Jump to content

Talk:Disabled Veterans National Foundation

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

May 2012 cleanup

[edit]

HelpingVets (talk · contribs) reverted my recent cleanup, stating the following in an edit summary: "User is unable to delete valid sourced material. In addition, the edits made are not tagged to properly sited information - the DVNF website does not state what this user is saying it does, nor do the links work for source 2 and 3."

The links for "source 2 and 3" go to CNN and Better Business Bureau. They work just fine. The "valid sourced material" I removed was from DVNF's own website, such as the "DVNF Response" to recent issues. Note that link is dead and does not represent a neutral point of view. As my edit summary said, "remove unencyclopedic/POV information. Yes, that means pruning to neutral sources". Sometimes a razor is the best way to clean up an article to make it neutral.

I'm especially concerned this user has a conflict of interest; they are a single-purpose account, which means it's probably a safe bet. As with any other user with a COI, they are strongly encouraged to discuss edits on the talk page, rather than taking action to own the page. tedder (talk) 19:03, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(Pasted reply from HelpingVet's talk page, AGF to maintain a threaded conversation)
The recent updates made do not uphold what is required in the Wikipedia T&Cs. These edits are not sourced properly, as DVNF does not have the supposed content about CharityWatch of their fundraising costs on their website. Additionally, the articles sourced as 2 and 3 links to "page not found" 404 redirects. The interlinking to other Wikipedia pages does not link to a real page either.
The content I've added earlier is not only sourced properly, but help maintain neutrality of the article. If there are any revisions or additions that are felt to be needed, that's fine. But it is unacceptable to delete properly cited content that is unbiased and not considered promotional for the organization. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HelpingVets (talk • contribs) 19:29, 21 May 2012‎ (UTC)[reply]
The links under references work. Can you paste the URLs you are having trouble with? Also, please explain what content wasn't sourced. The version you reverted (again, note WP:OWN) is much worse when it comes to sourced content. It also isn't encyclopedic in form, though that's much less important than the terrible neutrality issues. I've cited several of Wikipedia's Five Pillars; in the rewritten version, what does it not meet? Also, please keep in mind the DVNF "response" to the CNN article is a 404. tedder (talk) 19:37, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh- the "interlinking to wikipedia pages does not link to a real page either" are redlinks, which are okay. They are indicators pages should be created. See WP:REDLINK. tedder (talk) 19:40, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've replaced the DVNF response link. Here are the URLs that are not working: http://www.marketwatch.com/Story/story/rescue?SourceUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.marketwatch.com%2Fstory%2Fdisabled-veterans-national-foundation-provides-support-for-veterans-empowering-veterans-in-north-carolina-2011-10-12 and http://www.bradenton.com/2011/09/28/3532443/disabled-veterans-national-foundation.html. Also, where on the DVNF website do you see mention of CharityWatch and the 98% statistic? How is the DVNF website a legit source for that material? While I may only have commented on this one article, it is because I am very passionate about these issues - however, I am neutral in my position with the organization. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HelpingVets (talk • contribs) 14:34, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, those links are bad. But they were external links, not sources. Why do you keep referring to the DVNF website for things like CharityWatch and 98%? You know this article isn't owned by DVNF, right? I will merge in the writing to the improved version you've kept. tedder (talk) 14:54, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not the one referring to DVNF website for CharityWatch and 98%, those are the external links that you give as a source in your edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HelpingVets (talk • contribs) 15:29, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This link gives 98%. It was used as a reliable source. It's not on DVNF's website. What's the problem here? tedder (talk) 16:15, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Citations for verifcation

[edit]

Hi,

I wanted to start a thread to help verify and cite information on this wiki. Please let me know if anyone wants to help :D

(Jameshammersmith88 (talk) 17:51, 11 May 2012 (UTC))[reply]

I would love to help verify and cite information for this wiki with you. Please let me know if you're still interested. (ericawilliams70 (talk) 19:04, 25 November 2013 (UTC))[reply]

[edit]

I am a freelance PR consultant retained In April by Disabled Veterans National Foundation to advise on a range of communications issues. For Wikipedia purposes, I have a conflict of interest and am a Paid Editor or perhaps a Paid Advocate (I don't know the difference exactly). The Wikipedia article on this organization has Template:Multiple Issues posted, citing the need for additional verification. In addition, I have found the following problems: a dead link, a person wrongly identified, out-of-date information, significant recent changes in the organization that are not mentioned, and allegations for which the organization's response is not covered. I would like to work to correct these issues. I understand and agree with the policy that Paid Editors may not edit articles directly. I am a former journalist and adhere to Wikipedia's principle that articles must reflect a Neutral Point of View. I am also aware of the apparent "edit war" that broke out in 2012 and am aware that one party in that war was a consulting firm that edited the article directly and did not disclose its conflict of interest. That firm is no longer working for DVNF, and I will not engage in those practices.

