Jump to content

Talk:Habitat for Humanity

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

Untitled

[edit]

uhh let's get a wikipedia discussion o HFHI. i'm doing it for a socials project. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.85.199.58 (talk) 00:16, 2 June 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What aspects are you looking to learn more about? --MC MasterChef 00:52, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Criticism Section

[edit]

It would appear the Criticism section is over the top and not in line with neutral POV. In particular the quote "don't act poor or grateful enough" is just from a cited article and not attributed to anyone at Habitat. Also the income ranges were based on showing only the high range - it seems very slanted. This area could be improved - it just regurgitates a negative article. Claygate 01:13, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Portions of the criticism section are also literally cut-and-pasted from the two articles cited. I attempted to rewrite some of the section, removing some parts, and did a little bit of minor reorganization, but more needs to be said in the other areas of the article to balance this out, I believe. There is plenty more to be said about the history of the organization, its leadership (Millard did more than just get fired), and more. Does anyone know any other third-party sources that report on Habitat that could be used to gauge its effectiveness and/or reputation as an international charity? — MC MasterChef :: Leave a tip — 07:13, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I do have some more stats I can add to this re: HFHI's effectiveness. We also ought to describe the affiliate/federated model; I find this a common misunderstanding when people discuss HFHI/Habitat affiliates. It would probably be prudent to add to the Sexual misconduct section the fact that an expensive and thorough investigation by a third party hired by the board of directors found no credible proof of Fuller's alleged misconduct in 2003. I have some more info on this in various emails and memos I received as an intern last year...I'll get them together and rough something up in the near future. Justinlaine 03:55, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Recent 'Anderson Gardens' criticism is over the top and non-nuetral POV. I have tried to improve it, although a case can be made for deletion. This story is still developing and hopefully someone informed and with better perspective will rewrite it. Cuvtixo 17:25, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't the 'Anderson Gardens' situation apply more to the local (Edmonton) affiliate, and not to HFHI? I would think that entire section could be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.178.132.251 (talk) 20:33, August 24, 2007 (UTC)

Reading the Criticism section for the first time, it strikes me as needing the NPOV tag as it's suffering from a lack of NPOV, and from what I've read in this discussion, changes to it have been outstanding. It really needs a rewrite and I'm willing to work on it over this weekend, but I do believe a tag is needed. To0n 20:34, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HfHI International Family Selection

[edit]

With two thirds of the building that HFHI does taking place overseas, most of this article talks about the American aspects of HfHI. Does anyone know/want to research how, say family selection takes place in other parts of the world? Do they run credit checks on Habitat families in, say, Afghanistan? There's some mention about the differences in house types internationally, but I'd imagine the whole program would be pretty different.

Also, are the international affiliates in third world countries run locally (as they are in the U.S.) or are they puppet organisations of developed countries?

I'm sure there's a whole host of other differences. This was the one glaring hole in an otherwise good article.

Sparsefarce 21:46, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I will try to add more info on International's practices, but international houses are built by offices located within the region they are building. For example, there is a Central Asia and Eastern Europe office in Slovakia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.98.146.63 (talk) 01:20, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Habitat for Humanity

[edit]

I reverted your edit to the HfH article under reStores. I'm sure some reStores accept upholstered furniture. If I'm wrong, feel free to correct me. Sparsefarce 20:11, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to some ReStore paperwork from the HfH office they are not supposed to accept upholsered furniture, because of smells and lack of appropriate storage facility in some warehouses.

--Mustafarox 21:14, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Some Habitat ReStores do sell upholstered furniture. I have been in ReStores that sell upholstered furniture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.98.146.63 (talk) 01:14, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am a staff member with a Habitat affiliate in the U.S. and many ReStores do sell furniture. It is up to each affiliate (and thus their board and staff leaders) to determine exactly what criteria they will use regarding what they will sell, just as it is up to each affiliate to set the number of sweat equity hours that partner families will do. Some area do well selling furniture and some do not. Kcmandy (talk) 19:49, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Habitat for humanity.svg

[edit]

Image:Habitat for humanity.svg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 22:55, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism and NPOV

[edit]

The criticism section is completely absurd. HFH is based on the idea that they are giving people a "hand UP, not a handOUT." While the composer of that section may feel that the organization could use its resources differently, it has no place whatsoever in the article, and seems to be ideological grandstanding. Quigonpaj (talk) 05:05, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm doing NPOV cleanup. It is my feeling that the critisism portion is neutral and unbiased, but I'm not removing the tag for that reason. I'm removing it because the editor who put it did not post his reasons clearly on the discussion page, permitting discussion and dispute resolution. In fact, they did not post at all. If anyone wishes to return the tag and post their reasoning and suggestions for improvement clearly, then of course they may do so. Drive-by tagging is against WP policy. Comments here or to my talk page. Jjdon (talk) 23:57, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Family focus?

