Jump to content

Talk:Mennonite Central Committee

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 106.70.119.115 (talk) at 07:38, 27 August 2018. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Untitled

I am working on writing an article about Clayton Kratz. He worked for the early MCC and i wondered if anyone wanted to help. Please Tell me on my talk page. Callan93 16:48, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MennoNet Radio Network?

Does MennoNet have any relation to the MCC? If so, maybe it can be added. 68.116.99.140 20:47, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MennoNet is loosely affiliated with Mennonite Disaster Service (MDS), which is separate from MCC. It would be good to have an MDS article! I don't know where one would find a source for MennoNet. ✤ JonHarder talk 19:33, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reply. An article for the Mennonite Disaster Service would be a great idea. Maybe we could add a blurb about MennoNet to such an article. Sources may be hard to find, but perhaps one of the members of MennoNet could provide information. Thanks. 68.113.47.11 (talk) 18:33, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CAMERA

Please also refer to the organization CAMERA (camera.org 'The Mennonite Mission')for a independant critique of MCC's activities in Israel -Palestine. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.237.86.174 (talk) 04:52, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm no expert on the Israel-Palestine conflict, but it doesn't take much research to find out about CAMERA. They are not not neutral in the conflict, and not a reliable source. It might be possible to use their information in regards to their own beliefs, but not on the activities of MCC. My opinion is that we'd need more than an essay or two from an extremely pro-Israel group before including such a claim in the MCC article. Sχeptomaniacχαιρετε 16:42, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are you suggesting that the Camera organization is lying? If they are not lying how on earth can they be biased?? Can you direct us to a MCC article where they explicitly defend Israel's right to exisit and protect it's citizens? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.237.86.219 (talk) 05:31, 24 June 2008 (UTC) An essay or two? I suggest you go to their website and check again. Also while you are there you will find articles about wikipedia. You might like to reconsider your veiw point about them being pro-Israel, I don't think they will regard being labeled, 'bias' lightly unless you have proof of what you have claimed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.237.86.219 (talk) 04:51, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I did a Google search on the Camera site for "Mennonite", and only found one article about MCC, and a few others that mention MCC in passing. Electronic Intifada probably wouldn't want to be called biased, either, but it doesn't change the fact that they are also not a neutral entity in the conflict. Both organizations explicitly operate in the interests of one side. You're going to have to find a better source. Sχeptomaniacχαιρετε 17:23, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do I need to point out to you that this article needs citations for verification, YOU will need to find a better source. Again, are you saying that the Camera organization is lying and there fore is an unreliable source of information? Where is your proof? Why don't you check their claims in their articles before calling them bias? Why do you think they are a unreliable source? Just answer the question. You can't be much good at searching because I am able to find seven articles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.237.86.219 (talk) 22:57, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've already answered the question as to why they are not a reliable source. If you want to add something to the article, you need to find sufficient sourcing, and Camera.org alone is not going to cut it. Sχeptomaniacχαιρετε 23:16, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, you have not answered the question, you have merely stated, 'they are not neutral'. So again I ask you where is your proof that they are not neutral? Also, where are the citations and verifications that are missing from the article? Are these just the views of the author? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.111.130.132 (talk) 20:46, June 26, 2008

