Talk:Patricia Bartlett

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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

An anon has put a POV-check template on this article, but has not explained what they consider POV. I suggest that someone who has not edited the article remove the template, or else explain here what needs to be done to improve it.-gadfium 01:31, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

I had a quick look through, and did not find, what I'll class as POV Brian | (Talk) 01:40, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
The Christian Heritage description felt a little abbrasive, so I toned it down to the same language used in the party's page, but otherwise there's no POV that I can smell. Ziggurat 02:21, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
As someone who has not been involved with this article I will remove the tag (and give it a haircut as well). If User:203.79.117.1 comes here with genuine POV examples, then we can look at them. They are not obvious to me. Moriori 02:26, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks all.-gadfium 02:48, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick response. It was remiss of me to put a POV check without comment, I'm sorry.

I know almost nothing about Ms Bartlett or the SPCS, but it seemed to me the story was written with an undertone which was antagonistic to Ms Bartlett's views and work. For example:

- "she failed her University Entrance". No doubt this is true, but it seems an odd fact to include, unless trying to make a point about her intelligence.

- "fundamentalist protestants" - "conservative protestants" would be more precise, and would avoid the implied perjorative.

- "her attempts to stifle freedom of artistic expression" - also true, but betrays an unsympathic POV. On her own terms, no doubt, she was working to maintain social standards, which justified the loss of freedom.

- "attempts to obstruct film festival schedules" - it makes it sound as if spoiling the film festival is the point. I'm sure SPCS don't see it that way.

Regarding the specific points:
  1. it does seem unusual to include this (unverified) information.
  2. 'fundamentalist' implies an approach to religion not implied by 'conservative' - i.e. a literal interpretation of the bible's infallibility. Perhaps it should be linked to Fundamentalist Christianity to elucidate the term?
  3. agree on this one too - I have modified it to clarify whose interpretation of intentions this is
  4. funnily enough, the SPCS has adopted an essentially obstructionist approach, as seen in their use of interim injunction requests [1] for reclassification immediately prior to festival screenings. Nevertheless, they do deny such an activity via press release [2] (although somewhat disingenuously in my opinion). Ziggurat 01:09, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Many of the above references are cited from Carolyn Moynihan's A Stand for Decency(1995), including Bartlett's limited educational achievements, and her biographer records her responses to criticisms that she was somewhat lowbrow in her cultural tastes.

[[User: Calibanu] 15:23, 02 May 2006.