Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 01:26, 20 October 2010

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Alabama This article is part of WikiProject Alabama, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Alabama on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlabamaWikipedia:WikiProject AlabamaTemplate:WikiProject AlabamaAlabama Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Human rights Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Organizations This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Index Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15 Archive 16 Archive 17 Archive 18 Archive 19

This page has archives. Sections older than 21 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

Update SPLC Article

There is alot of information missing about how the SPLC defines its mission. This is another reason the article needs to be revamped. This discussion can probably help with establishing an outline. Based on their website, the "Southern Poverty Law Center is dedicated to fighting hate and bigotry, and to seeking justice for the most vulnerable members of our society." They state they have 4 current priorities (paraphrase): (1) Hate and Extremism (tracking hate groups); (2)Immigrant Justice (legal advocacy and lobbying to stop workplace exploitation); (3) Children at Risk (reducing juvenile crime and increasing educational opportunities); (4)Teaching Tolerance (educational resources). Mrdthree (talk) 12:06, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I believe the proposed outline above covers most of the priorities.

(1)--Point 2.

(2)--Point 3.2

(3)--Points 3.2 & 4.1, although it probably goes beyond these

(4)--Point 4.

Do you have suggestions for changes to the current outline? Drrll (talk) 12:36, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Looking at their website, I see why you have the three major sections of the outline. That is how they describe their tactics on their What-we-do page (tracking, advocacy, education). I think you are probably right to emphasize those in the outline as they are probably more permanent features of the SPLC. Maybe it could be 3.2.1 Immigration Law 3.2.2 Children and Criminal Justice etc. Mrdthree (talk) 14:27, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

juvenile justice system is probably the preferred phrase. one of their major educational advocacy initiatives concerns Reforming School Discipline to positive reinforcement techniques (PBIS) . Mrdthree (talk) 16:23, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Add SPLC mission statement to lead

The SPLC states, "The Southern Poverty Law Center is a nonprofit civil rights organization dedicated to fighting hate and bigotry, and to seeking justice for the most vulnerable members of society." http://www.splcenter.org/who-we-are As the organization has defined its own mission, it should be included in fairness to the subject. I suggest: The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) is an American legal advocacy organization, internationally known for its tolerance education programs, its legal victories against white supremacists and its tracking of hate groups, militias, and extremist organizations. The SPLC is dedicated to fighting hate and bigotry and to seeking justice for the most vulnerable members of society. The SPLC classifies as hate groups those organizations which it has determined “have beliefs or practices that attack or malign an entire class of people, typically for their immutable characteristics..." Mrdthree (talk) 16:44, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

I like that, but I would put the mission statement in the last sentence and I would put the mission statement in quotes (if it's not too long). Drrll (talk) 20:11, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

I thought it might better fit as a first or second sentence because a statement about the mission of the organization strikes me as more of a topic sentence for a paragraph than a supporting sentence. It seemed to better fit the first paragraph as on my reading the second paragraph seems to summarize biographical information while the first paragraph defines the group and its reason for notability. However I can see it as a topic sentence of the second paragraph with something like: The SPLC describes its mission as "fighting hate and bigotry, and to seeking justice for the most vulnerable members of society." or maybe you can show a draft of the variant you had in mind? Mrdthree (talk) 18:35, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Using the website statement as the lead sentence makes the most sense; the claim that the SPLC is a legal advocacy group is actually uncited (cited article only states group is a nonprofit). With the SPLC mission statement, the first paragraph could have three sentences: defining the group, stating the notability, and defining hate groups (as before): The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) is an American "nonprofit civil rights organization dedicated to fighting hate and bigotry and to seeking justice for the most vulnerable members of society."<<rf name='SPLCwho'> Southern Poverty Law Center website: Who we are, http://www.splcenter.org/who-we-are, accessed August 1, 2010 </rf>>. The SPLC is internationally known for its tolerance education programs, its legal victories against white supremacists and its tracking of hate groups, militias, and extremist organizations.<<rf name="wjfa"> With Justice For All November 5, 2006; The Times Picayune</rf>> The SPLC classifies as hate groups those organizations which it has determined “have beliefs or practices that attack or malign an entire class of people, typically for their immutable characteristics..."<<rf>

I like that change a lot. It doesn't split up the last two sentences, which really need to be together and it summarizes the organization as the SPLC does. We should try to get someone else on board before changing the beginning sentence of the article, though. It's possible that some may object to the wording sounding too much like a press release from the SPLC. Drrll (talk) 18:28, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

So any other thoughts out there? Mrdthree (talk) 22:03, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

No criticism section?

