Talk:Young Life

Criticism

I added some information on the limited controversy surrounding the organization and some tactics they use. I felt it was necessary to at least mention something negative surrounding the group as it seems to be a fine topic of discussion whenever Young Life comes up. Also added a link to a thread about some of the cult-like status it has been accused of.

--Whosgotbugeyes 18:36, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The criticism portion is a good idea, but it really needs to be cleaned up. It reads more like your personal POV rather than statement of fact. You also need to cite your sources... otherwise anybody who dislikes Young Life could put up their personal opinion as a "criticism". Anyone could do the same thing to a section about "atheism criticism" by saying that they've heard that atheists beat dogs and spit on Christians, which is ludicrous and has no place on Wikipedia. So until it is rewritten and cited (with authoritative sources... not some dude's blog), I'm going to put up a POV tag. Phrases like "gone astray" don't have an encyclopedic meaning, and the following sentence should be struck altogether: "There have been unconfirmed reports of sexual predators and other criminals being unknowingly let into the organization and left unsupervised until harmful damage has already been accomplished." If the reports are unconfirmed, then why are they being mentioned? Thanks. --Goodraisin 15:58, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The criticims section ought to be on here, even if it is kept general and avoids specific allegations, etc. Criticism is by its nature going to be subjective, reporting the existance of subjective opinions if not deserving of a POV tag. There are plenty of criticisms of how young life operates without mentioning sexual predators.

Added Category Links

I added Category links because some spammer suggested it, but I removed the advertisement tag because it wasn't explained on the talk page. Thanks to those involved with the upkeep of this page, as it seems there are a lot of people out there intent on spamming without explaining why on the talk page.

Also, please refrain from making additions to the page that are POV-sounding. I know everyone likes to use familiar YL phrases like "earning the right to be heard" and "meet kids where they are" because they are commonly used in the ministry, but someone writing this page in a biographical manner really wouldn't say it that way, right? Even when put in quotes. If you want to give a list of phrases like that which are commonly-used in the ministry and then explain them all in layman's terms, I'm all for it, but personally I don't think it's all that necessary. I love the updates though, keep them coming. --Goodraisin 20:15, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Page Updated

I made some big changes in the wording of this page in order to make it NPOV, and I did some restructuring of the paragraphs. I also included more factual information and took out statements that could be construed as POV. If the previous author of the page wants to discuss the changes I've made, by all means let me know what you think as this is the first time I've edited a Wikipedia entry. I grew tired of seeing this page with POV tags and wanted to see an encyclopedic type entry for this organization that parents or students could come view to find out what "Young Life" is. All tags will be removed unless explained on this talk page. Thanks! - Goodraisin 22:37, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I removed "Controversial", although I admit I am involved with "YL" at a local level, I searched the internet and could not find anything that would qualify it as "controversial" and looking at the users other edits, I do not think that this addition (of the word) was made in good faith. Marushke 00:12, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removed Information & POV

I have been looking through some of the history of this article andI totally agree with discussions below that this article was being written from a POV (Mostly positive, but at some stages negative). It was also at points repetative.

However I don't understand why so much unique information has been removed in early July this year. No contentious information such as the dates of founding in the US and Australia. Rather than build on and correct material it has been swept away and left with a simpler article with less information and les of a religious POV but a greater USofA only POV (But a US only POV never seems as contentious as a religious POV)

My appeal is please don't remove info. Add to it, rearrange it, correct it's accuracy or style (POV etc), shift it to a more appropriate location, and/or make it more encyclopedic, but please don't just remove it plain and simple. - Waza 23:15, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

POV

The following statement is a matter of oppinion:

"They meet kids on their turf, build positive mentor-like relationships with them, and demonsrate Christ's love."

This should be reworded to something similare to :"their mission statement[1] says..."

67.23.60.92 21:22, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

POV

User 143.109.59.20 has added a large amount of content that appears to be promotional. Given the obvious POV problems with promotional material, I will remove it soon.

Concurr. Ditch that.

I also found this article to be biased. I cited this line in the introduction as evidence. Young Life tries to make a subtle distinction from our high school ministry.

What is it biased towards? It seemed pretty straightforward and informational to me.

Does anyone have a problem with the line, "As these "experiences" tend to be expensive, most teenagers participating in Young Life come from middle-to-upper class families."

This seems biased as younglife has a large Urban ministry that has been omitted from the article. Also, the position of quotes around experiences seems sarcastic. King-of-no-pants 01:28, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I also find the implication that only middle to upper class teenagers are involved in young life since it leaves out the Urban ministry and also doesnt mention the fact that it costs Young Life more per kid at camp than the kids pay.

