Talk:Environment America

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Environment America. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.austinchronicle.com/gyrobase/Issue/story?oid=oid%3A935765

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 15:55, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Environment America. 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:
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20130412024209/http://legacy.utsandiego.com/news/state/20060725-9999-1n25energy.html/ to http://legacy.utsandiego.com/news/state/20060725-9999-1n25energy.html/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:08, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Fixing Bad Links
Hello User:DASonnenfeld and User:Marquardtika! Thanks again for your guidance as I learn more about editing Wikipedia, particularly in a COI situation. The banner on the page calls attention to the many improperly formatted, and often dead, links on the page. I would like to repair them (I think there are 39). What is the best way to do that? I can confirm they support the statement in the article, reformat them and test them to make sure they go to an actual news article or book. Should I then post them on the talk page for you to review? Then perhaps one of you can repost them. (I am also willing to do that if you trust me to do so.)

Here are five I have confirmed, repaired and tested. (No. 61 is used 3 times in the final paragraph of the article. Doesn’t it make more sense to use it just one time at the end of the paragraph?)

61.

Note: this is the one that is cited 3 times in the same paragraph.

60.

59.

58.

57.


 * References

Let me know how to proceed. I am happy to do anything that needs to be done to improve the accuracy of the article. CleanWater17 (talk) 17:47, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, Thanks for your note. The way to avoid duplication of references is to use the 'name' parameter within the ' ' tag. From my point of view, it would be a service to Wikipedia & its readers for you to correct the references. If there are editors who believe the resultant, updated article is biased, that can be noted and discussed here. Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 17:57, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the feedback. I've updated the last five footnotes and will work my way through verifying and reformatting the remaining references that have problems. CleanWater17 (talk) 00:27, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Eight references remain to be cleaned up, as of this date. Thanks, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 12:58, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I've corrected most of the remaining footnote problems, but I'm not sure what to do with a few of the remaining issues. Can you give me some guidance?

Footnote 38. I don’t know how to document this fact except by citing the Environment America website. Should I delete this information, which I think is useful because it indicates that the following examples are a subset of a larger group, or may I cite the Environment America website? Footnote 43. I’d like to delete this footnote. The fact is already documented in another footnote, plus I can’t find the article cited in footnote 43, which comes from a less-than-ideal source ("Wandermelon") anyway. May I delete this footnote? Footnote 45. I could correct this footnote format, but I think the article would be more accurate if I could delete the footnote and the information the footnote refers to. Footnotes 45 and 46 refer to the same Environment California report that was covered in two different news outlets, and the focus of the report was on solar projects on school campuses and only tangentially about “energy consumption of public schools.” May I delete this information and the related footnote? Thank you for your help. CleanWater17 (talk) 21:48, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

COI editor seeks revert of apparent vandalism
Hello there my name is Dan Cook. I am a paid editor hired to improve the main Public Interest Research Group article and others related to it. I would like to request a revert of an edit made to the Aims and Activities section of the Environment America page. The reason for the request is that it was made by an anonymous user Blorpfiend and appears to be vandalism. The text added by this user is untrue and unsupported by the reference included. In fact, Environment America has a long-standing and very public record for endorsing candidates. The endorsement of Barack Obama was simply one of many such endorsements.

So my COI edit request is as follows: Thanks in advance for your assistance. DanDavidCook (talk) 17:59, 15 September 2020 (UTC)


 * ✅ – Thjarkur (talk) 18:29, 15 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Thanks! DanDavidCook (talk) 19:05, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

COI editor requesting correction to "Ratings" section
Hi @DASonnenfeld and other volunteer editors-

I’m an editor with a conflict of interest, which I’ve also disclosed on my talk page, and I’d like to help improve this page. I recently discovered an error in the “Ratings” section and would like help fixing it. The text in that section refers to Environment America Research & Policy Center, a 501(c)(3) organization that is separate from, though related to, Environment America, a 501(c)(4) (as noted in the text box). I’ve corrected the information and links in the text box. Can someone help with edits to the article?

I propose:


 * 1) Updating the “State affiliates” section to be “State affiliates and related organizations.”


 * 2) Adding a subsection called “Environment America Research & Policy Center.”


 * 3) Moving and revising the information in the current “Ratings” section to this new subsection. The revised version would be:
 * Environment America Research & Policy Center is a 501(c)(3) organization affiliated with Environment America. In its evaluation of Environment America Research & Policy Center’s 2020 IRS Form 990, Charity Navigator gave the organization two of four stars, with 69/100 for "financial" and 85/100 for "accountability and transparency."


 * 4) Deleting the second sentence of the existing "Ratings" section. This information is no longer up to date and I can't find it on the Charity Navigator website.


 * 5) Deleting the now-empty "Ratings" section.

Thank you for your help with fixing this incorrect information on the page. CleanWater17 (talk) 23:47, 4 September 2022 (UTC)