Talk:Targets of Westboro Baptist Church
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Article title
If you can think of a better word, give it up. Phelps targets people. It's what he does.TimmyBIsCool 05:48, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
From what I understand, the objection here is the title, not any of the content. Why can't someone just come up with a "more neutral" title and we can move the article?70.242.12.153 02:51, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
I have no problem with the word "targets."
I'd say that victims is more accurate, but that would be "biased."
Sportsmen shoot "targets" all the time, and it doesn't imply some sort of malicious hatred of paper printed with concentric circles.
Companies have marketing "targets," and it doesn't imply an immoral and unjust persecution of, for example, selling eight million widgets.
Fred targets people.
I have no problem with that.
I suppose you could say, "Recipient's of Fred Phelps' Unwated Attention"?
Sorry, forgot to sign my post. NiftyDude 15:57, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm going to move this to Targets of Westboro Baptist Church nless someone can come up with convincing reasons not to. --Xyzzyplugh 15:39, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
- Ok, still no comment, I'm moving this article. --Xyzzyplugh 02:52, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Let's assemble an image gallery of the targets?
We already have public domain images on Wikipedia of some of the targets.
For example, Mister Rogers.
I'd say assemble a three-column format with a photos alongside a one-paragraph profile.
I believe that every military death has a government file photo posted online at the DoD website that we can use.
When possible, we should also have a photo of Fred protesting at the event.
Example:
Photo of Mister Rogers. Paragraph of text. Photo of Fred's Protest.
NiftyDude 16:02, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Many problems with this article
First of all, I question why it needs to exist at all, seeing as how almost everything in it is also covered in the main Westboro Baptist Church article. Seems highly likely that this is just a POV fork.
Secondly, the article's name is bad for multiple reasons. It is possibly POV, and just as important, it specifically mentions Fred Phelps instead of focusing on the Westboro Baptist Church in general. Fred Phelps himself is now old and sick, from what I've read, and doesn't go to many of his church's protests anymore. It's highly unlikely that he is personally writing the text of his church's website, either. Since most of your source material is about the Westboro Baptist Church, rather than about Fred Phelps personally, that leaves much of the article unsourced.
And Fred Rogers is hardly one of the major targets of the Westboro church. --Xyzzyplugh 16:28, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Coretta Scott King
Should we describe also Fred as enlightening people that they're going to hell? Because it seems to be ok to claim CSK was enlightening us poor ignorant fools. 132.241.246.111 21:40, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
- Do you not understand the definition of enlightening? To give intellectual insight to, to instruct? Using one word to mean many smaller ones (such as exchanging "enlighten" for the over-long, verbose, and ugly, "give intellectual insight to, instruct") is a sign of clarifying, not obfuscating. Gnrlotto 12:46, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
- I have to agree that describing her work as enlightenment is biased in favor of gay rights. There are neutral terms that describe it just as well without an implied endorsement of the gay rights movement. (I'm a gay rights activist, not a WBC supporter.) I'll try to rework the section to follow the NPOV policy. —Guanaco 19:38, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] People - get a grip!
I agree with Xyzzyplugh that this article should not exist and should be combined with the main Westboro Baptist Church article. And people, please get a grip. Wikipedia articles are not the forum to air your own personal grievances with the subject of the article. If you need to get something off your chest, start a blog. Please stick to the facts and provide citations for your quotes and accusations. Members of the WBC have made enough controversial statements and engaged in enough controversial activities on their own. You don't have to go making stuff up! GuyInCT
[edit] NBA
I think they might target the NBA, I dunno maybe because of Tim Hardaway.
