exceptionally significant awards.

One common exception to avoiding comprehensive lists for example is acquisitions. Sometimes there are too many trivial acquisitions to list them all, but in most cases every acquisition or most of them get significant press attention, so they generally warrant comprehensive inclusion. So every case is different. Hope this helps. CorporateM (Talk) 01:21, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Another improtant point to make is that stories about winners of awards must not simply be regurgitated press releases. When someone wins a notable award, such as the Fields medal or a Nobel prize, there will be several different stories, and they will be very clearly written ab initio by the journal in question. Less notable awards, such as the films that pick up awards by state or city film critics' associations, you might get two or three stories, but they are all almost word for word the same, because they are space-fillers written direct from press releases. I have yet to see a single story about any of the awards handed out by this company that can be clearly read as anything other than exactly that. There is no lead story from Time that describes the conferral of one of these awards. Bluntly, the company is barley notable, the awards, as far as I can tell, are not. Guy (Help!) 08:42, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes, very strongly agree. There are a lot of press articles about awards that are just routine announcements that list all the winners that aren't really usable. CorporateM (Talk) 16:10, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

I don't think you guys actually read the sources I used. Not only was there not a single regurgitated press release, but there was not a single press article just listing winners. The articles - all mainstream press - all talk about the events, and how meaningful they were to the attendees. I also used YouTube videos of acceptance speeches to substantiate that the award was indeed awarded to such and such a person, or that so and so spoke at the event. Reagan, Jobs, Spielberg, the list goes on and on. If that's not notable, I don't know what is. Is that not allowed? Sounds like you're adlibbing that popular statement - "what are you going to believe - your admin or your lying eyes?" CorporateM - I don't know what I expected when I reached out, but it wasn't this. Where did you read that the group was founded in Malibu? I don't see that info anywhere, or I'd have included it. Based on your editing history, I thought you'd actually look at the sources and agree with me about the notability, but instead you gutted the article to be exactly the way Guy wanted it. You even took out all the info about the additional multimedia content that sits on the Academy site. Is that not a great resource? While hunting for sources, I saw that many of the online biographies of the awardees quote that Academy content as a resource. You had to have studied this article's history before jumping in, and I'm not paranoid to think you gutted it on purpose. Openly paid editors don't get very far contradicting admins. I followed the rules - making edits with good sources, without any advertorial bias, and only asked that there be a discussion about my edits before keeping them or deleting them. Instead, Guy quickly reverted everything with his standard statement - laundry list, fluff, etc. - without so much as looking at what I did. After I reverted and politely asked for a discussion, even giving him my Skype ID to discuss, he vandalized the article's motto in the infobox, perhaps to thumb his nose at me and show how he is above reproach. I flagged his talk page twice with the vandalism template, and his response was to charge me with COI. Apparently I fit the profile of paid editing, and I must be doing real well with three company articles since April 2014, an article on Ray Price's Nightlife album and the Pretzel logic article, which I just created in Guy's honor. Specifically, due to his reasoning seeing no problem blocking all contextual honoree info from an article about a group that grants awards to successful people. There is an unreasonable notability standard being applied to this group and its media coverage. At this point this is bigger than Wikipedia. Guy - it's about you being a bullying admin who is unyielding and perhaps has been fighting too long with others to be fair and effective anymore. If you were running for admin now, wouldn't your inability to remain neutral and civil preclude you from being selected, regardless of the good gatekeeping work I see you doing in other areas? That's why I called you Gustav von Aschenbach - despite the good you've done elsewhere, you are a tragic hero with a fatal flaw - in this case it is your unyielding resistance to allowing this article to be improved. I'm discouraged and even briefly considered going to the administrative noticeboard, but you already have so much going on there, I think you actually thrive on drama and conflict. I have no history of drama or conflict - no reverts, no flags, nothing, until this point. I won't give you the satisfaction of smearing me. And, since anything I add to this article will be deleted, and this has become Guy's personal article, I'm going to step back and let others try. Eventually Guy will be gone or go so far over the top that his admin role will be stripped from him, and then we can go back to putting in newsworthy, properly sourced info about this group, and civilly discussing its merits on an even footing. If not, this will continue to be the group which the Wall Street Journal called "perhaps the glitziest gathering of intellect and celebrity that no one has ever heard of."[[1]]TechnoTalk (talk) 00:06, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

TechnoTalk, you need to look at the history of this article, whihc has been subject to years-long POV pushing by undeclared and declared advocacy accounts. I think you are out of your depth. You have remarkably little history outside of this article, inviting speculation that you are the latest in a series of editors whose interest in this article has nothing to do with Wikipedia's goals. I recommend you leave it. I have been an admin for nearly a decade, I actually do know what I am doing. I am concerned that you may have an undeclared COI, given the evidence of recent emails I have. I do not like conealed conflicts of interest. Guy (Help!) 22:16, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

There is no concealed conflict of interest. You can throw up all the smokescreens you want, and attack my contributions, but I have never been nor will I ever be paid for fixing this article. That includes cleaning up the sources, and adding significant info of interest to Wikipedia readers. You insult your position of responsibility by lying about having some kind of evidence to the contrary. Wouldn't a good admin expose someone they thought was getting paid? You have also still not acknowledged your vandalism. You also continue to insist that since you have been on the site longer, yours is the final word. Sorry - it doesn't work that way. And saying you have more friends on the site - I've seen evidence of that - they've also attacked my work - but that doesn't make you right. Quit being so ornery and try to be a better admin.TechnoTalk (talk) 16:22, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Criteria for allowing notable members on Wikipedia pages

I am writing to appeal the wrongful deletion of the listing of the organization’s membership and related references. The names listed in the Academy of Achievement Wikipedia page are all members of the organization and participated in its programs. If Wikipedia pages such as the Horatio Alger Association of Distinguished Americans and Harvard Business School are allowed to list their notable awardees, the Academy of Achievement should also be allowed to list their notable awardees. Please share the criteria for allowing listings of notable members on wikipedia pages.Ranprin (talk) 17:30, 31 August 2020 (UTC)ful deletion of the listing of the organization’s membership and related references. The names listed in the Academy of Achievement Wikipedia page are all members of the organization and participated in its programs. If Wikipedia pages such as the Horatio Alger Association of Distinguished Americans and Harvard Business School are allowed to list their notable awardees, the Academy of Achievement should also be allowed to list their notable awardees. Please share the criteria for allowing listings of notable members on wikipedia pages.Ranprin (talk) 17:30, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

The list was formatted oxnoxiously as a massive paragraph, it had no reason to be there. Can you declare you Conflict of Interest? Hemiauchenia (talk) 17:38, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Edit Request

Hi Wikipedia,

I work for the Academy of Achievement. We’ve made some edits ourselves in the past which I apologize for. We did not understand the process. This edit request seems like the right way to ask for impartial and accurate changes, so please let me know if anything I asked for is incorrect or can’t or shouldn’t be done.

