Talk:Free Speech Coalition

Is biased!

The first paragraph of the main text ends with very partial language: "They are powerful lobbyists who wish to keep pimping and the exploitation of women legal in the United States." Someone else should rewrite this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.51.24.110 (talk) 23:46, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Needs citations

I'm not sure the 'Original Research' template is the right one, but the whole article is in desperate need of citations. It reads very much like it was written by someone close to the subject matter. The last paragraph in particular is more like the conclusion of an opinion article than an encyclopedic one. -Zegota (talk) 02:40, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

I just changed the template to COI, which I think is more appropriate. I don't know much about the FSC, so I don't know how much I can help, but there are a lot of problems with this article, starting about a month ago. -Zashitnik (talk) 10:05, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Original Research

The vast majority of the prose lacks sources and therefore constitutes original research. Unless citations from WP:RS sources are offered content will be deleted. - Semitransgenic _talk. 16:21, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

No, it just means that that whoever added the content did not support it. You claiming that its made up is an entirely different circumstance. Have you actually checked any of it? -Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (Talk) 03:23, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Merger proposal

I propose that Performer Availability Screening Services (PASS) be merged into Free Speech Coalition. The content in the PASS article (such as it is; it's a stub) can be better explained in the context of the FSC. I was going to develop the PASS article, but there is little to develop it with so unless/until it becomes WP:N on its own, I think this is the best place for it. Lightbreather (talk) 18:49, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Free Speech Coalition. 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/20100109100140/http://www.freespeechcoalition.com/pressreleasesmedia/135-award.html to http://www.freespeechcoalition.com/pressreleasesmedia/135-award.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.freespeechcoalition.com/industry/news/stars.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.adultvideonews.com/archives/199909/bone/by0999_24.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.adultvideonews.com/archives/200010/bone/by1000_06.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.adultvideonews.com/bone/by0901_06.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.adultvideonews.com/bone/by0902_02.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 14:42, 7 October 2017 (UTC)