[edit]

What I know of Habitat suggests that part of the idea is to promote better family life, but nowhere have I seen it explicitly discussed that the program is designed only for family housing, or that single-person households or other groupings of people would not qualify for housing from Habitat. Neither the Habitat website nor this article clears up my confusion on the matter. They both seem to say (and the name of the organization itself implies) that the intent of Habitat for Humanity is to provide affordable housing to anyone who needs it, but whenever the potential or eventual tenants are discussed, the word "family" inevitably comes up. Does the program only apply to families, and if so, has there been any criticism of this? B7T (talk) 18:11, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am a staff member at a US Habitat affiliate, and I hope I can address your question. There is nothing that says that is must be a family that is in our program. However, we are a "need-based" program and when it comes to assessing need, it is often determined that someone with children would be in more need of decent housing than a single person (granted, this depends greatly on the specifics of their particular case and current living situation). Our ultimate goal, as stated on HFHI publications, is "to eliminate poverty housing and homelessness from the face of the earth by constructing and building adequate and basic housing. Furthermore, all our words and actions are for the ultimate purpose of putting shelter on the hearts and minds of people in such a powerful way that poverty housing and homelessness become socially, politically, and religiously unacceptable in our nations and world." It does not specify who we serve and how we serve them in this statement, but I know it greatly varies with each individual affilaite. Here in the US we don't deal so much with the homeless, and while most of our homeowners are people with families, there are single persons who also receive housing through our programs. Kcmandy (talk) 19:56, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

HFH Mission Statement

[edit]

The article states "The mission statement of Habitat for Humanity is to "seek to eliminate poverty housing and homelessness from the world and to make decent shelter a matter of conscience and action."[1]" but this is incorrect. According to http://www.habitat.org/how/mission_statement.aspx HFH's mission statement is "Seeking to put God’s love into action, Habitat for Humanity brings people together to build homes, communities and hope." I can change the words but couldn't figure out how to change the reference. I looked at Wikipedia's instructions on citing sources, but still couldn't figure it out. Could a more Wikipedia savvy user either change the mission statement/reference or post a link to a step-by-step on how to do so? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.39.12.245 (talk) 13:45, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

History section?

[edit]

I find it odd and troubling that this page doesn't have a history section; normally, that would be section #1. 50.39.238.148 (talk) 06:47, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Habitat for Humanity. 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) 13:42, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to US Housing Edit-a-thon

[edit]

Please join us on 13 December 2020, 12:00-14:00 EST, as we update and improve articles in Wikipedia related to housing in the United States of America. Sign up here. -- M2545 (talk) 10:16, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"HabiJax" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

The redirect HabiJax has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 11 § HabiJax until a consensus is reached. Graywalls (talk) 14:07, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge of Habitat for Humanity – New York City into Habitat for Humanity

[edit]

It is a chapter/branch of a larger organization and blow-by-blow details of each program of each branch is undue coverage. Once primary sourced coverage are trimmed out of this article, I believe it would be appropriate to merge into the main article. Graywalls (talk) 22:34, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge of HabiJax into Habitat for Humanity

[edit]

Per WP:BRANCH Graywalls (talk) 02:30, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Attribution

[edit]

Mgrē@sŏn (Talk) 04:47, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Safety issues in criticism

[edit]

This feels way too short, vague, and maybe biased:

"Safety of volunteers Like much construction activity, which carries inherent risk, Habitat for Humanity construction has led to serious injuries or death to some volunteers."

That was literally all there is under "Safety of volunteers." It's one sentence vaguely mentioning injury and death and then minimizing it by saying all construction "carries inherent risk." And then, when I clicked on the citations, I found that this was not some accident, this was (negligence).

I think that this section should be expanded, and the part about all construction carrying risk should be removed because it doesn't communicate any new info and makes the negligence sound more like a regrettable accident. Titan(moon)003 (talk) 15:26, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Habitat_for_Humanity&oldid=1247048331"