1. Can we change the name of the page from Academy of Achievement to American Academy of Achievement? That’s the real name, as you can see on the current references

2. Can we add a lead? Like “The ‘’’American Academy of Achievement’’’, known colloquially as the Academy of Achievement, is a non-profit education organization that brings together accomplished people from diverse fields with graduate students in order to network and to encourage and mentor the next generation of young leaders. The Academy hosts an annual International Achievement Summit, which ends with an awards ceremony, during which new members are inducted into the Academy.” It can use these references: https://www.irishtimes.com/news/visiting-politicians-to-get-protection-1.1059364 https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/clinton-and-gorbachev-at-secret-dublin-summit-26241965.html https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-2004-06-14-0406140115-story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/2003/05/04/you-have-a-dream/64bb0f12-305d-4f0c-ad42-f29ca099ea87/ https://achievement.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/San-Francisco-Chronicle-June-26-1989.pdf

3. Can we then make a History section? It would start like this: “The Academy was founded in 1961 by Sports Illustrated and LIFE magazine photographer Brian Reynolds. In 1985, Reynolds' son, Wayne became the Executive Director and, in 1999, was selected as the Board Chairman. In the 1990s, the Academy’s board moved the organization from Malibu, California, to its new foundation headquarters building in Washington, D.C.” Catherine Reynolds did not take over leadership in 1985, nor is she listed in the reference used; she only joined and met Wayne later on. It can use the same references that are already there, but the Washington Post archived article says nothing about the Academy, just about a donation that Catherine made. Can we just remove that unused reference? I just want to rearrange the page. It can end with “In 2007, the Catherine B. Reynolds Foundation donated $9 million to the Academy.”

4. Can we make a subsection under History called International Achievement Summit, with this text: “On September 9, 1961, the Academy hosted its first International Achievement Summit. The Summit, held in Monterey, California, included a "Banquet of Golden Plate" award ceremony, named for the gold plates used by Sheraton-Palace Hotel, in San Francisco, which provided the service for the ceremony. Physicist Edward Teller was the keynote speaker, in which he warned of the United States' poor performance in the atomic arms race. Awardees at the inaugural ceremony also included engineers Charles Stark and Kelly Johnson, General Douglas MacArthur and film director William Wyler. The first honorees were chosen by a national board of governors, but subsequent honorees have been selected by the Golden Plate Awards Council, which consists of prior Academy awardees.

The Golden Plate is awarded for an individual's contributions to science and exploration, the arts, public service, sports, and industry. The academy has held a summit and award banquet annually since 1961.

On October 27, 2012, the Banquet of the Golden Plate celebrated its 50th anniversary in Washington, D.C.

The latest Banquet was held in New York City 2019.

The Academy also hosts the International Achievement Summit each year, attended by graduate students and young innovators, like Sergey Brin and Larry Page, from the U.S. and overseas. The summits were originally attended by high school students chosen based on their academic achievement and extracurricular activities. With time the event evolved into a gathering of speakers and panelists which The Wall Street Journal called in 1999 "perhaps the glitziest gathering of intellect and celebrity that no one has ever heard of."

References are the previously included ones, plus: https://www.unionleader.com/nh/arts_and_ent/folk-icon-judy-collins-postpones-nh-show-amid-coronovirus-pandemic-but-schedules-a-return-its/article_6f9bc49e-d20a-59dc-85c0-49dc9ca6383e.html Sergey Brin and Larry Page - https://www.businessinsider.com/google-sergey-brin-favorite-books-2016-2

I hope you can help me with this. Thank you in advance.

Sincerely,

Jarc12030 (talk) 22:02, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Jarc12030: thanks for declaring your paid editing status. I have added your declaration to the banner at the top. Another editor will evaluate this request at a later date. Z1720 (talk) 01:55, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi Jarc12030

Lots here, but I can tackle these.

I also edited your request a bit to make it easier to read. I hope your don't mind.

1. The name change seems right to me and supported by the sources on the page. I'll make.
2. A lede is a good idea and the language is pretty similar to what's on the page. Looks good.
3. A history section is also a good idea. I'll dig into that source (gotta get some use out of my WaPo subscription) to see if it really supports nothing. If not, should be removed.
4. That works. I may tweak slightly and both this subsection and the history parent section need Wikilinks, which I can add.

I'll dig into the sources and see if anything isn't supported, but these look like good edits.

--FeldBum (talk) 01:40, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Pinging Jarc12030

I'll make the name change after everything else.

I made a lede. I had to change some sources around, but if you have one about the academy basics for the lede, like a profile, that would be good.

Made history edits, but I need sources for Wayne Reynolds becoming "the Executive Director and, in 1999, was selected as the Board Chairman" instead of just taking over. That's not in the sources as is.

Did the inaugural summit with some edits and lots of source moving. Did you mean Charles Stark Draper? Looks like it, so I changed it. I had to add a few sources too.

I rewrote "The Academy also hosts", since that's already established on the page.

Rewrote a bunch of that too. Also, as far as my research turned, Brin and Page had completed masters degrees but paused their doctoral studies when they attended. Is that what you meant? They were young (late 20s), but not officially in grad school? A bit confusing, but I'll leave as I wrote, unless you have a different source.

For future edit requests, if you have, can you put the source next to the line?

--FeldBum (talk) 17:42, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Dear @FeldBum:,

Thank you for your edits.

1. Re: I need sources for Wayne Reynolds becoming "the Executive Director and, in 1999, was selected as the Board Chairman" instead of just taking over. This June 1989 San Francisco Chronicle article mentions Wayne Reynolds becoming the Executive Director in the paragraph, “The quiet mind behind all the hubbub is Wayne Reynolds, executive director of the Academy. Eight years ago the 32-year-old Malibu resident took over from his father, Brian Reynolds, ….” https://achievement.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/San-Francisco-Chronicle-June-26-1989.pdf

This May 2003 Washington Post article mentions Wayne Reynolds as chairman of the Academy of Achievement. https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/2003/05/04/you-have-a-dream/64bb0f12-305d-4f0c-ad42-f29ca099ea87/

2. Please change Reynold’s to Reynolds’ in this sentence: In 1985, Reynold's son, Wayne Reynolds took over the leadership.