The language throughout the article is overly inclusive and rings disturbingly of promotional material. The use of the word "experiences" in such a way provides no factual information and makes Wikipedia seem too close to the organization. More specific wording such as "camping trips" might be better. At least, language with overly positive connotations should be used more sparingly in the article. Also, due to the prevalence of "mission statement" related information, it seems that there ought to be some evaluation of what the organization Italic textactuallyItalic text does, or some contrary views if they can be found.

This group doesn't seem controversial to me but the article seems way promotional and not like an encyclopedia in many places. Check this out:

Rather than asking kids to come to a particular location, Young Life leaders go where kids are. - Says who? And what exactly is a "Young Life Leader"? That could seem creepy without a supported explanation.

They meet kids on their turf - Their "turf"?

build positive mentor-like relationships with them - Says who and what makes them positive?

and demonsrate Christ's love. - Says who, and exactly how does one do that?

There is much more in the article that reads like promotional material like that above. I am not familiar with this group so I am not sure where supporting evidence can be found. Mr Christopher 05:05, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just read the article again, Young Life should copy this article as is an make a brochure from it :-) Serioulsy, it is well written but not very encyclopedia like. And I think one or two images will do. Mr Christopher 05:09, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The info is there, but I agree the page could use some "encyclopedia-izing" King-of-no-pants 04:00, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Conflicting statements

Does anyone else see a problem with this statement:

Young Life, which began in 1941 (although in Britain, NYLC began in 1911), is a non-profit non-denominational organization founded by Jim Rayburn. Young Life's focus is on teenagers. Kids are encouraged to explore the purpose of life and the Christian faith through weekly gatherings called "clubs". During the summer, Young Life takes kids to one of their many camps, where they hear the gospel of Jesus Christ and the Good News.

How can it be non-denominational while still 'encouraging the exploration of the Christian faith'? - Greb 05:49, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Because non-denominational is a reference to denomonations of the christian faith. i.e. catholic, baptist, reformed... King-of-no-pants 01:28, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is an example of the POV problem that the writers of this article have. They are certain that religious denomination will be understood to always mean Christian denomination. I have edited this section to make this clear. 151.203.217.130 13:33, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cult?

Is there any evidence that Young Life is somewhat like a cult?

I have a ton of personal experience with young life, its not a cult. :) King-of-no-pants 01:20, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on your definition of a cult. I have been a participant and paid staff for Young Life and there were no overt coercive tactics that I recall that are otherwise associated with cults such as food or sleep control. However there is a deliberate motive on the part of the organization to recruit new members who are otherwise emotionally vulnerable and to introduce them to a narrow set of ideas, where a confused young person can now find a group than can do the thinking for them and serve as a family by proxy for all the emotional needs that are missing for them. It is a fun social community that unfortunately is a trap because at its base is a bunch of people with narrow, unexamined ideas and an ideology that is internally inconsistent.

If you consider Christianity a Cult then possibly, otherwise no. It is a Christian outreach ministry for high school kids. Also the claim that Young Life at its base is a bunch of People with narrow, unexamined ideas and an ideology that is internally inconsistent is highly inaccurate. I can understand how someone might see Young Life as internally inconsistent but that is only because Young Life intentionally keeps from making stances on specific ideological problems outside of core Christian doctrine in order to appeal to the most kids possible and to gain support from as many denominations as possible.

I used to be a Young Life leader and it's definitely not a cult. There is no dissemination of information from a central source, and in fact, Young Life philosophies vary greatly from area to area because they tend to reflect the influence of different Christian denominations in each part of the country. There are a few phrases like "Winning the right to be heard" that are passed on by way of word of mouth, but you could easily find students or leaders involved with Young Life who have never heard these phrases. This is because there is no formalized training for Young Life leaders and I can say with certainty that most students and volunteer leaders couldn't even tell you who the current president of Young Life is. Could Young Life in a particular area be considered a cult? Possibly, but you could say the same thing about a church of any particular Christian denomination. At an organizational level, it's not even close. I may try to add more to this article when I have some time, as there is still a lot of factual/neutral information that could be added (i.e. the organizational structure for one).--Goodraisin 21:42, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

While not necessarily a cult young life does have a few cult characteristics and their deceitful, aggressive recruiting is scary to some. How about we add the controversy segment back to the article so this opinion is aired and not just a promotion of young life.

MasterCheif, remember to sign your posts to the discussion page. Like I said at the top of this page, I'm all for adding a criticism section so long as it's cited properly. This isn't a place for gossip and hearsay. --Goodraisin 15:07, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Adding more information

I'm adding quite a substantial amount of information about the various ministries of Young Life. I will also be adding logos of each ministry so that they may further be easily identifiable. My work will be added a little at a time so please I welcome any cleanup that you wish to do.

Young Life is not in any way shape or form a cult. It is simply a Christian ministry devoted telling high school students the good news of Jesus Christ. Young Life is devoted to these students through hanging out with them, showing up in their lives and being dependable for them. Many of their parents have left them and Young Life provides leaders to walk beside the kids and be there to support them.

