Talk:Compassion International

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

Article Refresh

I just finished doing a bit of an article refresh. Nothing major. Added a few new services that Compassion is providing overseas as well as some general cleanup. Rhodizzle (talk) 21:52, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Free advertising

This article strikes me as being more of a free advertisement than an encyclopedia article. It also doesn't strike me as noteworthy in any sense. Perhaps a conensus should be held for deletion? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.33.132.19 (talk • contribs)

Compassion has been sitting on a back-burner in the theorhetical to-do list of my mind for quite some time; I'll look into tinkering with it this evening. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 12:01, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

ok. so you see this as free advertisement, how else would you write the article? compassion has just as much right to be represented here. i see the article as merely stating what compassion does and how they operate. how is this a problem? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Focus on time (talk • contribs)

No, this is not advertising. It is a non-profit charitable organsisation. The page isn't very comprehensive as say the Red Cross page, however, it does state the organisation's basic philosophy. Don't worry, I'm in the process of updating some information on the page. Bgoodlin 17:09, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

It still pretty much reads like a promotional brochure for the organization. Particulsrly considering Compassion's involvement in Ministry Watch's well-publicized bashing of rival Christian Children's Fund (www.ministrywatch.org/mw2.1/pdf/MWDA_042704_CCF.pdf) It seems to me that this is significant enough to mention, since it could well affect peoples' donation decisions. 69.139.158.74 05:58, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

To the above user: Go back and read your .pdf document a bit more closely and you'll see that Ministry Watch is a watchdog organization that educates donors about facts regarding different Christian Ministries. Further, the document you've highlighted fails to prove that Compassion in any way is 'involved' with the alleged 'bashing' that is also mysteriously lacking in your document. If you've got a personal grudge against Christianity, please try to find another outlet. - Rhodizzle

01-Aug-2007: Two things. I'm not sure how to rewrite the page as it has been suggested. Any thoughts? Also, I don't know what that reference added to the end of the first paragraph has to do with that paragraph. Why was it added? The article has nothing to do with that sentence or paragraph or thought. I'm considering removing it. Bgoodlin 21:32, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Have a look at Wikipedia:Verifiability.--Addhoc 21:38, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

--I'm not disputing the veracity of the article - I'm familiar with it. My concern is that is is just plain out of place. Do we just find any and all articles written about Compassion and post them as references to random parts of the page? Wouldn't the placement of the article fit in with the rewrite?Bgoodlin 21:20, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Bgoodlin If you're looking for suggestions, I think the article could do with loosing the whole section titled Compassion Foundational Beliefs and gaining a brief and factual history. The word-for-word repetition of of the mission statement and goals etc. isn't really appropriate for an encyclopedia, and I suspect it's a big part of what made the original poster talk about it reading like and advertisement. We should be writing about the organization in a more analytical way rather than simply repeating their own message. I've already removed the external links directly to their advocacy and sposonor a child pages - which really are inappropriate. Also, If you know the organization you may know where to find a little more about ways in which they are significant from an organizational perspective (follow the x methodology, or made front page news because of Y). It also really needs some independent, third party sources about the impact the org has had on the world. I know this is difficult - our media and universities don't give the charitable/voluntary sector the same sort of coverage as they do business - but without independent verification most claims about impact don't stand up to our requirements for sources. -- SiobhanHansa 09:20, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Reset

I've removed all the advertising, and added some info and links. More info needs to be found (not just copied off the organizations website). CitiCat ^♫ 20:45, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Page looks cleaner, that is for sure. However, why did you remove the partner counties from the list? Compassion International is the Umbrella organization that works with the USA, Australia, UK, Italy.... and each of those countries have their own presidents and what not. Wouldn't that have been 'encyclopedic' to list? That isn't advertising.... I so do not have an eye for this stuff, haha. I'm a finance guy - not an journalism/english guy. Bgoodlin 15:38, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

That information certainly could be added back in, but the paragraph as it was written was unusable. I'd add it back in myself, but I'm not sure I understand it - "Today, Compassion helps the impoverished children through the caring support of strong partner networks with central offices in the following countries:". Does that mean the C.I. has offices in those countries, or that they "partner" with organizations that have offices in those countries? If anyone knows the answer to that please add it in. CitiCat ^♫ 01:05, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Hello, my name is Julie and I work for Compassion International. In response to your question about Compassion's partnership, we work with 11 other countries that offer the same child sponsorship program that we do, but for their respective countries. In other words, the international offices that we work with are independent of Compassion International, however they voluntarily agree to follow our direction. These offices have their own Presidents and CEO's who meet regulary with Compassion International's CEO. Jkoshy 20:45, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Compassion Taiwan

Compassion Taiwan has nothing to do with Compassion International - it just so happens to share the same name.Bgoodlin (i forgot my password)65.112.244.2 15:45, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

I deleted all references to Compassion International Taiwan. The other organizations that are part of Compassion International include: Compassion UK, Compassion Australia, Compassion Canada, Compassion Italia, Compassion Suisse, Compassion Deutschland (this office will open in December 2007), Compassion France, Tear Fund NZ, Compassion Netherlands and Compassion South Korea.Jkoshy 22:37, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

The article was merged some time back so I've reverted the redirect and added a disambiguation header here. It's not a standard header, but i think it makes sense to list out the affiliates here since we probably ought to have redirects for them and it makes it clear that the other one isn't affiliated without making it sound like a bad thing. It is long though, so if someone has another idea that would do the same without the length, that would be good. -- SiobhanHansa 23:53, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Controversial ad campaign

The edit adding the line about the controversial ad campaign seems like an overstatement. I can't find any press anywhere online other than the blog post referenced mentioning Compassion's campaign as controversial. I personally feel like it is just Christian nit picking and irrelevant for Wiki purposes. Thoughts? Aprila711 (talk) 00:17, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

501c3

Earlier today, I edited the type of organization so it included a reference to Compassion being a 501c3 non-profit. The 501c3 portion was removed, and the reason given was that 501c3 "Only applies to the United States and it operates in other countries where it is non-profit. That explanation also applies to World Vision International and Plan USA. Both of those child sponsorship organizations work internationally, are based in the United States, and have a reference to 501c3 on their Wikipedia pages as the type of organization. Why the inconsistency?

