Talk:Fight OUT Loud

Spam

This organization's page does not meet the criteria. It is a nonprofit started by a man and his partner. The majority of the sources that reference the nonprofit are two blogs from two people (one being the founder). The newspaper articles reference the cofounder's political career and the nonprofit in passing, they are not direct news articles about the nonprofit. From their own website, it has not had any activity since 2008, just a few years after it was founded. Just filing IRS paperwork does not make an organization notable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.206.147.76 (talk) 16:51, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

This doesn't look like a WP:CSD candidate, it was kept before. Nominate it for WP:AFD instead if you still think its not notable.--CoJaBo (talk) 17:06, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Notability

AfD started to resolve issue.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
How does this group qualify as notable in the general Wikipedia sense? The actions attributed to the organization were done by individuals (a married couple), not the organization itself (as it wasn't even founded at the time). There are numerous links to the founder's blog, radio, and television appearances, rather than credible news sources, as supporting documentation. Further, the organization's website contains links to the founder's blog and a television show he hosts, but nothing that the organization has done since 2008. (signed) 71.194.11.62 It's not notable, for the reasons stated in the first 2 sentences above and despite the fact that I did what I could to document it back in February. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 19:40, 28 August 2012 (UTC) I think they might be notable as a Google News search shows several stories that are not presently in the article, some of them may require paying. I've found that generally more news sites become searchable so even a search a few months ago may turn up new results. A wider search not just Google News will turn up more sources, some of which are likely of use. Insomesia (talk) 23:59, 28 August 2012 (UTC) Not even close to notable, nominated for deletion. Facts, not fiction (talk) 22:21, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Blog ref

Brought to the BLPN board[1] Facts, not fiction (talk) 19:49, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Andy Towle citation

I love Andy Towle's blog, but that's what it is. Normally, if you find something there you can follow his links to his source and cite the original. In this instance, he's "reporting" -- he is not a reporter -- the detail he received in an email from Niedwiecki. A reliable source? I don't think so.

And Lord knows the claim in the 2nd paragraph that an incident became "an international news story" needs to be documented from something more than a participant's online diary/blog. Like maybe from an international news source. Good luck.

Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 20:31, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

I used Towle's blog to source the installation of the national board of directors, information that is immediately verifiable on the group's website. As for the international cite i believed all I did was post the web archive link for those that wished to see it, it was a source already there. Insomesia (talk) 21:37, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

No. You use Towle at the end of this sentence: "In 2007 Fight OUT Loud became a leader in the effort to address Fort Lauderdale, Florida Mayor Jim Naugle's comments about the gay community." But since Towle is merely parroting the email he got from Niedwiecki, we only have Niedwiecki telling us what he and Hudson are doing. Bogus. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 00:35, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I was thinking of a different cite. I used this one there as the very first sentence - of Towle - states, "I received an interesting email this morning from Anthony Niedwiecki, whose organization Fight OUT Loud, has been spearheading the campaign to flush anti-gay Fort Lauderdale Mayor Jim Naugle." Insomesia (talk) 16:23, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

It's still a blogger's comment based on a email from a self-promoting source. Towle is not a reporter. He's self-edited. The essence of a blogger. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 17:07, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

He's a journalist and reporter for the Miami Herald. And his statement is not based on the press release but from his past reporting on the whole "Flush Naugle" campaign. Insomesia (talk) 17:35, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Could you be more confused? You can read about Andy Towle right here on WP. The TowleRoad blog is named for him. His work is unedited. He's a former journalist. He has no connection to the Miami Herald. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 23:41, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Really, I'm trying to understand your concern. I thought you were now referring to Steve Rothaus, a journalist with the Miami Herald. See this for example. He also runs the paper's LGBT blog. Andy Towle is also well respected but I didn't intend to use his comments as anything surprising. I have another look to see what the concern is. Insomesia (talk) 00:38, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

OK, back on Towle, I noted his exact words that opined himself, and are not an exceptional claim. Additionally Towle has an English degree and has served as the editor of a national magazine as well as other other pursuits that lead me to believe he knew what he was writing and stands behind it. I find the use of the source as acceptable and unsurprising. Additionally i think it's a good source for someone wishing to get more background information of the subject that we wouldn't necessarily want in the article itself. Insomesia (talk) 00:48, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Fight OUT Loud. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20111010015526/http://equalitync.org/news1/20071017 to http://equalitync.org/news1/20071017
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100714070048/http://www.victoryfund.org/news/view/url:anthony_niedwiecki_wins_in_oakland_park_fla to http://www.victoryfund.org/news/view/url:anthony_niedwiecki_wins_in_oakland_park_fla

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 10:26, 25 February 2016 (UTC)