3. Please change Banquet to summit in this sentence: The latest Banquet was held in New York City 2019.[13]

4. I would like to change the image “Academy of Achievement logo.jpg.png” in the Infobox to this photo of the Academy of Achievement headquarters in Washington, D.C. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Academy_of_Achievement_building.jpg

Sincerely, 96.241.152.93 (talk) 02:10, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, @FeldBum:, I forgot to login. Thanks again, Jarc12030 (talk) 02:21, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Looks good. Made those edits. --FeldBum (talk) 05:32, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Dear @FeldBum:, I would like to request the following update:

1. Change 50th anniversary line: 'On October 27, 2012, the Banquet of the Golden Plate celebrated its 50th anniversary in Washington, D.C.' Change to: ‘On October 27, 2012, the Academy celebrated its 50th anniversary with a summit in Washington, D.C.’

Thank you, Jarc12030 (talk) 18:10, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

I think that actually works better, Jarc12030. Made that edit and marked the request as answered. --FeldBum (talk) 21:05, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Dear @FeldBum:,

Please change Sheraton-Palace Hotel to the Palace Hotel. The correct wiki link is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palace_Hotel,_San_Francisco.

Thank you, Jarc12030 (talk) 20:28, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

History

The Academy was founded in 1961 by Sports Illustrated and LIFE magazine photographer Brian Reynolds. His 1953 LIFE cover photograph of John F. Kennedy and Jacqueline Bouvier sailing at Hyannis Port “helped shape the mystique of Camelot” and was later selected by TIME as the 100 most influential images of all time. Reynolds established the Academy to both empower and educate young people by bringing them together with leaders, the level of achievers he met on his many photographic assignments.

HISTORY > 2nd paragraph: 1) delete reference

2) Insert "In the 1990s, Reynolds moved the organization" from Malibu California.

EXAMPLE with changes: In 1985, Reynolds' son, Wayne Reynolds took over the leadership, becoming the executive director of the Academy and, in 1999, was selected as the board chairman. In the 1990s, Reynolds moved the organization from Malibu, California,/> In the 1990s, Reynolds moved the organization to its new foundation headquarters building in Washington, D.C.

HISTORY > 3rd paragraph:

1) Delete reference

EXAMPLE with changes: In 2007, the Catherine B. Reynolds Foundation donated $9 million to the Academy.>

International Achievement Summit > 1st paragraph

1) Insert after first sentence:

2) Fix reference URL:

3) Add this text after "William Wyler": Nobel Prize laureates Willard Libby and Luis Walter Alvarez were also 1961 awardees, the first group of more than 170 other Nobel Prize recipients that have been inducted into the Academy.

International Achievement Summit > 2nd paragraph

1) Delete: The Golden Plate is awarded for an individual's contributions to science, the arts, public service, sports and industry. The academy has held a summit and award banquet annually since 1961.

2) Delete: On October 27, 2012, Academy celebrated its 50th anniversary with a summit in Washington, D.C.}} The roster of Golden Plate awardees who have participated in the summit include Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Larry Ellison, Jeff Bezos, George Lucas, Sally Ride, Rosa Parks, Coretta Scott King, John Lewis, Ronald Reagan, Barack Obama, Jimmy Carter, Gerald Ford, George H. W. Bush, Edmund Hillary, Tenzing Norgay, Mikhail Gorbachev, Elie Wiesel, Shimon Peres, Desmond Tutu, Oprah Winfrey, Sidney Poitier, Audrey Hepburn, Francis Crick, Jonas Salk, Frederick Sanger, John Bardeen, Linus Pauling, John Wayne, Elizabeth Taylor, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Michael Jordan, Mickey Mantle, John Wooden, Denzel Washington, August Wilson, Stephen Sondheim, Toni Morrison, Bob Dylan and Aretha Franklin.

The 10th anniversary Banquet of the Golden Plate awards ceremony was held at the The Bellevue-Stratford Hotel in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania on June 26, 1971. The Academy guests of honor and participants included Norman Borlaug, Roberto Clemente, Gerald Ford, Milton Friedman, Leon Jaworski Louis Kahn, Har Gobind Khorana, and James A. Michener. The program’s keynote speaker at Independence Hall was broadcaster Lowell Thomas who went on to serve as Chairman of the Academy’s Golden Plate Awards Council.

The 25th anniversary Academy summit was held in Washington, D.C. in June 1986. The program included an awards ceremony at Mount Vernon in Virginia, which was narrated by Academy member Olivia de Havilland. Among the Academy members who participated in the 1986 program were Neil Armstrong, John Glenn, Alan Shepard, Chuck Yeager, Muhammad Ali, Willie Mays, Bo Jackson, James Watson, Loretta Lynn, Ray Charles, Steven Spielberg, Leontyne Price, Herman Wouk, Gloria Vanderbilt, Shirley Temple, Mary Lou Retton, Yousuf Karsh, Stephen Jay Gould, Michael DeBakey, Denton Cooley, Isidor Isaac Rabi, Charles H. Townes, Joseph L. Goldstein, David Baltimore, John H. Johnson, Stephen Bechtel Sr. and Robert Rauschenberg.

The 30th anniversary American Academy of Achievement summit was held at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel in New York City in June 1991. The Golden Plate awards ceremony was narrated by Academy member Oprah Winfrey. The 1991 honorees and Academy participants included Ralph Lauren, Calvin Klein, Oscar de la Renta, Wynton Marsalis, Norman Schwarzkopf, Colin Powell, Barbara Walters, Beverly Sills, Maya Angelou, George Lucas, Martin Scorsese, Wallace Stegner, Ken Burns, Dizzy Gillespie, Philip Johnson, Jack Kemp, and Sylvia Earle. The keynote speaker of the summit symposium held at the United Nations was Audrey Hepburn, who spoke about her life as an actress and a UNICEF Goodwill Ambassador. The Academy program was hosted by Awards Council members Henry R. Kravis and Steven J. Ross.

The 40th annual International Achievement Summit was held in Dublin, Ireland, hosted by the Prime Minister of Ireland. The keynote speakers at the opening dinner were Bill Clinton, singer-songwriter Bono, record producer Quincy Jones, and author Frank McCourt. The summit symposium held at the Library of Trinity College included presentations by Academy members Mikhail Gorbachev, Ehud Barak, and Benazir Bhutto. Among the 2002 Academy honorees were Henry Kissinger, John Hume, David Trimble, Edna O’Brien, Chuck Berry, Enya, Paul Nurse, and George J. Mitchell.

In October 2012, the Academy celebrated its 50th anniversary Summit in Washington, D.C. The Summit’s introductory dinner was hosted by Academy members Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Anthony Kennedy at the U.S. Supreme Court and Sonia Sotomayor was presented with the Golden Plate Award. The welcome address to the Academy members was made by Chief Justice John Roberts. The summit program was held at the Hay-Adams Hotel. The 2012 Golden Plate awardees included Leon Panetta, Louise Glück, Eric Holder, and Ray Dalio. The program featured a dinner at the United States Capitol, followed by a presentation in the House of Representatives Chamber by Academy member Tim Berners-Lee, inventor of the World Wide Web. General Colin Powell was the keynote speaker at the Banquet of the Golden Plate ceremony, which concluded with a musical performance by Academy member Aretha Franklin.

