Talk:Camp Ramah in the Poconos

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

Proposed Deletion[edit]

None of the other articles for Ramah Camps have been proposed for deletion. Why was this one singled out. Either it should not be deleted, or it should be, but together with the other similar articles. JMack 02:37, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Mistake[edit]

Sorry, I nominated under wrong criteria. It should be A1 (Little or no context) not A7 (Non-notable). I belive it is notable, however at it's current level it is not worth keeping as the content provides no more information in the title. You could provide as much information using the line "Camp Ramah in the Poconos" rather than an entire article. If the article is expanded, then this is no longer valid, however it is not stub quality as of yet. Matt - TheFearow 03:35, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great Work[edit]

Great work guys, now this is a great article, with usefull information. Consider all my previous reasons for deletion invalid. Way to go ;) Matt - TheFearow 01:47, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

more content![edit]

This article needs more content! Given that I'm spending another summer (my 19th at Poconos), I'll do my best to flesh things out and snap some more photos. Also, the Kesher program died shortly after the new director came into office. --yonkeltron 21:09, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I think I may have been the one who first put in the Kesher program. I think that it should be deleted now, or perhpas made just one sentence, and put in a miscellaneous section. Since it is discontinued, it doesn't deserve the prominence in the article that it used to have. IMHO. Thoughts?--Epeefleche 01:28, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Possibly...but there have been many programs (Family camp, Shabbat plus, etc.) canceled since Cheryl Magen stepped down. Perhaps a section full of discontinued and former programs should be included...also, we should def have a section on camp leadership where we list the former directors and their accomplishments. It'd be the perfect spot to have some information about Rabbi David Mogilner, Eli Havivi and others. I'll try to snap some photos this summer...any other ideas? --yonkeltron 18:01, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Possible, but I'm just concerned that this primarily represent the camp as it is now. Rather than a graveyard of canceled camp programs. Perhaps this is more than anything a matter of relative sizel. Camp leadership, etc., sounds fine. Eli Havivi -- he still around? Wow. Enjoy the summer.--Epeefleche 18:17, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You might be interested in looking at the articles on the other Ramah camps. Not that they need all be the same, or follow the same template, but there may be sections in some of those -- for example, the names of the eidot, that might well be appropriate in this article as well, if you know them and have the time to input them. Just a thought. --Epeefleche 18:23, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Eidot or Edot?[edit]

See (and join) the discussion on the Camp Ramah talk page on this issue.

Someone who has good reason for one form of transliteration over the other might make the appropriate change across all the Camp Ramah articles. Right now they differ, and people are RVing each other (as on the Camp Ramah in California article page).

Right now Camp Ramah publications use both forms of transliteration. For example, eidah is used at [1], [2], and [3]. But edah is used at [4], [5], and [6].--Epeefleche 21:01, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i went[edit]

i went 2 camp ramah. it was a great experience. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.94.112.207 (talk) 01:04, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Carol Burnett?[edit]

Why is there a link to Carol Burnett in the See Also section? There's no other reference to her in the article, and no reference to the camp in her article, either. --Rpresser 19:44, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Current leadership edits[edit]