I'm working on suggested edits to the article over the next couple of days. If anyone is interested in reviewing these suggestions and either posting or rejecting them, I would very much welcome it. TransparencyServices (talk) 16:00, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The draft hasn't been touched for more than a month, the editor (User:TransparencyServices) who was working on it and who filed this COI edit request has been blocked indefinitely, possibly for using a promotional username. The user who previously commented on the draft (User talk:Brianhe) is no longer interested in giving feedback. There's really no point in keeping this COI edit request open unless the draft editor returns (and makes a new edit or review request). --82.136.210.153 (talk) 13:01, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

I am the "Paid Editor requesting assistence". See above. I have major revisions to suggest to this article, a significant rewrite, because of the problems I describe above. I've looked at similar situations, and don't see that there is any standard way of posting such suggestions. So, I think I will address it on a section-by-section basis, with comments on the problems I see in each section, and my suggested replacement text to address the problems. If a neutral editor wants to engage with me on this and suggest a different way for me to post the suggestions, that would be fine. I didn't know the best way to show references, so I put [fn] where the footnote superscript would go, and immediate below that paragraph, I inserted the citation. The edits in the first few sections are minor, but quite substantial later on. So, here goes... TransparencyServices (talk) 22:18, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Extended content

Section: Opening sentence

Comment: “provides service” is odd wording; “support and services” is more descriptive.

Suggested replacement text:

The Disabled Veterans National Foundation is a registered charity that provides support and services for disabled veterans. Founded in 2007, the organization is based in Washington D.C. and is funded by donations. [fn]

Reference: http://www.dvnf.org/about-us/mission/

Section: History

Comment: The footnoted source for this sentence and the quotation is the “History” page on the DVNF website. However, the language on that page has been changed. Suggested replacement text is based on the new language on the “History” page.

Suggested replacement text:

The Disabled Veterans National Foundation (DVNF) was founded in 2007 by six women veterans, each with years of experience as State Women Veterans Coordinators in various states around the country. They created DVNF to help address the gap in services faced by disabled and at-risk veterans. After several years of building its organizational capacity, DVNF hired Joseph VanFonda (SgtMaj Ret.) as the organization’s CEO in late 2013 upon his retirement from a 27-year career in the United States Marine Corps. [fn]

Reference: http://www.dvnf.org/about-us/history/

Section: Mission

Comment: The first sentence overlooks DVNF’s primary focus on disabled and at-risk veterans, and it cites a website posting from September 2011. The second sentence quotes language from DVNF’s website that has since changed. The two sentences are also somewhat repetitive in their content.

Suggested replacement text:

According to its website, DVNF “exists to provide critically needed support to disabled and at-risk veterans who leave the military wounded—physically or psychologically—after defending our safety and our freedom.” [fn]

Reference: http://www.dvnf.org/about-us/mission/

Reference: http://www.disabled-world.com/communication/community/dvnf.php

Reference: http://www.footstomp.com/articles/65/featured-organization-disabled

Section: Disbursement of funds

Comments: 1. The headline doesn’t describe the content very clearly.

2. The info in the first paragraph is from 2 press releases issued in 2011 and 2012. While not technically “false,” the information is time-specific and would need a time reference. Since it is way out-of-date, it seems best to replace it with current information about the organizations activities.

3. The last 3 paragraphs really belong in the “Criticism” section later on in this article. This would put all the allegations in one place and would eliminate the duplication that now exists.

