Talk:Intelligent Giving

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

London This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Websites: Computing This article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.WebsitesWikipedia:WikiProject WebsitesTemplate:WikiProject WebsitesWebsites ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

I moved this: Keystone - organization working on charities' accountability

from the article page because it does not yet have a Wikipedia article and the name directs to a disambiguation page (which is a "really bad thing" to do to readers). If someone who know a bit about the org can start an article (assuming the org would meet Wikipedia's standards) we can link to it from the see also section. -- Siobhan Hansa 17:32, 16 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

I've tried to add some references. Most are from IG's own website - which I don't think is a problem for the things they're used for, but feel free to disagree (and hopefully find better ones!). Would be good to have more from other places though, especially on IG's actual process and impact rather than what they say is their process and impact. Also more on the sector response would be good. Their have been some great additions, the article really seems to be shaping up. -- Siobhan Hansa 18:08, 18 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

I am a bit suspicious of the "good and bad responses from charities in equal measure": none of the good ones are listed here: are they somewhere? --BozMo talk 22:13, 23 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

They do exist - on the site's 'About Us' page, they quote a few charities who have reacted positively. Though whether this justifies saying that 'good and bad' responses were attracted in 'equal measure' is another thing entirely... Cameronweaver 08:49, 25 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

For what its worth I have just sent them a positive reaction from the charity I work for as well. --BozMo talk 11:07, 25 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

What's up with reference number 9? --John (talk) 23:53, 3 November 2015 (UTC) Actually both refs in that para,Reply

• http://www.intelligentgiving.com/articles/features/the_times_children_in_need_and_us
• http://www.intelligentgiving.com/articles/features/four_things_wrong_with_pudsey

appear to redirect back to this Wikipedia article. I've removed the material for now, but can anybody tell me what is going on?

• It looks like the intelligentgiving.com site redirects to this page. We obviously cannot use such as refs. They arguably should never have been used in the first place. --John (talk) 07:26, 4 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Intelligent Giving. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/3634420/Wogans-world.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:01, 22 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Intelligent Giving. 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/20070218032324/http://www.thirdsector.co.uk/charity_news/full_news.cfm?ID=21148 to http://www.thirdsector.co.uk/charity_news/full_news.cfm?ID=21148

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) 16:19, 14 November 2017 (UTC)Reply