The latest summit was held in New York City 2019. The 2014 International Achievement Summit was held in San Francisco, California, and opened with a dinner at City Hall hosted by Mayor Willie Brown. Golden Plate awardees included Frances Arnold, Thomas C. Südhof, Carol Burnett, Jeff Koons, Robert Lefkowitz, Admiral William H. McRaven, Governor Jerry Brown, Diana Ross, and Wayne Shorter. The dinner’s keynote speaker was Sergey Brin who talked about his journey as an entrepreneur since participating in the 2000 summit as an Academy delegate. The 2014 program included a symposium series in Napa Valley where the concluding presenter was Academy member and geneticist Francis Collins.

The 2017 International Achievement Summit was held at Claridge's in Mayfair, London. The awards ceremony was narrated by Academy member Jeremy Irons. The 2017 Golden Plate awardees included Simone Biles, Michael Caine, Jennifer Doudna, Peter Gabriel, Neil Gorsuch, John Banville, A. S. Byatt, Demis Hassabis, Kazuo Ishiguro, Venki Ramakrishnan, Norman Foster, Sting, and Valentino. Bill Clinton was the keynote speaker. The summit included a luncheon at Waddesdon Manor, the ancestral country house of the Rothschild family, hosted by Academy member Lord Jacob Rothschild. The Academy program concluded with a dinner at Blenheim Palace in Oxfordshire, hosted by the 12th Duke of Marlborough and Academy member Roger Bannister, the first athlete to finish the mile run in under four minutes.

The 2019 International Achievement Summit was held in New York City, and the Golden Plate Awardees included Andrew Lloyd Webber, Nadia Murad, Leymah Gbowee, Daniel Kahneman, Pete Townshend, Roger Daltrey, Van Morrison, Orhan Pamuk, Lynn Nottage, James P. Allison, Buddy Guy, Bryan Stevenson, Lucian Grainge, Smokey Robinson, and Ian McEwan. The summit ended with a dinner and tour of the "Play It Loud" exhibition at The Metropolitan Museum of Art, hosted by Academy member Jimmy Page, guitarist and founder of the rock band Led Zeppelin.

International Achievement Summit > last paragraph

1) Delete: With time, the event evolved into a gathering of speakers and panelists which The Wall Street Journal called in 1999 "perhaps the glitziest gathering of intellect and celebrity that no one has ever heard of."

2) Insert text at the end of the paragraph: Other Academy delegate alumni include Taylor Swift, Bryan Stevenson, Pete Buttigieg, Eric Lander, Herschel Walker, Princess Reema bint Bandar Al Saud, Karl Deisseroth, and Feng Zhang.

EXAMPLE with changes: On September 9, 1961, the Academy hosted its first International Achievement Summit. The summit, held in Monterey, California, included a "Banquet of the Golden Plate" awardawards ceremony, named for the "gold plate service" used for special occasions by the Palace Hotel in San Francisco, which provided the service for the ceremony. Physicist Edward Teller was the keynote speaker, in which he warned of the United States' poor performance in the atomic arms race. Awardees at the inaugural ceremony also included engineers Charles Stark Draper and Kelly Johnson, General Douglas MacArthur and film director William Wyler. Nobel Prize laureates Willard Libby and Luis Walter Alvarez were also 1961 awardees, the first group of more than 170 other Nobel Prize recipients that have been inducted into the Academy. The first honorees were chosen by a national board of governors, but subsequent honorees have been selected by the Golden Plate Awards Council, which consists of prior Academy awardees.

The Golden Plate is awarded for an individual's contributions to science, the arts, public service, sports and industry. The academy has held a summit and award banquet annually since 1961.

On October 27, 2012, Academy celebrated its 50th anniversary with a summit in Washington, D.C.}} The roster of Golden Plate awardees who have participated in the summit include Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Larry Ellison, Jeff Bezos, George Lucas, Sally Ride, Rosa Parks, Coretta Scott King, John Lewis, Ronald Reagan, Barack Obama, Jimmy Carter, Gerald Ford, George H. W. Bush, Edmund Hillary, Tenzing Norgay, Mikhail Gorbachev, Elie Wiesel, Shimon Peres, Desmond Tutu, Oprah Winfrey, Sidney Poitier, Audrey Hepburn, Francis Crick, Jonas Salk, Frederick Sanger, John Bardeen, Linus Pauling, John Wayne, Elizabeth Taylor, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Michael Jordan, Mickey Mantle, John Wooden, Denzel Washington, August Wilson, Stephen Sondheim, Toni Morrison, Bob Dylan and Aretha Franklin.

The 10th anniversary Banquet of the Golden Plate awards ceremony was held at the The Bellevue-Stratford Hotel in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania on June 26, 1971. The Academy guests of honor and participants included Norman Borlaug, Roberto Clemente, Gerald Ford, Milton Friedman, Leon Jaworski Louis Kahn, Har Gobind Khorana, and James A. Michener. The program’s keynote speaker at Independence Hall was broadcaster Lowell Thomas who went on to serve as Chairman of the Academy’s Golden Plate Awards Council.

The 25th anniversary Academy summit was held in Washington, D.C. in June 1986. The program included an awards ceremony at Mount Vernon in Virginia, which was narrated by Academy member Olivia de Havilland. Among the Academy members who participated in the 1986 program were Neil Armstrong, John Glenn, Alan Shepard, Chuck Yeager, Muhammad Ali, Willie Mays, Bo Jackson, James Watson, Loretta Lynn, Ray Charles, Steven Spielberg, Leontyne Price, Herman Wouk, Gloria Vanderbilt, Shirley Temple, Mary Lou Retton, Yousuf Karsh, Stephen Jay Gould, Michael DeBakey, Denton Cooley, Isidor Isaac Rabi, Charles H. Townes, Joseph L. Goldstein, David Baltimore, John H. Johnson, Stephen Bechtel Sr. and Robert Rauschenberg.

The 30th anniversary American Academy of Achievement summit was held at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel in New York City in June 1991. The Golden Plate awards ceremony was narrated by Academy member Oprah Winfrey. The 1991 honorees and Academy participants included Ralph Lauren, Calvin Klein, Oscar de la Renta, Wynton Marsalis, Norman Schwarzkopf, Colin Powell, Barbara Walters, Beverly Sills, Maya Angelou, George Lucas, Martin Scorsese, Wallace Stegner, Ken Burns, Dizzy Gillespie, Philip Johnson, Jack Kemp, and Sylvia Earle. The keynote speaker of the summit symposium held at the United Nations was Audrey Hepburn, who spoke about her life as an actress and a UNICEF Goodwill Ambassador. The Academy program was hosted by Awards Council members Henry R. Kravis and Steven J. Ross.