Before I make edits of a greater scope, I would like to address the areas needing correction in advance.

In the Donating Countries section, only two of Compassion's 11 donating countries are listed. Shouldn't the other nine also be referenced for the page to be a proper encyclopedic resource?

Regarding the Programs section, the Child Survival Program and the Leadership Development Program no longer exist. The Child Survival Program has been replaced by Compassion Survival, and the Leadership Development Program has been replaced by a Youth Development initiative. Neither of the replacements is a core program of Compassion's. Compassion primarily works through child sponsorship but has specific initiatives to complement the needs of the children it serves. G9ine (talk) 23:16, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi. New comments go at the bottom, not above others.

Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias addresses this issue. As I suspected, the other nations are not listed, but checking three of their websites, https://www.compassionuk.org/about-us/ https://www.compassion.ca/about/ https://www.compassion.com.au/about-us none of them use the US-centric term 501c3, and so it incorrect to list it. If it's easier to fix those other articles, I can do that. I can also tag all three articles to indicate that a more globalized (or globalised) view of the subject is required. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:30, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Plan USA is about the US charity, while Plan International is the comparable article to this one and that article does not list 501c3 in the infobox. I tagged World Vision already for this. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:41, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation. What thoughts do you have about updating the Donating Countries section of the Compassion page to include the nine other donating countries? Any objections to removing the references to the Child Survival Program and Leadership Development Program? G9ine (talk) 23:53, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

That makes sense. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:59, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

The source states that the leadership program exists. Both references now point to https://www.compassion.com/youth-development.htm. What proof do you have it no longer exists? Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:01, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

In fact, the program has just changed, according to https://blog.compassion.com/ask-jimmy-leadership-development-gifts-and-prayer/ Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:05, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

The Leadership Development Program (LDP) as it was described on this page was a separate and distinct program. The 2015 blog post you reference is from the beginning of the transition to close LDP as it previously operated (i.e., one sponsor financially supporting, on a monthly basis, one student through university). Students participating in LDP had to officially graduate from the Child Sponsorship Program and apply to participate in LDP. The numbers of students able to participate wwere limited. Compassion desired to expand the opportunity and changed the program. Compassion still offers leadership support but it is not through a separate and distinct program and it is not the same approach. The Youth Development initiative you link to is a fund that people contribute to either monthly or just on a one-time basis. It is not tied to specific youth (i.e., the contributor is not specifying which youth gets the benefit). Instead, the initiative, as it says on the page you linked to "provides youth ages 12 and older with customized training and educational paths according to their own unique potential, and God-given talents and purpose." G9ine (talk) 16:26, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Do you have any sources that support that?

I have a bit of concern that you may be associated with CI. Do you mind explaining your association, even if it is none? Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:43, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Yes. I do work at Compassion International, and I believe I am working with and through you to update the content to be fully accurate. Do you feel otherwise? If you feel that something I propose is incorrect, improper, or inaccurate, please let me know. The questions I have asked you about changes you have made to my edits have been simply to understand. I defer to your decision on things. This snapshot from web.archive.org is from August 2015. It's the previous copy and iteration of the current compassion.com youth development page you previously referenced. Does this help? If not, what sort of proof is necessary? G9ine (talk) 17:44, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

You can also compare the past language of this current compassion.com youth development page with its predecessor via web.archive.org. G9ine (talk) 22:10, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Ideally, that it was cancelled. Since this is an encyclopedia and not a brochure, we should probably discuss the existence of the program from 1996 until it was cancelled and the reasons for its cancellation would be useful. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:03, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Ratings

What is the value of preserving citation 13 when it does not link specifically to the Charity Watch information about Compassion? A person accessing citation 13 ultimately has to navigate beyond that page to find/confirm the information referenced and the final destination is citation 14. Thank you for helping me understand.

To avoid a similar issue, citation 15 should be supported with an updated citation that links directly to the Compassion accreditation page at BBB. G9ine (talk) 16:35, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

The value is that we don't simply report on current content. This is an encyclopedia and should address the subject over time. If there's a final destination, we should supply it. And again, the article should be globalized. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:46, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Do you feel the update to citation 15 is valuable and correct to do? G9ine (talk) 17:46, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Some proposed changes

Information to be added: List Bangladesh as a country of operation for Compassion.

Explanation of issue: A January 2019 edit to the page says Compassion was kicked out of Bangladesh. That is not correct. Compassion still works in Bangladesh.

References supporting change: https://www.compassion.com/about/where/bangladesh.htm G9ine (talk) 21:36, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Reply 24-APR-2019

  Edit request implemented  

1. The current version of the article no longer carries the January 2019 edit stating that Compassion was "kicked out of Bangladesh".
2. In verifying current Bangladesh activities, the provided website was difficult to navigate, with the links which purportedly were to provide further information on Compassion's work in the Santal and Garo communities of Bangladesh not working, or else redirecting back to the blog's main Bangladesh page. This page in turn states that it does not publish information on its Bangladesh activities "due to the sensitive nature of our work".
3. Despite the lack of information on particular activities in Bangladesh, there is enough outlying information to indicate that some sort of operation may exist in Bangladesh, enough to post a one-word description of it in the article.

Regards,  Spintendo  03:35, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Notes