Talk:New England Skeptical Society

Skepticism Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Independent sources?

The article needs independent sources. So far the references are all to the organization itself, which is sufficient for factual type self claims such as its mission and founding, but more references are needed to better illustrate the organization's notability.Professor marginalia 16:29, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. There's the one New York Times article (assuming it mentions it, I didn't actually read it), but Wikipedia articles typically require at least three reliable sources independent of the group. An appearance on the Bullshit TV show might count. More sourcing all around would be helpful, because it mostly just sounds like it could have been a press release written by themselves. DreamGuy (talk) 15:29, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've put a couple refs in there as well as expanding it a bit. Donhoraldo (talk) 10:12, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Steven Novella's wiki article

Since it's obvious Steve satisfies WP:PROF, I've created an article on him. (Steven Novella). Please have a look & help out if you can. Mikker ^(...) 01:08, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great! I was going to eventually start it myself if no one did. Voice-of-All 01:09, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This page is getting a rewrite

I don't know how much I'm going to change on this article, but I'm going to attempt some changes. As the talk page looks dormant I'm just going to rewrite this in my user space and hope all are okay with the changes I make. We can always change things around once you see what I've done with it. Give me a couple weeks.Sgerbic (talk) 05:04, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I see no one commented, it took me far longer than a couple weeks. Actually I've been done for a long time, but was holding out trying to find photos. I've been promised logo and more photos, but you can only ask so many times before you finally just give up and publish. Someone can add them later if they are uploaded.Sgerbic (talk) 04:37, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Removing the "Other" section?

The section of the article titled "Other" reads like an advertisement for membership. I propose it be removed. Balon Greyjoy (talk) 06:48, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Balon Greyjoy:

Done --Gronk Oz (talk) 13:48, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

non-profit status

The New England Skeptical Society describes itself as a non-profit organization on their website.[1] However there appears to be only one 990 listed for the year 2001 at Propublica's Nonprofit Explorer here, and their mention on Guidestar holds a disclaimer stating that "This organization's exempt status was automatically revoked by the IRS for failure to file a Form 990, 990-EZ, 990-N, or 990-PF for 3 consecutive years. Further investigation and due diligence are warranted."[2] Has the organization changed names but retained their non-profit status? or has the organization shifted to a different status using either the same name or another variation? This article needs to be updated with more accurate information. Cedar777 (talk) 17:13, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]