The 40th annual International Achievement Summit was held in Dublin, Ireland, hosted by the Prime Minister of Ireland. The keynote speakers at the opening dinner were Bill Clinton, singer-songwriter Bono, record producer Quincy Jones, and author Frank McCourt. The summit symposium held at the Library of Trinity College included presentations by Academy members Mikhail Gorbachev, Ehud Barak, and Benazir Bhutto. Among the 2002 Academy honorees were Henry Kissinger, John Hume, David Trimble, Edna O’Brien, Chuck Berry, Enya, Paul Nurse, and George J. Mitchell.

In October 2012, the Academy celebrated its 50th anniversary Summit in Washington, D.C. The Summit’s introductory dinner was hosted by Academy members Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Anthony Kennedy at the U.S. Supreme Court and Sonia Sotomayor was presented with the Golden Plate Award. The welcome address to the Academy members was made by Chief Justice John Roberts. The summit program was held at the Hay-Adams Hotel. The 2012 Golden Plate awardees included Leon Panetta, Louise Glück, Eric Holder, and Ray Dalio. The program featured a dinner at the United States Capitol, followed by a presentation in the House of Representatives Chamber by Academy member Tim Berners-Lee, inventor of the World Wide Web. General Colin Powell was the keynote speaker at the Banquet of the Golden Plate ceremony, which concluded with a musical performance by Academy member Aretha Franklin.

The latest summit was held in New York City 2019. The 2014 International Achievement Summit was held in San Francisco, California, and opened with a dinner at City Hall hosted by Mayor Willie Brown. Golden Plate awardees included Frances Arnold, Thomas C. Südhof, Carol Burnett, Jeff Koons, Robert Lefkowitz, Admiral William H. McRaven, Governor Jerry Brown, Diana Ross, and Wayne Shorter. The dinner’s keynote speaker was Sergey Brin who talked about his journey as an entrepreneur since participating in the 2000 summit as an Academy delegate. The 2014 program included a symposium series in Napa Valley where the concluding presenter was Academy member and geneticist Francis Collins.

The 2017 International Achievement Summit was held at Claridge's in Mayfair, London. The awards ceremony was narrated by Academy member Jeremy Irons. The 2017 Golden Plate awardees included Simone Biles, Michael Caine, Jennifer Doudna, Peter Gabriel, Neil Gorsuch, John Banville, A. S. Byatt, Demis Hassabis, Kazuo Ishiguro, Venki Ramakrishnan, Norman Foster, Sting, and Valentino. Bill Clinton was the keynote speaker. The summit included a luncheon at Waddesdon Manor, the ancestral country house of the Rothschild family, hosted by Academy member Lord Jacob Rothschild. The Academy program concluded with a dinner at Blenheim Palace in Oxfordshire, hosted by the 12th Duke of Marlborough and Academy member Roger Bannister, the first athlete to finish the mile run in under four minutes.

The 2019 International Achievement Summit was held in New York City, and the Golden Plate Awardees included Andrew Lloyd Webber, Nadia Murad, Leymah Gbowee, Daniel Kahneman, Pete Townshend, Roger Daltrey, Van Morrison, Orhan Pamuk, Lynn Nottage, James P. Allison, Buddy Guy, Bryan Stevenson, Lucian Grainge, Smokey Robinson, and Ian McEwan. The summit ended with a dinner and tour of the "Play It Loud" exhibition at The Metropolitan Museum of Art, hosted by Academy member Jimmy Page, guitarist and founder of the rock band Led Zeppelin.

The annual summit is attended by graduate students and young innovators, like Sergey Brin and Larry Page, who paused their PhD studies to found Google, from the U.S. and overseas. The summits were originally attended by high school students chosen based on their academic achievement and extracurricular activities. With time, the event evolved into a gathering of speakers and panelists which The Wall Street Journal called in 1999 "perhaps the glitziest gathering of intellect and celebrity that no one has ever heard of."</> Other Academy delegate alumni include Taylor Swift, Bryan Stevenson, Pete Buttigieg, Eric Lander, Herschel Walker, Princess Reema bint Bandar Al Saud, Karl Deisseroth, and Feng Zhang.

