Talk:Southern Poverty Law Center

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

48px} This article is part of WikiProject Human rights, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Human rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the Project page, where you can join the Project and contribute to the discussion.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the assessment scale.


Archive
Archives

Contents

[edit] Montgomery Advertiser "investigation"

I accessed the "series" and found much of the material posted on conservative websites to be selectively quoting material. Also I think it is wrong to call it a "series" as the material was printed on two days February 13 and 14, 1994. Since Dan Morse (author of the Advertiser's articles referred to) is concerned with SPLC finances there is no need to have two separate sections. FFthird 01:59, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Arson controversy

I removed the one line because one article from 11 years ago about one Klanwatch article from 17 years ago fails WP:NOTE. The other criticism is notable, but one line in an article from a decade ago about arson isn't. Specifically, it fails several criteria such as, "Significant coverage" and sources. Moreover, it doesn't even cite what issue of Klanwatch the controversy is from or any other data on the arsonist. C56C 16:26, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Horowitz

Berlet thinks he's right, Horowitz thinks he's right, and rehashing the argument from primary sources leaves a nasty taste in the mouth. If we really must coover this spat, we should cover it by reference to independent reliable secondary sources, which specifically excludes discover the networks, Horowitz Freedom Center and Front Page Mag since all are controlled by Horowitz. Guy (Help!) 14:55, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Misleading Edit

Only the boldfaced portion of the following quote from the source was copied into the article:

After reading and analyzing white power publications from a variety of organizations on and off for several years, we decided to gain a greater sense of white separatism in the real world.As sociologists, we were aware of the limitations of understanding ways of life and divergent philosophies by relying solely on published propaganda that is far removed from social interaction and can provide only one aspect of the public face of a social movement.

By leaving the entire quote out and splicing it onto a summary of a previous paragraph that was talking about the SPLC, the editor has made it seem as if the phrase “published propoganda” refers to SPLC publications rather than “white power publications” which is clearly the topic of the paragraph. I have deleted the sentence since it is both misleading and unrelated to the SPLC. Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 12:08, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

My apologies!! Some how I read that as being critiques of /attacks on such organizations - typical problem of reading and editing to dang fast! Will correct elsewhere as well. Carol Moore 12:32, 12 May 2008 (UTC)Carolmooredc {talk}