Suggested replacement headline: Programs and activities

Suggested replacement text:

According to its website, DVNF’s primary programs include:

• Benefits and Resource Navigation, which provides direct, one-to-one counseling for disabled and at-risk veterans on how to qualify for and obtain benefits they are entitled to as a result of their military service. [fn]

Reference: http://www.dvnf.org/veterans-programs/resources/

• Wellness & Morale Program, which sends basic items such as clothing, food, water, and health and hygiene supplies to Stand down Events and homeless shelters around the country for distribution to veterans and their families. [fn]

Reference: http://www.dvnf.org/veteran-organizations/wellness-morale-program/

Reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9KdCh9xE7I


• Grants to Provide Stability, which provides funding for rent, mortgage and utility payments to qualified veterans when they are experiencing a temporary financial setback. [fn]

Reference: http://www.vaservice.org/go/training/funding_view/4837/

Reference: http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20120124005199/en/Disabled-National-Veterans-Foundation-Providing-Grants-Veterans#.U30LkSgUqSo

Reference: http://www.2d-hosting.com/dvnf/files/2013/04/Individual-Grant-Application-Final.pdf

Reference: http://www.dvnf.org/veterans-programs/gps-home-program/

• In May 2014, DVNF began a fundraising campaign in support of the Human Engineering Research Laboratory, which is affiliated with the Veterans Affairs Pittsburgh Health System and the University of Pittsburgh. Specializing in advanced engineering in clinical research and medical rehabilitation, HERL develops state-of-the-art adaptive devices to improve mobility and function for veterans with physical disabilities. [fn]

Reference: http://www.herl.pitt.edu/news-events/dvnf-launches-herl-initiative

Reference: http://www.fundcapitalamerica.com/disabled-veterans-national-foundation-launches-initiative-with-human-engineering-research-laboratories/#

• DVNF also provides grants to other veteran organizations to address the issues that align with the DVNF mission.

Reference: http://arvets.org/news/10k-grant-to-assist-arkansas-veterans-facing-tough-statistics-in-civilian-job-training-and-education/

Section: Board members

Comment:

1. This doesn’t mention the new CEO and other top staff. 2. One of the individuals mentioned has left the Board. Also, DVNF’s website does not list current Board members, so there is no way of sourcing current membership.

Suggest replacement headline: Leadership

Suggested replacement text:

In October 2013 the organization named Joseph VanFonda as Chief Executive Officer. VanFonda is a 27-year veteran of the Marine Corps and a recipient of the Purple Heart. In his final years in the Corps, VanFonda was the Regimental Sergeant Major for the Wounded Warrior Regiment. [fn]

Reference: http://dc.citybizlist.com/article/disabled-veterans-national-foundation-appoints-major-ret-joseph-vanfonda-executive-director

Reference: http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/disabled-veterans-national-foundation-introduces-new-executive-director-226445401.html

Reference: http://www.dvnf.org/disabled-veterans-national-foundation-introduces-new-executive-director/

In May 2014, VanFonda summarized developments in his first 6 months in the new role, which include launching new and expanded programs to provide direct service to disabled and at-risk veterans, strengthening the structure and professional staff of the organization, and evaluating its development and fundraising programs with the goal of improved efficiency and transparency. [fn]

Reference: http://finance.boston.com/boston/news/read/27230349/Disabled_Veterans_National_Foundation_Issues_Progress_Report_Si...

Reference: http://www.dvnf.org/dvnf-ceo-issues-new-report-progress-made-since-arrival/

The Executive Director is Delese Harvey. [fn]

Reference: http://www.dvnf.org/about-us/leadership/

In May 2014, DVNF announced the creation of a new position of Development Director and the hiring of Barfonce Baldwin, formerly Executive Director of the Capitol Hill Group Ministry as well as the Chief Administration Officer of the Central Union Mission. DVNF says Baldwin’s duties include building a broader and more diversified fundraising program for the organization. [fn]

Reference: http://www.streetinsider.com/Press+Releases/Disabled+Veterans+National+Foundation+Adds+New+Director+of+Development+to+Team/9439285.html

Section: Criticism

Comments (including comments on the 3 paragraphs from “Disbursement of funds” that I suggest should be moved here):

1. The American Institute of Philanthropy changed its name to Charity Watch, so the earlier paragraph under “Disbursement of Funds” and the paragraph here refer to the same organization.

2. The CNN investigation is mentioned in both places.

3. The study DVNF commissioned was by Richard Steinberg, a professor of economics at IUPUI, not Richard Harold Steinberg, who is a law professor at UCLA, a completely different person. Also, the study was released in several parts, in 2010 and 2012.

4. DVNF’s responses to the criticism are covered incompletely or not at all. For the sake of clarity and organization, I suggest 3 sections, in the following order: “Criticism,” “Report of Prof. Richard Steinberg,” and “DVNF Response.”