Jarc12030 (talk) 16:07, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

References

Request Edits July 2021

Extended content

I work with the Academy of Achievement and have a conflict of interest with this page. I am submitting the following proposed changes for independent editors to evaluate. Let me know if I can help. REQUEST 1 Please delete the first paragraph. And please replace it with: The American Academy of Achievement, colloquially known as the Academy of Achievement, is an American non-profit educational organization is a non-profit educational organization that recognizes some of the highest achieving individuals in diverse fields and gives them the opportunity to meet one another. The Academy also brings together the leaders with promising graduate students for mentorship. The Academy hosts an International Achievement Summit, which ends with an awards ceremony, during which new members are inducted into the Academy. Rationale: First, replaces “accomplished people” with “some of the highest achieving individuals” -- every reliable source makes the point that the Academy inductees are among the highest achieving individuals in their fields -- six U.S. presidents, heads of states, more than 100 Nobel Laureates, sports legends, etc. As the language stands now, the Academy could just be a mentorship program with “accomplished” local accountants and small business owners. Second, starts with a description of the Academy for what it is actually best known for -- an award that brings all these diverse leaders together. (as described in many high quality sources.) [2] [3] [4] Y Done with a minor revision to remove repetition in the first sentence. The url for citation was missing, so I used a previous version of the page to re-link it. Heartmusic678 (talk) 14:14, 21 July 2021 (UTC) REQUEST 2 Please add a new second paragraph: Founded in 1961, Academy members and summit attendees have included “Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Colin Powell, Michael Jordan, Maya Angelou, Maya Lin, Barbra Streisand, Mikhail Gorbachev, Steven Spielberg and George Lucas.” The Washington Post described it in 2005 as “one of the world’s most dazzling gatherings of international celebrities - Nobel Prize winners, heads of state, star athletes, titans of industry, scientists and entertainers.” Y Done. Heartmusic678 (talk) 14:14, 21 July 2021 (UTC) REQUEST 3 In the History section to the article, please replace the existing first sentence: The Academy was founded in 1961 by Sports Illustrated and LIFE magazine photographer Brian Reynolds. with: Founded in 1961 by Sports Illustrated and LIFE magazine photographer Brian Reynolds, the Academy of Achievement recognizes the highest achievers in public service, business, science and exploration, sports, and the arts. Reynolds had the idea to establish the Academy after he realized that the famous people he photographed from different fields did not usually have the chances to interact with each other. He also wanted to bring together highly accomplished leaders with promising students in order to inspire them. At the 1990 summit in Chicago, for example, student delegates “rubbed shoulders” with Ronald Reagan, Maya Angelou, and Michael Jordan. And in 1995, top students met with inductees including George H. W. Bush, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, [[Lady Bird Johnson], Robin Williams, Mike Krzyzewski, and Rosa Parks. Rationale: uses sources from the New York Times, Washington Post, and 60 Minutes to put the history of the institution in clearer focus and detail. Provides more context for this history of the development and idea behind the Academy of Achievement. @Jarc12030: Requests 1, 2, 4 and 7 are done (see comments above and below). Request 3 is partially done with minor edits for language/grammar/punctuation. There is an error for the url in citation [10] [5], but the details are supported by the 60 minutes and NYT sources you provided. I could not find the url for , but it was not necessary to support the first sentence of the first paragraph of the History section, since the beforementioned sources do. The url was missing from citation [13], whose name () was already used for the Nix citaiton, so I renamed it . Please add the urls for the final two citations of the final two sentences of this part of the request as well as the url for the reference named "Sentinel1". I could not find them on my own. Thanks, Heartmusic678 (talk) 14:14, 21 July 2021 (UTC) Y Done. Heartmusic678 (talk) 12:02, 28 July 2021 (UTC) REQUEST 4 In the History section, please change the title of the subsection from: ‘International Achievement Summit’ TO ‘Achievement Summit’ AND Please change the first sentence in the first paragraph of this section from: On September 9, 1961, the Academy hosted its first International Achievement Summit. TO On September 9, 1961, the Academy hosted its first Achievement Summit. Rationale: Omits the word “international” from the sub-section title and the first sentence of this sub-section. Before 1999, summits were only held in the United States. Starting in 1999, the summits became international with meetings in Budapest and Dublin, among other cities. See Y Done. Heartmusic678 (talk) 14:14, 21 July 2021 (UTC) REQUEST 5 In the History Section, please add a new fifth sentence, after the sentence that ends “...film director William Wyler.” Other attendees at the inaugural banquet included Nobel laureate Willard Libby (Chemistry 1960) and future Nobel Laureate Luis Walter Alvarez (Physics 1968). Rationale: Corrects a reference to Milwaukee Sentinel that would have been lost in the changes I’m proposing. These were the first of more than 150 Nobel laureates to attend these summits. Their presence contributes to the importance of the organization. @Jarc12030: Please add the urls for the sources so they can be fact checked. Thanks, Heartmusic678 (talk) 14:30, 21 July 2021 (UTC) Y Done. Heartmusic678 (talk) 12:02, 28 July 2021 (UTC) REQUEST 6 In the History section, in paragraph two, as the new third sentence, please add: The organization has been described by the San Francisco Chronicle in 1989 as “little-publicized but immensely powerful.” According to William DeVries, who helped develop the first artificial heart, "It is a social network. Like a club. Now I can call Chuck Yeager up, or Philip ‘Bo’ Knight and they'll return my calls, ask me out places. I promised myself I would never ask the people here for money, but I know a lot of scientists who do:' Rationale: These quotes give an analysis of the organization’s larger importance in the world, which is missing from the article as it stands. - The quotes also do a good job of explaining why so many U.S. presidents, world leaders and renowned people have participated for six decades. Here is an excerpt of the original text, since it is not online. “The occasion was the American Academy of Achievement's 28th annual "Salute to Excellence Weekend:' Each year, this little-publicized but immensely powerful organization gathers the nation's most glittering celebrities from business, science, entertainment, sports, arts and politics and throws them together for a weekend with more than 400 dazzled high school kids from around the country, selected for their academic excellence and ability to win various competitions. “The academy, founded in 1961, forms the base of a tight mutual admiration society. Past "honorees" pick future honorees, and become patrons of this event in a closed system of fame, wealth and influence. Like a collection of bees busily cross-pollinating, celebs chat over cocktails during numerous receptions, speak inspiring rhetoric to the star-struck students, and network like mad. “"It is a social network;' said Dr. William DeVries, known for his work in development and implantation of artificial hearts in humans. DeVries was himself honored by the academy and has returned each year for eight years. "Like a club. Now I can call Chuck Yeager up, or Philip "Bd" Knight (CEO of Nike) and they'll return my calls, ask me out places.”” Y Done. Heartmusic678 (talk) 11:27, 23 July 2021 (UTC) REQUEST 7 In the section “History”, subsection “International Achievement Summit,” paragraph five, last sentence, please replace the sentence: With time, the event evolved into a gathering of speakers and panelists which The Wall Street Journal called in 1999 "perhaps the glitziest gathering of intellect and celebrity that no one has ever heard of." WITH Proceeding the awards dinner are three days of panels, presentations and informal dialogues between the students and inductees. Many inductees return multiple years, participating in the panels, programming and networking. Rationale: The Wall Street Journal article does not say the event “evolved” into a gathering of speakers and panelists (glitzy or otherwise). The event was a “glitzy” gathering of speakers and panelists from the first banquet in 1961, which inducted two Nobel laureates, as well as the father of the hydrogen bomb Edward Teller. and one of the most successful movie directors of the day William Wyler. This paragraph is about the educational aspect of the Academy. The proposed replacement language, from the same source, makes the same point about there being panels and speeches for the attendees, removing a non-salient quote (the lead already should establish the bona fides of the event itself.) Y Done. Made minor language edits and placed this as the introductory paragraph for this section for fluidity. I removed prior information from this section that was uncited. Heartmusic678 (talk) REQUEST 8 In the History section, please add these photographs. The first should be added in the History section immediately after the section header. Chuck Berry presenting Golden Plate Award to Bob Dylan - 2003 Academy of Achievement Summit - DC The second should go immediately after the subsection ‘Achievement Summit’ header. 2006 Summit Hosts Steven Spielberg and George Lucas welcome the Academy delegates and members to the International Achievement Summit in Los Angeles Rationale: Photos in articles about awards are common in GA articles. See for example the multiple photos in the GA article about the Canada's Walk of Fame. The photos proposed here are especially encyclopedic because they show pairings of very accomplished individuals that are emblematic of the event and its mission. Y Done. Heartmusic678 (talk) 17:47, 21 July 2021 (UTC) REQUEST 9 I am requesting the creation of a table with select notable participants to be placed as the final section of the article, after “History.” Please CREATE a new section titled “Notable Recipients of the Golden Plate Award” and CREATE a table of the awardees: Table Golden Plate Recipients Recipient Category Year inducted Notes Muhammad Ali Sports 1986 Jeff Bezos Business 2001 Simone Biles Sports 2017 Sergey Brin Business 2004 Francis Crick Science 1987 Bob Dylan The Arts 2003 Gerald Ford Public Service 1971 Aretha Franklin The Arts 1999 Bill Gates Business 1992 Ruth Bader Ginsburg Public Service 1995 Mikhail Gorbachev Public Service 2000 Wayne Gretzky Sports 1983 Audrey Hepburn The Arts 1991 Steve Jobs Business 1982 Coretta Scott King Public Service 1997 Ralph Lauren Business 1989 George Lucas The Arts 1989 Mickey Mantle Sports 1969 Larry Page Business 2004 Rosa Parks Public Service 1995 Shimon Peres Public Service 2003 Steven Spielberg The Arts 1986 John Wayne The Arts 1970 Elie Wiesel Public Service 1996 Oprah Winfrey Business 1989 Rationale: The use of a table for an award here is similar to the format of the List of inductees of Canada's Walk of Fame, a WP:GA article, which as a GA can be used as a model for other articles. The quality of the sourcing for this article, and depth of coverage, is better than that of the “List of inductees of Canada's Walk of Fame” article, which is part of why I think a table is justified. A table is also an efficient way to show the diversity of award recipients, which is one of the most salient facts in the major sourcing. [6] [7] [8] For each inductee, I have provided a secondary source, as well as linking to the award page for each individual on the organization website, just like “List of inductees of Canada's Walk of Fame.” (Some WP:FL similar to this proposed list, like the Rumford Prize, are sourced back just to the awarding-institution’s website, without even providing a secondary source for each.) Thank you for your consideration. Jarc12030 (talk) 20:19, 14 July 2021 (UTC) YDone. Heartmusic678 (talk) 17:57, 21 July 2021 (UTC) @Heartmusic678: Thank you for your help. Since the citations you requested are older and not available for free online, below, I’ve included the relevant excerpts from each of the ones you asked about (I have the PDFs through the paid databases, Newspaper.com and ProQuest. As you know, Wikipedia wouldn’t be able to write about many older events if all sources had to be available online for free. Request #3. This is the relevant excerpt (not the full article) for Request 3, citation 105 in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune : “The young achievers also rubbed elbows with other famous people, including Jim Lehrer, co-anchor and associate editor of "The MacNeil/Lehrer News Hour;" former President Ronald Reagan; author Maya Angelou; running back Herschel Walker of the Minnesota Vikings, and basketball star Michael Jordan.” This is the relevant excerpt for Request 3, citation 103 in The Newport Daily News : “Dozens of political, corporate and Hollywood powerhouses are dropping in to attend a conference honoring some of the country's top high school seniors. Shortly after former President George Bush held a question-and- answer session Friday, actor Tom Selleck, former FBI director William S. Sessions, novelist Tom Clancy and Viacom Inc. CEO Frank J. Biondi Jr. - to name a few - milled about the lobby during a break in the conference. All were brought together by the American Academy of Achievement, a low-profile but well connected outfit that honors several hundred high school seniors each year and sponsors them on a trip to meet informally with celebrities and role models… Intrepid local star gazers might want to hover around the Williamsburg Lodge lobby today for a glimpse of celebrities. But the public will not be allowed in the rooms where the program discussions are being held. Other celebrities in Williamsburg Friday: * George Bush , former U.S. president. * Ruth Bader Ginsburg , U.S. Supreme Court Justice. * M. Joycelyn Elders , former U.S. surgeon general. * Tom Selleck , television and movie actor. * Henry Louis Gates Jr. , Harvard University humanities professor. * Robert J. Eaton , CEO of Chrysler Corp. * Tom Clancy , novelist. * Robin Williams , comedian and actor. * Lady Bird Johnson , wife of late former president Lyndon B. Johnson. * Mike Krzyzewski , basketball coach, Duke University. * James M. McPherson , Pulitzer-Prize winning author. * Peggy Noonan , author and speechwriter. * Rosa Parks , civil rights movement leader. * William J. Perry , U.S. Secretary of Defense. * Martha Stewart , television personality. * Frank J. Biondi Jr. , CEO of Viacom Inc. “ Request #5 For request #5, here is the relevant text for Oakland Tribune : “Those to be honored include 6 from the University of California. They are Dr. Luis W. Alvarez, professor of Physics; Dr. Harvey White, director of the Lawrence Hall of Science; Dr. John S. Foster Jr. of the Lawrence Radiation Laboratory; Dr. Edward Teller; Dr. Isadore Perlman of the Lawrence Radiation Laboratory, all of Berkeley; and Prof. Willard F. Libby, Nobel Prize winner from UCLA.” Thank you. Jarc12030 (talk) 18:21, 27 July 2021 (UTC) @Jarc12030: Thank you. Your request has now been answered. Heartmusic678 (talk) 12:02, 28 July 2021 (UTC) References

