Talk:Human Appeal

Humanitarian Hero of the Year
Noting my previously declared CoI, please could someone add:

I've red-linked the award title, as it is already red-linked on List of humanitarian and service awards. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:56, 22 November 2022 (UTC)


 * @Pigsonthewing Can we get a source that isn't AidEx itself? I'm not seeing anything with a quick search, and if there isn't external reporting I'm not sure it's worth including. Rusalkii  (talk) 21:05, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

The above source is independent of both HA and Dr Ashmawey, but here you go:



currently on their home page. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:59, 30 November 2022 (UTC)


 * ICYMT. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:08, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Rusalkii has marked their account "sporadically active"; could I trouble you to take a look at this, please? Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:54, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done Let me know if I mistook the desired section. Have a good day! PK650 (talk) 10:22, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
 * No, that's great. Thank you. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:22, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Iftar for All
May we append to the Projects section something like:

"" Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:00, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Reply 11-JUL-2023
Regards, Spintendo  17:29, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Per WP:NOBLECAUSE.


 * This doesn't seem to fall foul of any of the clauses in NOBLECAUSE ("an essay on notability."). Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:34, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
 * No response, so request reactivated to involve editors. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:10, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
 * The requested information discusses the company's advocacy for "people of need" by providing these food boxes. Content in the article should not discuss a company's advocating of certain causes, per WP:NOTADVOCACY. Regards, Spintendo  17:47, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
 * There is no "advocacy" here (defined as "the use of Wikipedia to promote personal beliefs or agendas at the expense of Wikipedia's goals and core content policies, including verifiability and neutral point of view") nor in the event described, and thus WP:NOTADVOCACY is irrelevant, but if it were, it says "An article can report objectively about such things, as long as an attempt is made to describe the topic from a neutral point of view." I suggest we let a third party review this. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:47, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Please establish a consensus with editors engaged in the subject area before using the Edit COI template for this proposed change. Regards,  Spintendo  06:38, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Just to expand on the above, I understand your point about this information not being advocacy. However, WP:BALASP states that "A description of isolated events or news reports related to a subject may be verifiable and impartial, but still disproportionate to their overall significance to the article topic." That suggestion, including my opinion that the mentioning of this information is done in order to promote it, is what is guiding my review here. By definition, an edit is controversial if one editor disagrees. Since that makes this a controversial edit request, it is not recommended to use the template. Please feel free to search for a broader consensus regarding these changes here on the talk page, or perhaps by using one of the other WP:CONTENTDISPUTE arenas, such as WP:3O (which I have found over the years to be very efficient). I stand ready to assist in any discussions going on from this. Once consensus has been achieved, and the decision is for the information to be included in the article, the request template can then be reactivated in order for another editor to make the change for you. Regards,  Spintendo  07:26, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

3O Response: The Daily Mirror is in the reference table as a rather questionable source, and the particular article from it looks a good bit like a puff piece, or even to possibly be partially sourced from press release material. Also, it would probably not be good for the article to become or contain an indiscriminate laundry list of every particular individual project the organization is involved in. Unless there's some better indication that this one was particularly notable, I would favor omitting it, and probably checking the rest to see if they actually merit mention as well. Seraphimblade Talk to me 18:49, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Restore
Given my previously-declared COI, I note here that I have restored the article to its pre-November 2023 state, due to a lack of balance. Although I do some consultancy for HA, they did not ask me to make this edit, nor did I discuss it with them. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:44, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

NPoV and Verifiability concerns
[Note my previously-declared CoI]

It has been drawn to my attention that two consecutive, and contentious, statements in this article are wholly uncited:

"In 2003, the FBI said Human Appeal had a 'close relationship' with Hamas. The US state department, in leaked cables from 2003, also associated Human Appeal with Hamas and said that 'members of its field offices in Bosnia, Kosovo, and Chechnya had connections to al-Qaeda associates'."

Can they be removed? Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:00, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * The source later in the paragraph verifies it.  ARandomName123 (talk) Ping me!  15:59, 9 April 2024 (UTC)