Section: Criticism

Suggested replacement text:

In 2010, the American Institute of Philanthropy, a charity watchdog group that later changed its name to CharityWatch, issued a report based on DVNF’s public filings for 2008. CharityWatch said DVNF is "contractually obligated to allow another fundraising company it hired, Brickmill Marketing Services to keep 100% of what it raises from donors until the charity's debts to this company are paid off." The report also said the largest fundraising vendor to DVNF was Quadriga Art, the parent company of Brickmill. The report said Quadriga Art billed DVNF over $14.7 million in 2008, equal to 90% of DVNF's total spending. Brickmill accounted for another 9% of spending that year, leaving less than 2% for direct aid to veterans. In a second report in 2012, CharityWatch, gave DVNF an “F” rating and said “that only a small portion of donations raised by Disabled Veterans National Foundation (DVNF) goes to assist injured veterans.” [fn]

Reference: http://www.charitywatch.org/articles/Disabled_Veterans_National_Foundation.html

A CNN investigation that aired on Anderson Cooper 360° over several days in May 2012 alleged that the organization received about $55.9 million in donations since it began operations in 2007, but almost none of that money wound up in the hands of American veterans. Instead, CNN said, publicly available IRS 990 forms show the charity made significant payments to Quadriga Art LLC, which owns two direct-mail fundraising companies. It also reported that the organization’s “goods in kind” program gave out “massive amounts of candy, hand sanitizer bottles and many other unnecessary items to veteran aid groups.” [fn]

Reference: http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/07/us/veterans-charity-fraud/index.html

Later, in July, CNN aired another story, recapping much of its prior reporting and focusing on the role of the fundraising consultants. After an interview with a DVNF Board member, CNN Senior Legal Analyst Jeffrey Toobin said: “But let's concentrate on where the money goes and who is making money here. Quadriga doesn't even pretend to be a nonprofit or a charity. Quadriga is making an enormous amount of money by churning these charities, these charities lists. That's where the money goes. They're the people making money. I mean this woman, she strikes me as she's probably well-intentioned but she's obviously in way over her head here. The problem is Quadriga, not these charities.” [fn]

reference: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1207/06/acd.01.html

On May 23, 2012, Senator Max Baucus, chair of the Senate Finance Committee and Senator Richard Burr of the Veterans' Affairs Committee announced an investigation of DVNF following the CNN report. They released an open letter to DVNF containing 14 questions about their tax-exempt status and fundraising activities. In their press release, the senators stated: “According to tax records, DVNF raised tens of millions of dollars over a two year period, yet reports indicate very little of the money went to directly help disabled veterans. Instead, DVNF apparently paid large sums to Quadriga Art in 2009 and 2010.”

Reference: http://www.burr.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=7B55939F-C432-AAF3-EC9C-8CAE76F3378A

Reference: http://philanthropy.com/article/Senators-Investigate/131965/

Another charity watchdog site, the BBB Wise Giving Alliance reports that DVNF has not responded to written requests for information. The site says: “The BBB encourages charities to disclose accountability information beyond that typically included in financial statements and government filings, in order to demonstrate transparency and strengthen public trust in the charitable sector.”

Reference: http://www.bbb.org/charity-reviews/national/disabled-veterans-national-foundation-in-washington-dc-18693

SUGGESTED NEW SECTION

Suggested headline: Report of Prof. Richard Steinberg

Suggested new text:

DVNF has responded to criticisms in several ways. In 2010, Dr. Richard Steinberg, Professor of Economics, Philanthropic Studies, and Public Affairs Indiana University - Purdue University Indianapolis, was commissioned to do an analysis to determine the appropriateness of DVNF’s fundraising approach.

Steinberg issued two reports in 2010, the first, in March, entitled “Expert Opinion on Fundraising by the Disabled Veterans National Foundation” [fn] and the second, in September, entitled “The Lifetime Value of Donors to DVNF.” [fn]

Reference: http://img.2dialog.com/dvnf/custom/studio_main/doc/DVNF_Financial_ProfOpinion.pdf

Reference: http://img.2dialog.com/dvnf/custom/studio_main/doc/lifetime_value.dvnf.9.10.10.pdf

In these reports, Steinberg noted that the process of prospecting for donors for a new organization is expensive but represents a long-term investment in developing an ongoing donor base. He also said that charitable fundraising campaigns serve two purposes. One is a financial purpose, to raise money for the charitable programs. And the other is a non-financial purpose, in this case, to raise public awareness of the needs of disabled veterans. Steinberg concluded that DVNF’s fundraising campaigns had succeeded in both respects: “In sum, data from the first two years of the contract and DVNF’s existence are highly encouraging. There is no evidence suggesting campaign expenditures are excessive.”