Request Edits October 2021

Hello, I have some suggestions for updates to this article. I can’t implement them myself because I am an employee of the American Academy of Achievement, so I am proposing edits here as per Wikipedia’s rules. Could an independent editor please review these proposals?

1.

The existing table for Notable Recipients of the Golden Plate Award would be stronger with a number of notable inductees. I propose to update the table with the following names, along with sources to confirm their membership and year inducted.

Please note that the current table is organized alphabetically by last name, so the following proposed names would be inserted in the table the same way:

|- |Ronald Reagan |U.S. President |1990 | |-

|- |Willie Mays |Sports |1975 | |-

|- |Jonas Salk |Medicine |1976 | |-

|- |Michael Jordan |Sports |1990 | |-

|- |Martin Scorsese |Cinema and the Performing Arts |1991 | |-

|- |Clint Eastwood |Cinema and the Performing Arts |1980 | |-

|- |Henry Fonda |Cinema and the Performing Arts |1979 | |-

|- |Alex Haley |Author |1977 | |-

|- |Desmond Tutu |Champion of Human Rights |2003 | |-

|- |Bill Clinton |U.S. President |2002 | |-

|- |Jane Goodall |Explorer |1987 |-

|- |Dolly Parton |Cinema and the Performing Arts |1992 | |-

Since some of the cited articles above are from old newspapers and are not available for free online, here are relevant excerpts:

Washington Post 1977:

The registration book at the Sheraton Twin Towers this weekend read like a volume of "Who's Who in the World." Stevie Wonder. Ray Charles. Alex Haley. Judge John Sirica. Leon Jaworski. Helen Hayes, Howard Cosell. Cloris Leachman. Edward Asner… Newscaster, author and adventurer Lowell Thomas chairs the Golden Plate Awards Council, which includes such people as Dr. Jonas Salk, Willie Mays and Donny and Marie Osmond.