Why is it that some editors feel the need to POV push away any of the sources that show criticism of the SPLC, of which there is a lot of. 174.54.36.247 (talk) 20:51, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

After reading the archives I think I'm going to have to add the POV template. There seems to be an ongoing debate as to whether or not to add a criticism section. Some editors have completely deleted the criticism section that was here before with little discussion. 174.54.36.247 (talk) 20:58, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Criticism sections have been strongly discouraged by Misplaced Pages. The prescribed mechanism is to incorporate sourced, valid, noteworthy, and neutrally presented criticism into the body text of appropriate sections. Just because an article doesn't have a "criticism section" doesn't mean it ascribes to a particular point of view -- in fact, the opposite is generally true. //Blaxthos ( t / c ) 00:07, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. A criticism section would create an unnecessary content fork. A public perception section doesn't seem to far fetched though. Gobonobo 07:52, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

I agree. There is no reason to have a criticism section. Any relevant criticism should be neutrally integrated into the article, in the appropriate place, making sure we don't give it undue weight. -- Jrtayloriv (talk) 08:01, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

I disagree. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. There is a large criticism section on conservative Debbie Schlussel. There should also be one on the liberal SPLC. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.204.211.159 (talk) 00:53, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

ANOTHER EXAMPLE IS THE ARTICLE ON Michael Savage (commentator). HE'S CONSERVATIVE, SO SURPRISE, SURPRISE THERE IS A LARGE CRITICISM SECTION. HERE IT IS:

Criticisms

In July 2005, conservative writer Bernard Goldberg ranked Savage number 61 in his book 100 People Who Are Screwing Up America. Goldberg wrote that "Savage's brand of over-the-top bile...puts him right in there with the angriest haters on the Left."

Liberal advocacy groups, media watchdogs and commentators such as GLAAD, FAIR, and Dave Gilson of Salon.com accuse Savage of fascist leanings, racism, homophobia, bigotry and Islamophobia because of his controversial statements about homosexuality, Islam, feminism, sex education, and immigration. On his September 21, 1999 broadcast, Savage said that the motivation for female students who come from a Marin County private school to feed and provide services to the homeless is so they "can go in and get raped by them, because they seem to like the excitement of it..."

On April 17, 2006, he said of Muslims "They say, "Oh, there's a billion of them." I said, "So, kill 100 million of them, then there'll be 900 million of them." I mean, would you rather die—would you rather us die than them?" After Savage was banned from the UK, this was also reported in the UK media.

CAN ANYONE WITH A STRAIGHT FACE SAY THERE ISN'T A DOUBLE STANDARD HERE?????98.204.211.159 (talk) 21:57, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Please stop ranting and using all caps. Read what Blaxthos has said above. If you would like to improve articles by incorporating criticism into the greater article then do it, everyone is invited to edit constructively. Misplaced Pages has millions of articles, the vast majority are not perfect by any stretch. If you would like to invite others to comment here, open a WP:RfC. - Burpelson AFB ✈ 12:46, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

broken fragment in wikilink: David Horowitz Freedom Center controversy

Hi everyone,

In the section, #Neo-Confederate movement, there is a link to a section, #David Horowitz Freedom Center, that was deleted from the article sometime in 2008 by this edit.

Related talk page comment: Talk:Southern Poverty Law Center/Archive 1#Horowitz

Any suggestions how we can clean up this broken link?

--Kevinkor2 (talk) 16:38, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Claims of discrimination against blacks by the SPLC

An editor added the charge that the SPLC has discriminated against black employees. Another editor removed it, with an edit summary talking about a link (link to the referenced article?). While the addition's reference format may have been incorrect, the reference is legitimate (the newspaper local to the SPLC) and a link to the article is not a requirement for use in Misplaced Pages (see WP:SOURCEACCESS). Does anyone see problems in adding this material back? Drrll (talk) 01:26, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

• All unassessed articles
• B-Class Alabama articles
• WikiProject Alabama articles
• B-Class Human rights articles
• Mid-importance Human rights articles
• WikiProject Human rights articles
• B-Class organization articles
• Unknown-importance organization articles
• WikiProject Organizations articles