Talk:Brian Camenker

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	LGBT Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, visit the project page.
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on the quality scale.

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

A full gamut of Massachusetts culture war articles, and nothing from the Massachusetts New? How times change, I guess. Stilgar135 06:26, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Contents 1 Terminology 2 YouTube links 3 Neutrality 4 "Homosexual agenda" 5 Sources

[edit] Terminology

I'll admit that "attention" is more neutral than "notoriety", but I don't see how you can reasonably replace "anti-gay" with "pro-family". His activism is entirely based on opposition to homosexuality. Stilgar135 06:36, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

"Anti-Gay" is a loaded word. "Pro-Family" is more neutral. I replaced the term with "Christian" as it is more neutral than "Pro-Family", and not loaded like "Anti-Gay." Ghostmonkey57 01:07, 13 June 2006 (UTC)Ghostmonkey57

But Christianity isn't the cornerstone of his beliefs. I've read articles by and about him for years, and religion almost never comes up. Beyond that, he doesn't advocate for school prayer or against abortion or any other standard right-wing Christian causes. Again, "pro-family" means different things. Can you actually deny that Camenker isn't anti-gay? Of those three options, it's the only one that really encompasses everything that he is. Perhaps the best thing to do would be to simply call him a conservative activist and emphasize, in the article's body, that he focuses on homosexuality and sexual education. Stilgar135 01:27, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] YouTube links

This article is one of thousands on Wikipedia that have a link to YouTube in it. Based on the External links policy, most of these should probably be removed. I'm putting this message on the talk page, to request the regular editors take a look at the link and make sure it doesn't violate policy. In short: 1. 99% of the time YouTube should not be used as a source. 2. We must not link to material violating someone's copyright. If you are not sure whether the link on this article should be removed or if you would like to help spread this message, contact us on User talk:J.smith/YouTube Linklist. Thanks, ---J.S (t|c) 00:54, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Neutrality

Could this article be any more in violation of WP:NPOV? Discuss. --Alexc3 ^(talk) 01:52, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, we could add some of Brian's Holocaust Denial arguments (unopposed, of course). Kidding aside, I agree completely, this article is hideously bad, POV-wise. The language demonizes one side, while glorifying the other, all four references are to anti-gay publications, etc. Ratatosk Jones (talk) 15:12, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Does this article even meet the criteria for notability? WP:BIO says, "A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of published secondary source material which is reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject." I'm thinking of just putting this page up for deletion. --Alexc3 ^(talk) 23:10, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Never mind, there's some Boston Globe articles on him. --Alexc3 ^(talk) 23:16, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I would hope that Wikipedia enforces the neutrality of this entry. The original entry painted a very biased view of this person. I have documented the activities of Brian Camenker and his groups here They think they are "heros" but the facts, well, read for yourself. All the changes I made to this and the MassResitance were provided with sources (and not just other blogs), the sources were either newspaper articles or even the group's own emails which still can be found on the web. In this 2004 Boston Globe article it states that this is his full time job:

Camenker, 51, formed the Article 8 Alliance in January shortly after the state Supreme Judicial Court legalized gay marriage. The group employs three full-time staff members, including Camenker. He said that, as of Oct. 1, the group had $30,000 in the bank. It is nonprofit but not tax-exempt.

He is not unlike Peter LaBarbera of [Americans for Truth about Homosexuality. They believe they are doing "God's work" by exposing the homosexual agenda, which they claim exists and know. ('Can you get me a copy'?)--MassWatch (talk) 18:36, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "Homosexual agenda"

Mr. Camenker and his supporters keep inserting loaded terminology such as "homosexual lobby", "homosexual agenda" and "vicious". Such terms have no place in an NPOV article. Corvus cornix_talk 02:06, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sources

Since sources have been added to all sections, I'll remove the template. Ratatosk Jones (talk) 10:35, 10 April 2008 (UTC)