Talk:Beard Liberation Front

Reality check

Is there any evidence that the "Beard Liberation Front" has more than one member? Because if there isn't, we should just say it flat-out, no matter the good humor of Flett's political satire.--Pharos 04:32, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Flett claims a loose network of a few hundred members, and the Beard of the Year awards are supposedly awarded according to the results of a poll. That poll isn't public as far as I can tell, so either there are some members being polled, or he's making the numbers up, which strikes me as a stretch. I think I've cast as much doubt on the reality of the organisation as I can without going into personal opinion. --Sam Blanning^(talk) 12:09, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

A couple of articles also mention that the BLF has a regular newsletter (one says weekly). --Sam Blanning^(talk) 12:13, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Do they have a website

... or registered office space? -- Zanimum 14:20, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

American equivalent society

The November Beard Club! They argue that at least on month per year (November), people (both men and women) should let their beard unshaven. Apparently, it was founded in 1988 and the last news of them is from 1997.

Google News Archives

bogdan 21:47, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Cris Crosso

On 19th March 2007, this article was altered to read "The BLF was founded in 1995 by socialist money broker Cris Cosso" from "socialist historian Keith Flett". It might be true but seems a little unlikely. Would anybody who knows more about it care to take a look? --QuestingVole 13:19, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Branson

Must we have a picture of that corporate benefit scrounger on the page? It's people like him what bring beards into disrepute.Keith-264 (talk) 08:00, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Beard Liberation Front. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090113173449/http://www.sundayherald.com:80/display.var.1655725.0.0.php?act=complaint&cid=546763 to http://www.sundayherald.com/display.var.1655725.0.0.php?act=complaint&cid=546763
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070928000551/http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/content/news/story.aspx?brand=ENOnline&category=News&tBrand=ENOnline&tCategory=news&itemid=NOED18%20Apr%202007%2009:11:11:470 to http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/content/news/story.aspx?brand=ENOnline&category=News&tBrand=ENOnline&tCategory=news&itemid=NOED18%20Apr%202007%2009%3A11%3A11%3A470

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:59, 29 October 2016 (UTC)