Talk:SumOfUs

Scientific Accuracy

Not wishing to be a Moaning Myrtle here, but some of their campaigns are bordering on shrill and some of the ones that have come across my desk *seem* to lack scientific validity. Bees in particular - the deaths are blamed on pesticides and yes, I'm told by apiculturists that colony collapse disorder is viral. I DON'T KNOW either way - but if this is true who is watching the watchers? 00:04, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

This is absolutely correct. SumOfUs is making multiple and repeated claims that simply don't stack up. Ask it for evidence and wait for the crickets. According to SumOfUs bees are going to die out (game over for the bees) and Monstano is out to get us. It's the same old schtick. This criticism needs to be addressed. I have a strong feeling SoU is only out to enrich the people that work for it. 82.16.170.111 (talk) 14:45, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Who will pay for scientific testing? "As a result, all outdoor uses of the three neonicotinoids of greatest concern for bee health — clothianidin, imidacloprid and thiamethoxam — will be banned outright, with use of the chemical permitted only inside permanent greenhouses."

BRUSSELS, May 6, 2021 (Reuters) - The European Union’s top court on Thursday upheld the EU’s partial ban on three insecticides linked to harming bees, preventing their use on certain crops."The EU extension of the ban on the three neonicotinoids to all outdoor uses is excellent news," said Christopher Connolly, a neurobiologist at the University of Dundee, UK, and expert on pesticide toxicity in bees, in a statement circulated by the UK Science Media Centre.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-02639-1 "Survey of more than 1,500 studies concludes that neonicotinoids harm bees."

https://www.ucdavis.edu/climate/news/pesticides-can-affect-multiple-generations-bees "Pesticides Can Affect Multiple Generations of Bees Study Finds Reduced Bee Reproduction Over 2 Years by Amy Quinton November 29, 2021" --Mark v1.0 (talk) 23:58, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Multiple Issues

This article was found to have issues with tone, missing citations (particularly for the claim to having over 10 million members), and NPOV. In general, it reads like a press release for SumOfUs. A lizard (talk) 15:53, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Completely agree. I have rephrased and trimmed some of the problematic content, and added some information for editors with a possible "conflict of interest" per Wikipedia's guideline at WP:COI. The page is supposed to be a succinct encyclopedic article, not a mirror of the organization's website.

==> NPOV and "Tone" tag removed now. The article could still use more polishing and more independent third-party sources. GermanJoe (talk) 12:53, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

SumOfUs name change to Ekō - what's the best way to update this page?

On 7 February 2023, SumOfUs changed its name to Ekō. The website sumofus.org now redirects to eko.org

What is the best way to update this page? Should we change every "SumOfUs" reference to "Ekō", or to "Ekō (known as SumOfUs at the time)", so that the references will still match up? Or should we just begin a brand new page for Ekō, and add a line on this page so that people know that SumOfUs has been renamed Ekō? Slackr (talk) 11:04, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

From my perspective, Wikipedia is first and foremost an encyclopedia with the paramount task of explaining the (ideally old and new) lemma(ta). So, where in the world can I find information about what "Ekō" means? Has it something to do with "ecology"? If yes, what's with the styling of the "ō"? Sinking down to cheap advertisement styling and "branding"? Is it too hard to add an explaining one-liner here or at the very site of eko.org announcing the name change? And no, "something that represents both the power and diversity of our work" doesn't suffice as an explanation, only as the typical near-nonsensical catchword marketing lingo we all are so tired of. As it seems, no one seems to care to even explain - not here, not on the pages of eko.org.

It reflects poorly on the purposes of Wikipedia and on Ekō itself when nobody even thinks a name change could be somehow significant or mean anything - maybe on a meta-level this means that likewise the meaning of the name is as hollow as Wikipedia's purpose to explain things or as Ekō's work? Or is it something obvious for native English speakers? For the rest of the world, it obviously isn't. <sarcasm>Thanks for excluding us.</sarcasm>

Also, is there a word play on the former name "SumOfUs"? Something with the U.S.? There seems to be a a hint at eko.org. I'd like to know. -- marilyn.hanson (talk) 14:12, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

WP:COMMONNAME: the term or name most typically used in reliable sources is generally preferred

Currently, sources seems to overwhelmingly use the former name. I guess we'll have to wait until this is no longer true. Paradoctor (talk) 14:58, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! In that case I'll hold tight, and review in the new year. Slackr (talk) 19:09, 9 October 2023 (UTC)