Talk:Gaia Movement USA

"History": content removed
I deleted the following from the article:

The source cited for the above paragraph is a blog post by a self-described "Online Media and Marketing Consultant" who was evidently paid to write it in a favorable light. The source also bears the disclaimer,.

If you are going to use Wikipedia for your shameless greenwashing (all in good faith, I have no doubt), you could Please try to use better sources. -Coconutporkpie (talk) 11:13, 9 April 2015 (UTC)


 * I think your agenda is quite obvious in this article's creation and editing and you seem determined to take out anything positive about Gaia so that it can only be viewed as bad. I dont think anyone would dispute that Eva founded the company in 1999 in Chicago, or her mission and I think it is quite disgusting to regard the basic truth as greenwashing.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.115.44.10 (talk) 20:23, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
 * My allegiance is to the truth, rather than to this or that organization. To that end, I am far more inclined to trust actual journalists than someone who is evidently being paid to promote. Material included in Wikipedia must be verifiable using "reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy" (WP:RELY). Wikipedia is not a vehicle for promoting an organization (WP:NOTPROMOTION), and self-published material, including individual blogs, are generally not reliable for statements of fact (WP:BLOGS). According to the Chicago Reader, the organization was started in Delaware by one Helle Lund. —Coconutporkpie (talk) 22:48, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Trivial content/poor sources?
Coconutporkpie (talk) 17:19, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Memphis garden
This claim is not supported by the source (a questionable one in any event), which never says the garden was actually established, only planned. To imply otherwise would be original research (WP:NOR). Please stick to what is actually published in reliable sources (WP:STICKTOSOURCE). -Coconutporkpie (talk) 02:26, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Balancing aspects: Better Business Bureau rating
Gaia Movement has received a rating of A+ by the Better Business Bureau based on the length of time the organization has been in operation and a lack of customer complaints. Gaia Movement has not been accredited by the BBB.

Given the controversy over serious questions about Gaia's accounting and transparency as reported by several other reliable sources, the prominence and detail given to this one citation seem to be giving undue weight (WP:BALASPS) to this minor aspect of the subject. The bases for the A+ rating are certainly trivial; Gaia Movement is supposedly a charity, not a "business" with "customers" in the ordinary sense. The source seems to be an automatically generated web page with no authored content. —Coconutporkpie (talk) 01:43, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Questionable source: [1Thing] Blog
1Thing reported in 2014 that Gaia grows "produce, herbs, and flowers" in a garden in Memphis, Tennessee through partnership with a local business.

The story cited appears to be little more than a duplicated promotional press release (WP:NOTPROMOTION). It contains no original reporting and merely conveys statements by the parties covered in the article. For "further information", it refers readers to websites of the restaurant and of Gaia Movement. The content is trivial (WP:BALASPS, WP:NOTNEWS)—especially since the group's own financial statements reveal that such "community gardens" comprise only a tiny fraction of their activities. And reliable sources are silent on the details of Gaia's local community gardens. The source itself ([1Thing]) is questionable (WP:RELY)—the "About Us" page is merely a public-relations spiel about Entercom, the site's parent company. —Coconutporkpie (talk) 07:52, 10 October 2015 (UTC)