Salt Lake Tribune 1979:

Some of the top names in just about every field of endeavor imaginable gathered Saturday night at the Salt Palace as the 18th annual "Banquet of the Golden

Plate" was presented in spectacular fashion… Hollywood was well represented by Jimmy Stewart, Henry Fonda, Olivia de Havilland, Mr. Asner, and others.

Arizona Republic 1987:

Other honorees include former U.S. Sen. Barry Goldwater; Jane Goodall, who has spent the past 26 years in Africa studying the social behavior of chimpanzees; Henry R. Kravis, Wall Street's master of the leveraged buy-out; Reinhold Messner, the first climber to complete mountaineerings grand slam - ascending the 14 highest

peaks in the world, without bottled oxygen; Sandra O'Connor, associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court; Dick Rutan and Jeana Yeager, the pilots on Voyager's epic flight around the world; and Diane Sawyer, correspondent and co-editor of 60 Minutes.

St. Louis Post-Dispatch 1992:

Sharing top billing with Michael Jordan and Dolly Parton, Van Duyn will wear the dress (if it's finished) this weekend at the American Academy of Achievement banquet in Las Vegas. The annual bash honors the nation's top high school honor students, with superstars like Van Duyn, Jordan and Parton as the entertainment.

Las Vegas Review-Journal 1992 (I’ve highlighted her name here in bold text):

The 1992 "Captains of Achievement" are: the crew of the space shuttle Endeavour _ Capt. Daniel Brandenstein, Lt. Col. Kevin Chilton, Lt. Col. Thomas Akers, Richard Hieb, Cmdr. Bruce Melnick, Dr. Kathryn Thornton and Cmdr. Pierre Thuot; Librarian of Congress James Billington; Olympic speed skater Bonnie Blair; 1991 Pulitzer Prize-winning political cartoonist Jim Borgman of the Cincinnati Enquirer; self-made billionaire Richard Branson; Daniel Burke, recently honored as "Chief Executive Officer of the Year" by Financial World magazine for his role as head of Capital Cities/ABC Inc.; Lodwrick Cook, chairman of Atlantic Richfield Co.; actor Kevin Costner; author Michael Crichton; media entrepreneur Barry Diller; CIA Director Robert Gates; computer wizard William Gates III; book publisher Phyllis Grann; journalist Seymour Hersh; Robert Earl Holding, one of the nation's wealthiest self-made men who owns the Sun Valley, Idaho, resort and is president of Sinclair Oil; dancer-choreographer Judith Jamison; architect Jon Jerde; Arthur Kornberg, Nobel Prize-winner for medicine for his work with DNA; handbag designer Judith Leiber; Safeway President Peter Magowan; Walter Massey, director of the National Science Foundation; soprano Jessye Norman; U.S. Surgeon General Antonia Novello; entertainer Dolly Parton; Nevada gaming entrepreneur William Pennington; investment entrepreneur Richard Rainwater; cancer specialist Steven Rosenberg; biology researcher Joan Steitz; jet propulsion physicist Edward Stone Jr.; movie director Oliver Stone; entertainer Barbra Streisand; Secretary of Health and Human Services Louis Sullivan; former Lebanese hostage Thomas Sutherland; Dial Corp. Chairman John Teets; San Francisco Ballet artistic director Helgi Tomasson; Poet Laureate Mona Van Duyn; and Tenneco Co. Chairman Michael Walsh.

 Done. Heartmusic678 (talk) 11:13, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

2.

There is also a minor error in the existing table, as well; it lists Wayne Gretzky’s year of induction incorrectly as 1983, when it should be 1982 (as you can see here): [9]

3.

In the History section, Achievement Summit subsection, under the first line of code (for a photo) please add this additional photo because it is a very good representation of the iconic individuals who are members of this organization. The photos may do an even better job than the text alone in representing the wide-range of individuals who are members of the organization.

2012 Aretha Franklin is joined onstage by Academy Awards Council member General Colin Powell during her performance to close the evening of the 50th annual Banquet of the Golden Plate ceremonies in Washington, D.C.

 Done. Heartmusic678 (talk) 11:26, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

4.

The 25th annual American Academy of Achievement Summit took place in 1986 in Washington, D.C.. The ceremony was addressed by former inductees Chuck Yeager and Erma Bombeck, and was attended by a group of 390 high school graduates assembled from across the United States. New members admitted to the Academy at that event included boxer Muhammad Ali, filmmaker Steven Spielberg, Nobel Prize laureate Isidor Isaac Rabi, opera singer Leontyne Price, and country singer Loretta Lynn, who became the first country music artist ever to be admitted into the Academy.

Because the sources cited here are all old newspaper articles which are not available for free online, here are the relevant excerpts:

Arizona Republic 1987:

Each year the academy brings its “who's who of heroes” together with the nation's top graduating high school seniors for a weekend extravaganza that moviemaker Steven Spielberg, who was honored in 1986, calls “the gathering of the greats.”

The Tennesseean Sun 1986:

Last month, Loretta Lynn was lauded as a Music City Living Legend at the Music City News Awards show during Fan Fair and became the first Nashville performer ever honored by the American Academy of Achievement.

 Done with very minor edits. Heartmusic678 (talk) 11:44, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

5.

The 50th anniversary American Academy of Achievement Summit was held in Washington DC in October 2012, and was attended by delegates from 29 countries. The five-day event included a dinner at the Supreme Court of the United States, where members were joined by four of the justices. Newly-inducted Academy members who spoke at the meeting included then-United States Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta and Nobel Prize winners Roger Tsien and Adam Riess.

 Done. With minor edit. Heartmusic678 (talk) 11:54, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your consideration.

@Heartmusic678: Hi, I was wondering if you might be willing to take a look at this latest round of requests, since you reviewed the last ones I submitted in July? Also, I want to let you know that on October 20th I tried to submit this, and it somehow merged together with the finished ones from July instead of appearing properly as a discreet request of its own. (I undid the request as soon as I noticed the problem.) By tinkering around with the Talk page code and previews, I’ve found that the “collapse top|Completed request” code from the finished July Request Edits seems to be the thing causing the old and new requests to meld together. So I removed that line in order to get the new request to show up properly. I hope that was okay. Jarc12030 (talk) 17:23, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

@Jarc12030: Hello, your requests have been answered, and undoing the collapse feature is not a problem. For future requests, it may be easier to first click the "New Section" tab at the top of this talk page to avoid any previous text. Thank you, Heartmusic678 (talk) 11:58, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

References