Following the CNN stories in May 2012, Prof. Steinberg issued a further statement, disclosing that he had been interviewed by CNN but that CNN had not mentioned his analysis and had not aired any portion of his interview. He concluded that “CNN is fundamentally wrong” in its analysis of DVNF’s fundraising. He added: “There are many bad charities, but looking at the ratio of expenditures to donations does not tell you whether the charity is good or bad.” He said that three U.S. Supreme Court decisions address the irrelevance of this “cost ratio” [i.e. expenditures to donations], and he noted that the IRS has stopped requiring charities to provide that information in the federal 990 tax form. [fn]

Reference: [to come]

Steinberg’s analytical approach has been the subject of commentary in the non-profit community.

Reference: http://philanthropy.com/article/An-Economist-s-Projections/133689/

SUGGESTED NEW SECTION

Suggested headline: DVNF’s response to Senate Finance Committee

Suggested new text:

DVNF issued a press release shortly after the announcement from Senators Baucus and Burr indicating it would cooperate fully with the senators’ investigation. DVNF President Precilla Wilkewitz said: “Media reports about our activities have been plain wrong and we welcome the opportunity to set the record straight.” She said DVNF had given $1.45 million in direct cash support to veterans, and she added: “Countless veterans’ organizations that have benefited from DVNF’s help have acknowledged this assistance in warm letters and calls. We will happily answer the questions posed by the United States Senate Finance Committee, and provide it with information that others have sadly, chosen to ignore.” [fn]

Reference: http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20120524006538/en/Disabled-National-Veterans-Foundation-Affirms-Support-Veterans#.U3jr_igUqSo

On June 5, 2012, DVNF sent a letter to the senators, responding to their request of May 23. Precilla Wilkewitz, DVNF President, said: “The Disabled Veterans National Foundation (DVNF) has provided $16.1 million in cash and requested items such as clothing, food, health & hygiene products to tens of thousands of underserved and disabled veterans nationwide.” She also pointed out that the founders of DVNF and all of its Board member, including herself, are volunteers and serve without compensation. They are reimbursed for some, but not all, out-of-pocket expenses. Wilkewitz’s letter proceeded to respond to each of the senators’ questions, and it included multiple attachments. [fn]

reference: http://www.dvnf.org/dvnf-provides-detailed-information-about-contributions-to-veterans-community-to-senate-finance-committee/

Reflecting the broader debate about fundraising costs, the DVNF response also referred to a Statement by the Association of Fundraising Professionals arguing, among other things, that “[f]undraising by direct mail can require a large initial investment. Charities employ direct mail to identify new supporters who might be interested in the work they do and the impact they achieve. It can take several years for the return on that initial investment to emerge, but the long-term results for charities are stronger because of that early focus on developing new supporters.” [fn]

Reference: http://www.afpnet.org/Audiences/NewsReleaseDetail.cfm?itemnumber=11494

Following DVNF’s response, the Senate Finance Committee and the individual senators have not issued any further public statements. [fn]

Reference: http://www.finance.senate.gov/search/?q=DVNF&x=10&y=8&access=p&as_dt=i&as_epq=&as_eq=&as_lq=&as_occt=any&as_oq=&as_q=&as_sitesearch=&client=finance&sntsp=0&filter=0&getfields=title&lr=&num=15&numgm=3&oe=UTF8&output=xml&partialfields=&proxycustom=&proxyreload=0&proxystylesheet=default_frontend&requiredfields=&site=finance&sitesearch=&sort=date%3AD%3AS%3Ad1&start=0&ud=1