It looks like there was a biased edit to remove this contribution, so let's please try to keep things civil and moving according to policy. Replacing an unverified and possibly NPOV section of text with an equally poor (and less comprehensive) substitute is poor practice. --yonkeltron (talk) 04:18, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just trying to stick to facts - the prior text was clearly biased and contained many factual errors. The only reason to exclude the directors Rabbinical title would be to degrade or insult. The text, although perhaps poorly phrased, is accurate to the current situation at camp. --Dalamaster (talk) 21:57, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whoever wrote the initial text may very well have had a bias, but it doesn't look like the text you replaced it with is really any better in terms of verifiability. Furthermore, I'm not sure that a statement referring to "strategic reconfigurations of upper management" is any less biased. Rather than get into a revert war (yes, I will contact an administrator if we need policy clarification), why don't you come up with something less charged that addresses the controversy and is still respectful? If the goal is Clearly, what is there now has some major issues so I don't see any problems with replacing the entire section with a timeline consisting of names and dates if that would adhere more closely to Wikipedia policies such as Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. Furthermore, your history of contributions shows you are a fairly new Wikipedian, so welcome! I would advise that you create a User Page to let people know about you and that you read the article on Wikipedia:Etiquette and remember to always Wikipedia:Assume good faith. This is obviously a big issue, so while I am going to revert your changes one last time, don't take this as an insult! I'm encouraging you to Wikipedia:Be bold in editing while still making sure that your future contributions improve the quality of material here. Please, in the future, Wikipedia:Citing sources. If you are still uncomfortable, then the entire section can be removed or replaced with something more appropriate. --yonkeltron (talk) 21:55, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is a simple case of biased incorrect information. People who are on the executive board know the truth. Anyone familiar with the facts of what happened over the past year knows most of what is in here is untrue. If you've been working at Ramah for 19 years, why would you want to paint the camp in such a negative light? It sounds like you are a bitter employee with an axe to grind. If we want to simply stick to citable facts under the leadership section, then the only thing that should be listed is the current leadership. --Dalamaster (talk) 12:46, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't be rude or make accusations regarding my motives (Wikipedia:No personal attacks). Also, the edit log will clearly show the original version of the unverified content you are referring to as negative was not added by me. I did clean it up and fill in holes according to my personal knowledge (I was not a part of any issues) and my mistake here was to not immediately label it as unverified information. That way, if nothing relevant had been turned up (as by now it clearly hasn't been) then it would be completely appropriate to remove it in accordance with Wikipedia:Verifiability. I regret not being sensitive to the fact that this is an emotionally charged issue and should try to be more careful, even when being bold (Wikipedia:Be bold). I would like to apologize for any stress caused to you but I would like to point out that Wikipedia is not a forum for publicity but an encyclopedia. An encyclopedia does not show favor by omitting or including information of any sort according to an agenda. To omit any references to a controversy is just as much a violation of Wikipedia:POV as anything else, and Wikipedia should document everything that it possibly can, regardless of how any individuals might feel otherwise. The deliberate omission of information to support a particular point of view is called Censorship and Wikipedia's stance on censorship is clear. No one is forcing anyone to read Wikipedia articles, just as no one forces people to watch any particular television program or attend any public speech. If you or anyone doesn't like the way that a particular issue makes camp look, then you or anyone reserve the right to refrain from viewing this article. However, the extensive set of community-generated policies show beyond the shadow of a doubt that you do not have the right to keep information from other readers, regardless of how you feel about it. Now, with respect to your earlier statement, "People who are on the executive board know the truth. Anyone familiar with the facts of what happened over the past year knows most of what is in here is untrue." I can say only that until members of the Ramah Poconos executive board publish their accounts of recent events, it is irrelevant what their personal opinions are. Even if they were to make available their tellings of any given incident or event, it would only be appropriate to include that information while making clear that the information is the opinion/version of a specific individual. If another member of the executive board were to publish a conflicting story, then that would be referenced as well. As there is some public record of these issues (official emails sent by camp and the creation of a Facebook group alleging misinformation in those emails), I will do my best to document things as well as can be done. At the end of this, your enthusiasm is valuable to the overall Wikipedia community and I encourage you to become more familiar with Wikipedia policies as you continue your contributions. All the best. --yonkeltron (talk) 05:06, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad we were able to achieve resolution on this issue. Going forward, I think it would be a better idea for this section to list past and present Ramah Poconos directors rather than highlight controversies. Does anyone have a full list of directors with dates? It seems the official Ramah sites are negligent with regard to history. --Dalamaster (talk) 12:26, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Violations of LIBEL and RS[edit]

Removed the following paragraph because it clearly violates WP:LIBEL and WP:BLP, with no WP:RS as it stands.

Her termination and the ensuing scandal caused a major embarrassment to the camp.[citation needed] Todd Zeff and the president of the board conspired to covertly terminate Toby's employment by not renewing her contract (due to expire following the 2008 summer) without consulting the executive board members or soliciting input from the community. Todd Zeff then falsely announced that Toby had opted to leave camp of her own volition in an attempt to cover up the decision.[citation needed] Following the announcement the community responded with outrage expressed in a letter campaign and the creation of a Facebook group petitioning the decision. The board then voted to buy out the remainder of Toby's contract and dismiss her immediately in an attempt to close the issue.[citation needed]

Even if substantiated, this kind of information is volatile and tricky without good public citations, see WP:RS, WP:CS and WP:NOT#BATTLEGROUND. IZAK (talk) 13:51, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The outside viewpoint is appreciated. A second opinion is always valuable and my future edits in this section will be cautious as this is a charged issue. Thank you for bringing this to a close. --yonkeltron (talk) 05:06, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Major quality issues - Possible rewrite[edit]

The quality of this article has degraded over time. Furthermore, in accordance with the WP:NOR, WP:ADVOCACY and WP:VERIFY, this current writing of this article makes a variety of claims which cannot be verified due to an acute lack of third-party materials on the subject. That is to say, that if everything providing information about Ramah Poconos is published by either Ramah Poconos itself, the National Ramah Commission or JTSA (it's supervising body), then there's a problem because none of them satisfy WP:RELIABLE. Clearly, a lack of third-party material doesn't necessarily indicate that Ramah Poconos doesn't satisfy WP:NOTE but this article does need some work. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not an advertising vehicle or some other forum for recruitment. What can we do to clean things up? I tagged what needs to be done in the hopes that readers will contribute, but there is much work to be done. --yonkeltron (talk) 00:20, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are speaking to the Tikvah section? I made edits to make it neutral and added a news article link to the external links section. The Current Leadership section is accurate according to the office - but are you saying that they shouldn't be there? --Dalamaster (talk) 13:36, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem removed[edit]

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://web.archive.org/web/20070312102306/http://www.campramah.org/Camps/Poconos.html. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Diannaa (talk) 23:03, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Camp Ramah in the Poconos. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 20:03, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Camp_Ramah_in_the_Poconos&oldid=1200570556"