This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-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.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations 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.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
I am an employee of this organization who has no interest in turning this page into an advertisement or the like. However, I would like to add the more-detailed version of Vera's history from out website (which disinterested observers can edit to perhaps make the language more anodyne) as well as Vera's mission statement. Further, I don't think the section on funding accurately represents Vera, focusing on the funding Vera's received from George Soros—a politically charged figure whose singling-out in the piece, to my mind, has intentional implications—and ignoring the vast, vast list of other funders Vera's had, both political and apolitical in nature. At the very least I would like the opportunity to balance out the Soros mention with something more anodyne. Vera is *not* an advocacy or partisan organization, it has worked often and extensively with Republican city and state officials, and I would ask to have our Wiki page reflect at least that much. There are further concerns I have with the page (primarily, the controversy section misrepresents not only our relationship with the program in CT but also with the employee in question [who was released some time ago]) but I'm happy to go one step at a time. I greatly appreciate the consideration and hope my being upfront concerning COI will earn me the benefit of doubt concerning my good faith. Thank you! Eliasisquith (talk) 18:26, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please feel free to edit the article. You have disclosed your affiliation, and that's good. Please write neutrally, and provide good, third-party sources where possible. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 22:17, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This page appears to be seriously incomplete and out of date, especially regarding Vera's current funding sources and activities. I am an employee of the U.S. General Services Administration performing general research on U.S. Federal contractors, their activities, and amounts of contracts awarded to them. In the course of this research I discovered that Vera has received large amount of Federal contracts over the last 12 years (over $700 million), which is inconsistent with the page's statement that "Vera's annual operating budget is approximately $25 million." I have added the information on Federal contracts received to the page, however I do not have time to further research and add the types of activities these contracts are associated with. These should be added, as it appears they may comprise a majority of Vera's funding and activities in recent years. Frededias (talk) 18:36, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
