Talk:Soulforce (organization)

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.
Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.

Contents

[edit] This Page is a Mess, Needs Cleanup by a Neutral Party

I added a neutrality tag to the article.


1) First, pejorative terms and a condescending tone pervade the entire article. How could anybody possibly believe that the word "incident" could be a neutral way to describe an event? If you are the person getting protested, you might call it an incident. The protesters might call it a brave civil action. Everybody else wants a neutral name for it.

2) Second, the article takes a somewhat negative tone toward the Soulforce organization as a whole. Entire sections exist for no better reason than to minimize a few particular events.

3) Third, the words of Mel White are taken out of context without a source . . . And the quote seems to cast a condescending light on Soulforce's impact. (See the end of the first HUGE paragraph)

4) Fourth, there isn't a decent history of this organization in the article. Location? Details? Subdivisions? Founders other than Mel White? I want to know some of the history of the organization. Where is information about Coretta Scott King? The first 200 people who got together?

5) Fifth, a majority of the article is devoted to actions of the Soulforce youth division that shouldn't even be in this article: specifially anything about Equality Ride stops. There's an entire huge article on Wikipedia about the Equality Ride. There is absolutely no reason Equality Ride actions should be included in this article for any reason, given the scope of this organization's work... There needs to be a short description of the Equality Ride in the article, however, LINKING to the page. This does not exist yet--and, by the way, there is no decent connection between the two pages yet-- the Equality Ride page is far more refined. Who would even know that the Equality Ride article exists by reading this?

6) Sixth, the military sit-in referred to in the first section was also a youth action that should not be focused on in the first paragraph as if it were a defining of this organization's work. To fix this, there needs to be a sub-section about youth actions so it doesn't steal the primary focus of the article.


I wish I had time to fix this, but I know somebody knowledgeable might read this. My recommendation: re-write the entire article with factual purpose and focus in mind. Cite real articles. There are plenty of them if you're willing to dig through old newspaper archives and pay for the luxury. There's also Soulforce.org, the Equality Ride page to refer to, plenty of blogs, and a plethora of official documents. Didn't Seattle declare an official day in honor of Soulforce? (Or was that the Equality Ride)... Didn't New York City do something similar? (You see, I can't write this article, because it might end up too rosy!)

--flowingfire


[edit] Argument about Relevance

Is the incident at Baylor really worth mentioning? The members of Soulforce have been arrested other times, too - what makes the incident at Baylor worthy of inclusion in this article? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 129.62.119.195 (talk) 10:55, 16 April 2007

I think it's a good idea to include information on what's happened at Soulforce's protests. It gives the reader a very clear idea about how these protests have been received. —Remember the dot (talk) 17:13, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reply to argument

These sections don't even belong in this article. They belong in the Equality Ride article. If you want to add them, figure out a way to do it in a neutral tone, because it's certainly not neutral as presented here. --flowingfire

Greetings friend! I will help clean this up if others are available to offer suggestions after I do an edit —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.228.37.86 (talk) 23:44, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Need a Criticisms Section

I'm getting tired of being referred to this article from other articles' criticisms seciton. It seems every time I read an article that is about anything conservative, I come accross a 'criticisms and controversy' section that has something about Soulforce. Well how about some criticism of Soulforce? What is wrong with wikipedia? Talk about bias! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.18.108.5 (talk) 02:06, 2 March 2008 (UTC)