_________________ If teaching the truth is narrow minded, that's like saying, "I am a man," and calling that narrow minded. If you are a man YOU ARE A MAN. To have discussion saying, "Well maybe I'm a woman..." so as not to be narrow minded, that's ridiculous. All Christians could be considered narrow minded because Christians believe that there is one way to the Father (God) and that is through Jesus Christ, his only son. That's the truth, so call Young Life narrow minded but understand that they have to be narrow minded if they are going to have a successful ministry.

Closing POV

I think any POV issues that existed have been remedied. I'm going to remove the NPOV dispute unless someone has something else to add to it.

It still sounds promotional. If you remove the POV tag I will be forced to add it back. --Nnp 22:31, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is not promotional, it's all factual. Young Life stands by their mission statement and runs their ministry by it. How is simple fact promotional? It's a FACT that Young Life and it's associated ministries (Young Lives, Capernaum, etc.) devote their time to telling high school kids and others about Jesus Christ. Just like grass is green, Young Life exists to spread the good news of the gospel of Jesus Christ. --User Unknown

Who wrote the above? You started off alright and you have a point, but trailed off drastically from having a heard point. This material is not promotional. Unless you consider facts and figures promotional. In that case you should add a POV to every page on wikipedia. This article tries to cover as much information as possible about Young Life. POV doesn't stand. --YLKJ 06:53, 03 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I feel that while not explicitly biased, this page portrays Young Life from the perspective of Young Life members, as it seems many of this page's contributors are. In addition to what this page has now I feel that a section must be placed on this page to discuss the controversies of young life from a non biased point of view. Controversies such as Young Life's deceptive and coercive tactics should be discussed as well as allegations of brain washing. The criticisms of Jews for Judaism against Young Life be aired.

Speedy Deletion dispute

No one added any discussion to why the speedy deletion is added. It will be removed. Please add to the discussion before choosing to mark this article as such. --YLKJ 06:56, 03 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why this article is a self-contradicting, NPOV, repetitive advertisement

From the introduction:

1) Self-contradicting: Compare "Rather than asking kids to come to a particular location, Young Life leaders go where kids are." with "More than 90,000 members spend a weekend during the school year or a week during the summer at one of Young Life's 24 camping properties." Young Life leaders go where kids are...then the kids go to camps where Young Life leaders are. Also, "Young Life has 23 camping properties" How many? 23 or 24? "More than 45 other countries" "total 50 countries." How many?

2) NPOV: "They...demonsrate Christ's love." This is not a Christian encyclopedia. If you think this is NPOV then imagine a similar article expressing a similar sentiment for a different faith.

3) Repetitive: "Young Life is active throughout all 50 states" "...and reaches coast to coast". "Young Life ...began in Texas in 1941" "...history spans more than 50 years." Young Life Australia repeats the same information about Rayburn.

4) Advertisement: The inclusion of the entire "Statement of Faith" and "mission" are pure advertisement. The entire mission and all of the goals of an organization would not be listed in an encylopedia. A separate logo for every subdivision of an organization would not be listed in an encyclopedia.

For an example of an NPOV article about a religious camp, see Camp Ramah. For an example of an NPOV article about a religious outreach program, see Islamic Society of North America. I hope you can see the difference between these articles and the article you have written. If you can then you will understand the edits I have made. If you cannot then you should not be at Wikipedia. Shame on you for misusing Wikipedia by placing your quest to seek publicity and recognition for an organization you like above the goal of developing an NPOV encyclopedia. The photo is great, though. If an outsider wants to understand Young Life, that image is the way to go. 151.203.217.130 12:24, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note the difference between what was there before: "They...demonstrate Christ's love" and what is there now: "Young Life's goals are...to demonstrate Christ's love." This is the difference between a Christian POV (that Christ's love may be demonstrated on Earth by these actions) and NPOV (that this organization has a goal of demonstrating Christ's love on Earth by these actions). Whether that goal is achievable, who Jesus was or what Jesus means is left up to the reader. Understand now? I hope so. 151.203.217.130 13:27, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the little logos for the Young Life mission subdivisions link to images that were described in the Summary section as "Only to be used for reference and journalism purposes. Not to be modified. Must have prior approval/credentials for use deemed by YoungLife.org." and then described in the Licensing section as "Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version." Is that the kind of morality they teach young Christians in this organization? To lie about copyright status in one section in order to put the right tag in and then to tell the truth about copyright status in another section? All of your images were placed in the category "Orphaned Unfree Images" and tagged for speedy deletion from Wikipedia. 151.203.217.130 12:20, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good Grief! "Is that the kind of morality the teach young Christians in this organisation?" Why is it that people accuse you for being a Christian and think that since you are Christian you must do everything 100 percent pleasing to everyone?

Are you tring to create NPOV-articles or just trying to confuse/annoy people?