And below this would be the references and the link to dvnf.org. Please let me know what you think. TransparencyServices (talk) 22:18, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for disclosing your position. This list of changes is really hard to assimilate, so I recommend that you create a draft page or a user draft page, starting with an exact copy of this article, tweak and change it to your satisfaction, then post the diff here. Also I noticed that some of the sources provided are a press release at the org's website then another apparent copy of that release at prnewswire.com; it doesn't seem to add value to have both. - Brianhe (talk) 04:15, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thx. That sounds like a much better approach. Does it matter whether I use the new VisualEditor or Wiki Markup? Also, I'm not sure what "post the diff" means (Wiki newbie, you see...), but I imagine I can figure that out. Will remove duped sources. Will try to finish this today, otherwise Tuesday. Your help is much appreciated. TransparencyServices (talk) 13:39, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Attempting to follow Brianhe's advice, I have rewritten the article with the goal of updating out-of-date/inaccurate information, replacing the dead link, correcting the identification error (wrong individual quoted), creating a more logical organization, consolidating the duplicated information, and representing DVNF's response to the criticisms. Pls note I have not eliminated any negative information, but where the same negative information was mentioned twice, I have consolidated it. And where DVNF's response to the criticism was not represented, I have attempted to do so neutrally, with multiple citations. Here (I hope) is the link to the diff's between the original and my rewrite:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:TransparencyServices/sandbox/Disabled_Veterans_National_Foundation&diff=610290816&oldid=610289396 — Preceding unsigned comment added by TransparencyServices (talk • contribs) 02:51, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
forgot to sign this comment... TransparencyServices (talk) 03:37, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
My feedback on your draft follows. Collapsed for talk page legibility. Other reviewers are encouraged to do likewise if comments are extensive. — Brianhe (talk) 18:21, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Brianhe's comments on draft

Overall comments: References need to have the publisher added, especially when they are DVNF self-published statements. I suggest using the {{citation}} template with at least date, publisher, title and URL filled in. Watch out for passive-voice usage like this phrase: "It also said that the founders ... are volunteers." Better phrased as "The DVNF press release stated that its founders are volunteers".

Section by section comments follow.

History - "years of building its organizational capacity" sounds euphemistic. What was the organization actually doing in all these years? Did they raise and dispense funds? Hire staff? Operate in several states? If so how much/how many? As it stands this section really says nothing about the organization other than its date of founding and the 2013 CEO, who is redundantly listed in the leadership section.

Mission - I'm leery of mission statements in any article. How does this add value? As always a third-party source is preferable. A brief statement like "...raises funds to support disabled veterans" in the lede is probably suitable instead of this section.

Leadership - any third party references to these people, other than in passing? If not, probably not notable and should be removed.

Ditto for Programs and activities - starting to look like promotion here. Find third party references or strike section.

Response to criticism section -- suggest making a subsection . Be careful with use of titles like "Prof. Richard Steinberg" - suggest rather "Report by commissioned outside expert". WP:HONORIFIC gives further guidance. Be careful with the statement about the cost ratio being "irrelevant" - it may be so in some narrow legal sense (i.e. preservation of tax exempt status) but is not so to the overwhelming majority of the press coverage on this subject, a typical headline being 5/8/2012 Huffington Post, "Charity Fraud: Disabled Veterans National Foundation Squanders Millions On Marketing Services".

Response to Senate Finance Committee section - also needs third party citations. PR releases on businesswire.com don't count. Did any of the senators speak to the DVNF response? The citation for the Finance Committee's non-response is kind of nonsensical: how can you show a citation for absence of evidence? Stating that you (the editor) found no response is original research -- you need somebody else saying that there was no response.

External links: You can format the official website with the {{Official website}} template.

Thank you. One of the problems in writing the article is that the criticisms, particularly the Senators' press release, got quite a bit of press coverage, while the organization's responses did not. There were no stories that I can find, and the Senators did not respond. So, there isn't any 3P sourcing, only the organization's own press release. Also, the Senators haven't put out any subsequent statement indicating the investigation is closed or provided any other status report. None of the press that reported the story initially has covered the fact that there's been no follow-up in 2 years. I couldn't figure out any other way to source it than to show the screen shot of the Senate website. As far as the Mission statement and other earlier sections, I don't disagree with your comments, but I was trying to keep as close as possible to the original structure of the article, figuring it would be more likely to be acceptable. I'll stew on all this for a while. Thx again. TransparencyServices (talk) 15:21, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
A lot has happened with this organization since May, and there has been extensive press coverage of a settlement with the NY Attorney General. This new draft reflects the recent news and also attempts to respond to all of Brianhe's comments on the previous draft. Here's the link to the comparison between the two versions, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%3ATransparencyServices%2Fsandbox%2FDisabled_Veterans_National_Foundation&diff=625438284&oldid=610290816. TransparencyServices (talk) 21:32, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Disabled Veterans National Foundation. 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: 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:44, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Disabled_Veterans_National_Foundation&oldid=1199957821"