Jump to content

Talk:American Library Association

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit]

The logo in the infobox is an old version of the ALA logo. The current ALA logos are located at http://www.ala.org/aboutala/contactus/rights/logo-rules

2602:306:83CA:D3C0:B4C8:38BD:B178:E27B (talk) 18:29, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on American Library Association. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:12, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on American Library Association. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:29, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on American Library Association. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:15, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on American Library Association. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:23, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on American Library Association. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:19, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

COI tag (August 2024)

[edit]

I've reviewed the contribution history and based on their contributions to here, and ALA related members, they may have a close connection Graywalls (talk) 20:03, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose you mean me. I'm an over 30 year member of ALA who pays dues. My primary job is at a university teaching library science which includes teaching the history of library development. I am not an employee of ALA. I review ALA projects, statements, policies and news and update the page as I update courses for my teaching. The ALA is important to U.S. library history. Each semester as I update classes I often update ALA information. There is no one at the ALA--that I know of--who edits Wikipedia. Over the years I've tried to make it a better page. So many of the association's documents are only on their website which is why I have sometimes cited it and know it is a primary source. I will keep looking to see if secondary sources are available. I wish there were more secondary sources. I really have tried to expunge advertising type material. Thank you for reviewing the page, but I think the conflict of interest shouldn't be there.Kmccook (talk) 21:13, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thousands of librarians in the United States are members of the ALA. This hardly constitutes a "close connection", it's basically a trade union. I can't remember if I'm currently a member, as I might have let it lapse, but many fellow members I've known are quite critical of the organization. The tag would be valid if someone was an employee of the organization or an elected councilor, but not merely for a run of the mill member. Gamaliel (talk) 13:45, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
{[re|Gamaliel}}, Please see WP:PSTS, which says that articles should be based primarily on SECONDARY sources while using primary and tertiary sources sparingly. Making the editorial choice to flood the article with contents based on PRIMARY sources, such as the article subject's own website is WP:UNDUE and this article is bloated to the point of it being a secondary website for the organization on Wikipedia. What you call "well sourced" is almost all ala.org, which absolutely fails independent, secondary sourcing. It's not a tell a story about the article subject using materials and publications controlled by the article subject, such as their own website. Graywalls (talk) 19:42, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Should the sourcing be improved? Sure, let's do that. But you've removed material that would be unquestioned in any other article for an organization: the names of historically important founders with their own Wikipedia articles, a small list of important subgroups in the organization, some of which have their own Wikipedia articles, and a list of executive directors of the organization, some of which also have their own Wikipedia articles. No definition of promotional fluff or bloating encompasses any of this. Gamaliel (talk) 20:22, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Small list? Contents based on the subject's own website and other primary sources shouldn't be fleshing out such a great deal of article. If independent reliable third party sources are not covering it, we should consider not covering it. Who decides these contents are "important" ? bouncing off and relying on third party, reliable secondary sources is a way to infer significance. Graywalls (talk) 20:40, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If they have their own Wikipedia articles, then I would say they meet Wikipedia's standards of "important". In regards to independent reliable third party sources, have you looked for them or do you assume they don't exist? Why have you removed third party sources if you say they are the source of your objection? Gamaliel (talk) 14:40, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:American_Library_Association&oldid=1240803446"