Talk:Noah Levine

Cleanup request

article is well written consistent with academic requirements for source sited bibliography. request to clean up rejected as non-specific and without basis. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.50.147.153 (talk • contribs) 15:55, 19 August 2007

Add'l source

From Shambhala Sun: http://www.shambhalasun.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3136&Itemid=247

--Pnm (talk) 23:55, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Cleanup tag

Why is the cleanup request still here? If nobody can point to a specific need, let's drop it. I may be missing something but I am not seeing the problem. Uberhill 20:50, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

scare quotes in "Allegations of sexual misconduct"

@Spasemunki: thanks again for the notice here User_talk:Scarpy#Noah_Levine/BLP. My only objection here is that without saying that the quote is from the official release it has a scare quote quality to it (at least it did to me when I read it). I also agree it's not clear they were strictly following the United States definition of burden of proof even if the terminology is the same. I do think we should make clear that it's a quotation from the official communication rather than a Wikipedian scare quoting. - Scarpy (talk) 17:43, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Conventionally, when a quotation appears with a reference I would think that the assumption is that it is quoting the referenced source- I wasn't quite sure what made it appear to be a scare quote. 'Preponderance of that evidence' would be a weird thing to scare quote- if it was just 'evidence' or 'investigation' I would agree. I considered quoting all or part of this sentence as well: "Ms. Yang concluded that with multiple women, Mr. Levine violated the Third Precept of the Teacher’s Code of Ethics, namely, “to avoid creating harm through sexuality.” "- maybe adding a sentence with that quotation, rather than the current paraphrase, would clarify? --Spasemunki (talk) 17:53, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

It's because it's quoting a noun phrase instead of a full sentence or clause. I would propose something like this. The ATS Grievance Council was tasked with investigating the allegations of sexual misconduct and retained an attorney, Roberta Yang, for this purpose. Yang was asked to determine if Levine had violated the ATS Teachers Code of Ethics and followed a preponderance of evidence standard. In August of 2018 ATS released a statement on the results of this investigation explaining that, by the standard used by Yang, Levine had more likely than not violated the Third Precept of the ATS Teacher's Code of Ethics with multiple women. That precept mandates to "avoid creating harm through sexuality." Levine was removed from the ATS Board of Directors, and the Board announced that its centers in Melrose, Santa Monica, and San Francisco would close as a result of financial difficulties stemming from the allegations against Levine. - Scarpy (talk) 18:42, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Scarpy's text is worded well, if a bit long. I just dropped by to say that I disagree with Spasemunki's edit, quoting "preponderance of that evidence". Daask (talk) 20:56, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

I trimmed things down a little bit but retained Scarpy's approach. --Spasemunki (talk) 02:04, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

I suggest the quotation marks in the following line either be expunged, or, if drawn from a source, that the entire text in which they occur be quoted, and not just selected terminology:

"Levine reportedly revealed this to the ATS Teachers’ Council at a meeting on February 7, saying that the student had 'pursued' and later 'seduced' him 'after he attempted to resist.'"

This use of punctuation is a textual eye-roll; it has the effect of placing an editorial (bullshit!) after each assertion. Since the assertions are credible in theory (that is, people are indeed routinely pursued, seduced, and attempt to resist) this amounts to an assumption of guilt, and therefore an abuse of NPOV. Laodah 01:45, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Allegations

Do the allegations need their own header? It seems as if this is an unbalanced bio given that Levine’s 30 year career gets the same space as allegations. Veritasy (talk) 05:32, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Jezebel and Tricycle

@Dharmalion76: This is important information to include, but similar to the issue expressed above, I'm thinking a summary of the recent Tricycle and Jezebel articles is more appropriate than a large quote. - Scarpy (talk) 23:33, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

@Scarpy: If you can find a good way to word it feel free to alter it. I was just worried that without an exact quote on such a delicate issue it would be open to being inaccurately altered later or perceived as a POV view from an editor. The quote clarifies certain points that would be difficult to sum up in less words. Dharmalion76 (talk) 12:46, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

I’d like to fix this by removing lengthy quotes with jargon and simply summarize. Much of the content is disinformation and mischaracterized. Veritasy (talk) 08:13, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

"Books and Beliefs" Section

I removed the "Books and Beliefs" section, as it was word-for-word copied and pasted from his author bio as referenced in the cited magazine article. I'm not sure how to amend the citation section to reflect that, however. Mushika Vahana (talk) 01:52, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Status of ATS

The article states both that ATS dissolved and that Levine currently teaches there. 2018 article from trycicle says ATS closed shop, but website and facebook are very active (and Levine-heavy). I understand that wikipedia can only report if a reputable sources chooses to investigate, but perhaps someone with more knowledge can clear up these discrepencies. Wickedjacob (talk) 12:27, 28 June 2023 (UTC)