Talk:Urban Homesteading Assistance Board

Let's have the the constructive argument.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Urban_Homesteading_Assistance_Board&type=revision&diff=963971075&oldid=963896794 They are embroiled in scandals. How should that be written? Theochino (talk) 01:26, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Possibly useful sources
In this edit I removed a bunch of material that was written in an argumentative and non-encyclopedic style. There were some sources included that I am listing here, in case someone finds they can be used in some more appropriate way in the article: --JBL (talk) 16:44, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 


 * There is a scandal going on and this information need to be there. It's encyclopedic since Billions of Dollars were taken by this Non Profit. It's documented up to wazoo. Theochino (talk) 19:24, 21 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi ,
 * The purpose of Wikipedia is to present a comprehensive, encyclopedic view of things. The text you've added is clearly not that; instead, you appear to be engaging in a form of advocacy, which is not appropriate (see Advocacy).  If you want to add negative material about an organization to WP, you need to do it with care for our basic principles like WP:V and WP:RS.  Three of the four sources I removed look basically like blogs, and the fourth is a tabloid; these are extremely marginal sources for the kind of broad criticism you tried to add, and the language you used (plagued with scandals etc.) is not actually supported by them.  I'd be happy to work with you to find a way to incorporate some content into the article, but it's not going to look like what you've written so far, I'm afraid.  As a first step, what are the best sources you have available about UHAB (where "best" is in the sense of the guideline WP:RS on reliable sourcing)? --JBL (talk) 20:31, 21 June 2020 (UTC)


 * HI ,
 * The sources are not blogs but real periodicals (even accepted in News Reddit) .... This is New York City and calling the NY Post a tabloid is a disservice. They might be the last investigative newspaper in New York City.


 * https://pix11.com/2018/12/11/new-yorkers-in-debt-losing-their-homes-as-part-of-program-designed-to-preserve-quality-affordable-housing/
 * https://pix11.com/2018/11/27/hundreds-of-homeowners-in-nyc-have-been-defrauded-out-of-their-homes/
 * https://www.nytimes.com/2001/04/02/nyregion/city-s-building-giveaway-prompts-council-inquiry.html
 * https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/ny-metro-third-party-transfer-carone-de-blasio-riseboro-20190527-xhyzyj2ksvgxbbqxocmasavf6y-story.html
 * https://brooklyneagle.com/articles/2019/07/12/third-party-transfer-reforms/
 * https://www.thecity.nyc/housing/2019/5/2/21211102/brooklyn-foreclosures-must-stick-city-lawyers-argue
 * https://www.kingscountypolitics.com/court-cases-could-determine-third-party-transfer-programs-future/

Theochino (talk) 12:36, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

I would like to know what exactly is your problem with the section about documented negative information. This is just the premise of a bigger scandal that is ongoing. By removing a real story you are basically allowing corruption to go undocumented. I am willing to. There is something bigger and hundred of new source documented here: https://www.showthebooks.org/news/

Theochino (talk) 12:44, 22 June 2020 (UTC)