I'm not going to argue endlessly. As I stated, CAMERA is not neutral because they say they are not neutral; they exist to defend one side of the conflict. I'm not even one of the editors that's removed your insertion so far, though I will if necessary. I'm just trying to help you out by explaining why it's not being allowed to stay. Sχeptomaniacχαιρετε 15:03, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Where do they say they are not neutral? You can censor the insertion if you wish, I will simply replace it as I believe in freedom of expression.I don't to argue endlessly either but the truth is the truth, your censorship will be seen for what it is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.111.130.132 (talk) 23:11, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe in freedom of expression, too, not that it has much to do with this. However, I would caution you against edit-warring over your insertion, as it will most likely end with you being blocked. Like I've said before, find a better source or two, and we can talk about it, and probably add a sentence. I'm sorry you don't understand why CAMERA is not neutral, as I fail to see how it could be understood otherwise. I suspect it's because you're probably a little too close to the issue. Sχeptomaniacχαιρετε 02:23, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry that you cannot see how you are threatening my freedom of expression as you have now threaten to block me. And just what insertion are you talking about? Camera is pro truth, not pro Israel, it simply appears that way because others seem not to want to critque popular media outlets in regards to Israel. If someone were to tell lies about your family or friends or community would you not defend yourself by what ever media outlet that you could access? Also I am not too close to the issue as I do not have any Jewish friends, nor Israeli friends, nor am I jewish - actually I am a Mennonite and I believe in speaking the truth. If you were to arrange to block (read 'GAG' ) me, I would simply move to another computer. If you can prove that Camera is lying you won't hear from me again.If you do block me I will forward your comments to Camera for them to deal with. I guess you will want to have the last word again? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.111.130.132 (talk) 03:59, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(Please act responsibly and sign your posts with ~~~~ and see WP:TALK for other formatting guidelines.) This latest suggestion of disruption is not a good idea. See WP:EVADE. CAMERA is currently in a lot of trouble on WIkipedia. See Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/CAMERA lobbying. The problems deal with "advocacy or propaganda, furtherance of outside conflicts, publishing or promoting original research, and political or ideological struggle," all of which are prohibited on Wikipedia. Individuals affiliated with CAMERA are blocked from editing Wikipedia, some for a year, some indefinitely. I invite you to reconsider becoming involved in a similar mess. Finally, this discussion no longer seems focussed on improving this article. Please take further discussion of CAMERA neutrality to another venue. ✤ JonHarder talk 12:17, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for setting me straight Jon, I suppose, as a Mennonite, I just wanted to regain full confidence in MCC again. So I suppose it is best that I don't believe anything or any reports or media coverage that comes out of the middle east either for or against Palestinian or Israel. But I will pray for the safety of all the kids in the middle east but that is all I will do now. Thanks again most sincerely. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.111.130.132 (talk) 08:57, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for stepping in, Jon. To the anon editor, let me clarify by saying I did not threaten to have you blocked (nor would it be possible for me to block you). I simply gave a word of warning before you did something that would have ended in you being blocked. Sχeptomaniacχαιρετε 22:50, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jon, just quick question. Are you the same Jon Harder who in some way is connected to the Mennonites? I feel that if this is the case, then I feel that you and I may be too close to the issues that came to the fore in the talk. I don't know if I, as a Mennonite could maintain my neutrality if I represented or were closely connected in some way to the article. I feel that the discussion should be reviewed by a non - Mennonite. Please don't see this as 'warring' but I feel that readers would have more confidence in the article if it were 'written and controlled' by someone who was not a Mennonite.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.108.176.41 (talk) 03:53, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article shouldn't be "written and controlled" by anyone...Mennonite or non-Mennonite. Basic principle here: all are free to contribute. I found JonHarder's comments appropriate and useful. Whether he's a Mennonite or not makes no difference. Indeed, I would expect that many Mennonites contribute to the article. It makes sense. It would be strange to discourage editors most familiar with a topic to keep away. --Anietor (talk) 16:18, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What you say about the article is right, all should be able to contribute freely to it. But when it comes to the discussion page it would appear that some bring bias to it (recheck what I wrote above, eg'-the issues that came to the fore in the talk' (something you did not refer to in your post above). It is of no suprise to me that a North American Mennonite would be hostile to Camera and any references to it.It seems that Jon is not as objective as he would want us to believe.How can Camera be in trouble with wikipedia if all are free to contribute to articles, unless they are lying. I don't think that Camera is any more or less pro-Israel, than Jon may be pro Mennonite. As far as the discussion page is concerned I am not confident that Jon can be an indifferent arbitrator. You see, I subscribe to ML,MDS, and I understand the links to MCC.But it is interesting to learn which people are contributing to the discussion pages about anabaptism.As a member of the Mennonite church I have been taught to be with those 'outside the camp' with Jesus and to support those who have been marginalized. A quick reading of a lot of Christian articles, (including those by MCC) shows that Israel and its people, (which includes their children) have been marginalized and attacked again and again by various Christian groups.Therefore a balanced article would include MCC other activities such as its involvment with Mennonites who went to South America after leaving Germany(I refer you to the writings of John D. Thiesen.Perhaps you would like to include some material for the article from his book, 'Mennonite & Nazi?'.Don't get me wrong, I am firmly in the Mennonite camp, but I do go outside the camp to listen to what others are saying about the history of the MCC. A history that I cannot find in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.108.176.41 (talk) 01:33, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply] 

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.206.160.105 (talk) 06:17, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone realize that it was the GERMANS during WWI that gave Lenin safe passage back to Russia to bolster the Russian revolution which ultimately led to the persecutions of the Mennonites? And I too have observed how entries on this discussion page seem to disappear. It would be interesting to find out who is doing it before an official complaint is made. Censorship is the tool of the desperate to control the ignorant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.108.204.149 (talk) 08:56, 4 September 2008 (UTC) I disagree most strongly with 'Mennonites who 'govern' this article being compared to the Nazis'. The nazis never deleted but censored input in regards to their articles. The only difference between Nazis and the Mennonites who wrote this article is that the nazis practised what they preached. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.206.139.6 (talk) 00:38, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]


I think that she should concentrate on her own spiritual walk before she compares mennonites to Nazis regardless of deletions and such. First take out the log in your own eye then you will see the speck in the eyes of Mennonites. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.206.139.6 (talk) 01:40, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Mennonite Central Committee. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:29, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mennonite_Central_Committee&oldid=856741633"