This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Lafayette Morehouse article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
I am attempting to add the required content to this page. Zoticogrillo ( talk) 07:55, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Hello Peter. I am a current and active member in the Lafayette Morehouse community. Over the next several weeks I will be correcting some of the content in this article and adding new content and pictures with permission from the community. I am hoping that I will be able to work with you and the other editors to create a piece that is current, accurate, and balanced. Thanks in advance for your assistance. ( Moreoceana ( talk) 23:58, 18 February 2009 (UTC))
Hey Zoti I am quite new at this so pardon any missed formalities in this post :). I was very pleased to see your recent article. I would also be curious to know the source of your interest in Morehouse Mbeneteau ( talk) 22:41, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
i have separated this into 2 sections, changed original to just "References" & added an "External links" section, since many of these were external links and neither referenences nor notes. I'm parking one of the refs below, since blogs are generally not used as references.
(Some accounts of this exist on personal websites and blogs such as these: http://claycord.blogspot.com/2007/07/purple-people-in-nut-creek.html http://reverendpujo.blogspot.com/2005/08/purple-people-madness.html)
I also want to point out that some of the language seems promotional: "most famous product", "Because of the conflict between this group's lifestyle..." (whole para) please be aware of Wikipedia policy in this area WP:SOAP. [sorry i am late in signing this, was actually entered some time ago] David Woodward ( talk) 14:51, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
re the term diminutive in the lead "a diminuitive term derived for the community's characteristic use of the color purple", perhaps would "derogatory" be more accurate? David Woodward ( talk) 14:50, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
I've googled ("vic baranco" and 'sexual freedom league' and "victor baranco" and "sexual freedom league", etc.) and found all the hits eventually lead back to the one cited reference [2] Billingsly, KL, which cites no source for the assertion that Baranco was a member of the sexual freedom league. Members of the morehouse community state that Baranco was never a member of the sexual freedom league. What is the best way to document this given that there are no other secondary sources? -- 80 Guy (George) ( talk) 23:45, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Hey y'all Wikipedia studs, I have updated my article on Victor Baranco here: http://manifesting.net/lafayette-morehouse/ , feel free to link or to pull in anything that seems relevant... Mbeneteau ( talk) 14:57, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
I feel this article has a bias in favor of Morehouse. Sonicsuns ( talk) 07:52, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
I agree that this article is biased, but I can't tell in which direction. Basically, it lacks relevant encyclopedic information about this group. For example, are they allegedly a sex cult? A university? A marginal group of harmless communitarians? Why are there so many sex references? After reading this article, it is really not clear. I am going to look for mainstream newspaper descriptions of Morehouse that more usefully explain what this group is. Aroundthewayboy ( talk) 13:52, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
In the lede the third sentence of the second paragraph states "Victor Baranco recognized that to sustain a cohesive group it was imperative to handle communication, sensuality, and decision-making." (emphasis added) This is inappropriate for an encyclopedia. First, because what a person may "recognize" is only known to the individual themselves, and considering Victor Baranco died in 2002, and this isn't an autobiography, it is conjecture to assert what someone "recognized". Second, to "recognize" something is to apprehend something objectively factual, and there is no such established objective fact as "it is imperative to handle communication, sensuality, and decision-making." Indeed, all three of those are subjective and ambiguous, negating anything being "imperative" about them. This sentence should be rewritten, or struck. Bricology ( talk) 06:00, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Lafayette Morehouse article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
I am attempting to add the required content to this page. Zoticogrillo ( talk) 07:55, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Hello Peter. I am a current and active member in the Lafayette Morehouse community. Over the next several weeks I will be correcting some of the content in this article and adding new content and pictures with permission from the community. I am hoping that I will be able to work with you and the other editors to create a piece that is current, accurate, and balanced. Thanks in advance for your assistance. ( Moreoceana ( talk) 23:58, 18 February 2009 (UTC))
Hey Zoti I am quite new at this so pardon any missed formalities in this post :). I was very pleased to see your recent article. I would also be curious to know the source of your interest in Morehouse Mbeneteau ( talk) 22:41, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
i have separated this into 2 sections, changed original to just "References" & added an "External links" section, since many of these were external links and neither referenences nor notes. I'm parking one of the refs below, since blogs are generally not used as references.
(Some accounts of this exist on personal websites and blogs such as these: http://claycord.blogspot.com/2007/07/purple-people-in-nut-creek.html http://reverendpujo.blogspot.com/2005/08/purple-people-madness.html)
I also want to point out that some of the language seems promotional: "most famous product", "Because of the conflict between this group's lifestyle..." (whole para) please be aware of Wikipedia policy in this area WP:SOAP. [sorry i am late in signing this, was actually entered some time ago] David Woodward ( talk) 14:51, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
re the term diminutive in the lead "a diminuitive term derived for the community's characteristic use of the color purple", perhaps would "derogatory" be more accurate? David Woodward ( talk) 14:50, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
I've googled ("vic baranco" and 'sexual freedom league' and "victor baranco" and "sexual freedom league", etc.) and found all the hits eventually lead back to the one cited reference [2] Billingsly, KL, which cites no source for the assertion that Baranco was a member of the sexual freedom league. Members of the morehouse community state that Baranco was never a member of the sexual freedom league. What is the best way to document this given that there are no other secondary sources? -- 80 Guy (George) ( talk) 23:45, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Hey y'all Wikipedia studs, I have updated my article on Victor Baranco here: http://manifesting.net/lafayette-morehouse/ , feel free to link or to pull in anything that seems relevant... Mbeneteau ( talk) 14:57, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
I feel this article has a bias in favor of Morehouse. Sonicsuns ( talk) 07:52, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
I agree that this article is biased, but I can't tell in which direction. Basically, it lacks relevant encyclopedic information about this group. For example, are they allegedly a sex cult? A university? A marginal group of harmless communitarians? Why are there so many sex references? After reading this article, it is really not clear. I am going to look for mainstream newspaper descriptions of Morehouse that more usefully explain what this group is. Aroundthewayboy ( talk) 13:52, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
In the lede the third sentence of the second paragraph states "Victor Baranco recognized that to sustain a cohesive group it was imperative to handle communication, sensuality, and decision-making." (emphasis added) This is inappropriate for an encyclopedia. First, because what a person may "recognize" is only known to the individual themselves, and considering Victor Baranco died in 2002, and this isn't an autobiography, it is conjecture to assert what someone "recognized". Second, to "recognize" something is to apprehend something objectively factual, and there is no such established objective fact as "it is imperative to handle communication, sensuality, and decision-making." Indeed, all three of those are subjective and ambiguous, negating anything being "imperative" about them. This sentence should be rewritten, or struck. Bricology ( talk) 06:00, 3 July 2023 (UTC)