Talk:Local 33–UNITE HERE

Origins and history

In the paragraph discussing the vote in april 2003, it is clear from both articles cited, NYT reference "Grad Students Reject Union In Yale Vote," and YDN reference "Graduate Students Vote Down Unionization," that this vote was controversial. Neither one of these pieces is an opinion article, both were written by reporters. I agree that the word 'highly' can be removed. Acerjan 17:27, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

In the next paragraph, when discussing the vote to strike in april 2005, I agree that a single anonymous source cited (again in a staff written YDN article) is not enough to justify a comment about the publicity of the vote. Acerjan 17:27, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

In the paragraph discussing GESO's efforts in its unrecognized form, "GESO has since mounted...," citations are needed for the claims given. The final citation in this paragraph, to an opinion article, is not sufficient to justify all of the claims made. For example, from the YDN article (staff writer) on the wage increase, http://yaledailynews.com/blog/2004/02/10/grad-school-ups-stipends/, the administration does not mention either GESO or the GSA as being responsible for the actions of the administration. Thus ascribing to GESO this result is currently unsupported. Acerjan 17:27, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

"Card-count neutrality" is an alternative term for "card-check neutrality." Both are acceptable. Cerebella 07:45, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Actions

Two of the references lead to dead links. Acerjan 17:27, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Reliable sources

The use of college papers as the main sources throughout this article is a big problem. The recent revert is sourced to an opinion piece in a college paper—not known to be reliable for statements of fact. The college papers need to be scrapped for reliable sources—national and local papers, even self-published "official" sources, not college opinion pieces. – czar 18:53, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

In general I agree, but I'm not sure what is different about an opinion article in a college paper versus an opinion article in a local newspaper. Around a year ago I went looking for references that met this criteria, and was only able to find a single short article from the NYT that supported any of the 2003-2005 history of GESO, which I then included in the references (currently Ref. 12), but it only discusses the events of 2003. In the absence of using an opinion piece from the college newspaper, there is no reference to prove that the vote in 2005 occurred. However, if the 2005 vote is mentioned here, I do not think it is appropriate to omit the suspect circumstances of that vote contained within the same reference. Acerjan 19:14, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

It is better to make no claim or to say nothing about it unless we can find a reliable source or official self-published source to say it. The YDN's publishing criteria pale in comparison to the NYT's. – czar 19:59, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

• I'm pulling the YDN citations. Cite reliable sources please. – czar 02:00, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
• Here's a 1995 source: http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1995-12-18/news/9512180129_1_graduate-students-yale-officials-unions czar 05:55, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Graduate Employees and Students Organization. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150507195000/http://www.makingabetternyu.org/gsocuaw/ to http://www.makingabetternyu.org/gsocuaw/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150503093138/http://www.yale.edu/geso/links/denning.htm to http://www.yale.edu/geso/links/denning.htm

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) 16:25, 25 December 2017 (UTC)