Talk:Mission Mountain School
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is related to WikiProject Schools, an attempt to write quality articles about schools around the world. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance rating within Schools. Please rate the article. | |
 |
This article has been marked as needing an infobox. | |
 |
This article is within the scope of the Montana WikiProject, a collaborative WikiProject designed to improve articles related to the U.S. state of Montana. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page (see Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ for more information). |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale. |
This article seems to be written as a critique of the Mission Mountain School, not as a neutral description of the school. Please see Wikipedia:Neutral_Point_of_View for clarification on writing neutral point of view articles. It also needs to be copyedited and wikified. Crunch 03:34, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
- I quite agree, and I think 6 months is sufficient time to rectify the issue. I am going to remove all the unsources critiques and turn this into a neutral (albeit much shorter) article. --cholmes75 (chit chat) 19:53, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Removed NPOV content
ChinadogDebates are described, represented, and characterized, but not engaged in, this has been done. Background is provided on who believes what and why... although I believe the alumni viewpoint could use some work, that is elaboration on child labor and work (as in the instance where kids did the work of the school to become accredited, what that accredidation actually means- not mental health related, the absence of accredidation by health care orgs,etc- with proper citations, of course) etc etc etc... please explain in what way you find these edits in error and explain your continuous deletion of text. As you may be aware, presenting the facts means that this is not a place for the sole use of advertising a product.CAFETY 22:52, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] This facility belongs in the behavior modification category
If you watch the latest GAO hearings about the behavior modification industry this facility is mentioned and much of the text of the proposed bill H.R. 5876 aka Stop Child Abuse in Residential Programs for Teens Act of 2008. are based on the torment suffered from former detainees at this very facility.
Why was the category removed?
Covergaard (talk) 10:56, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Mission Mountain School is a Therapeutic Boarding School. It is not a behavior modification school. Personal opinions about how to categorize a professional school are not acceptable.
Wildrock (talk) 21:00, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
It is not only a personal opinion. The GAO hearing was not for fun. It was for held to uncover child abuse and this particular "school" as some choose to call it became attention for this hearing and provided a foundation for the H.R. 5876
A more european description can be found here. It does not look like the advertice published here, but of course all the countries in Europe have signed the Convention on the Rights of the Child, so children are regarded as humans overthere.
What is this page going to present? An American point of view or the rest of the world point of view?
Covergaard (talk) 21:36, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
The european description of MMS you are linking to is inaccurate. Thus your categorization of MMS as a behavioral modification facility is incorrect.
Wildrock (talk) 22:07, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
You have not answered why this "school" was chosen among properly hundred of similar places where abuse has taken place at the GAO hearings.
Covergaard (talk) 04:03, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
GAO did not find any evidence of abuse at MMS, per their reports. MMS's inclusion in GAO report does not validate or verify any allegations of abuse. Testimony provided by Whitehead generally has been challenged as incorrect in the MMS letter to Cong. Miller that I posted in the References. Individuals working at MMS at the time of Whitehead's claims indicate that her Congressional testimony may be perjury. In any case it is defamatory to MMS, is not factual, and I will raise the issue as a Wiki dispute if this entry is reverted back.
Wildrock (talk) 05:49, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
MMS article has been edited to a NPOV, and is factual. I will remove the disputes soon in the absence of evidence to the contrary of either facts or neutrality of article.
Wildrock (talk) 21:40, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
