Talk:Alan Sears

Far too many quotes
Out of about 11,800 words not counting the lead, about 5,767, more than half, of the article is made up of quotes from the subject. Some of these are so long they are probably copyright violations, but in any case there are simply too many quotations. See WP:Quotations. Doug Weller (talk) 16:18, 16 July 2015 (UTC)


 * I am actively working on the article and that proportion will decrease dramtically. As for copyright violations, all of these quotes clearly fall under fair use. Intermittentgardener (talk) 16:38, 16 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Except we have our own copyright policy that we all must follow. We allow brief use of quotations - a rule of thumb being about 220 words. Doug Weller (talk) 17:18, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Abortion
I'd think his desire to see Row vs Wade overturned warrants a mention. Doug Weller (talk) 16:21, 16 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Me too. 203.218.214.60 (talk) 17:14, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Why was his action while a Federal prosecutor warning thousands of retailers not to sell Penhouse and Playboy deleted?
Sears was a federal prosecutor in Ed Meese's Justice Department during the presidency of Ronald Reagan. While employed by the Justice Department he was the Staff Executive Director of the Attorney General's Commission on Pornography. In the Spring of 1986 Sears became notorious for sending a letter from the Commission over his own signature to thousands of retailers warning them, in an attempt to intimidate them into not selling Playboy and Penthouse, that they might be publicly identified as pornography dealers. As a result of this letter more than 17,000 retailers stopped carrying the magazine. Christie Hefner, daughter of Hugh Hefner and president of Playboy Magazine, joined Penthouse International in suing the Meese Commission over Sears's letter. Judge John Garrett Penn ordered the Meese Commission to retract the letter, and Sears quit the Department of Justice in disgust, moving to the Department of the Interior. This should be restored. Doug Weller (talk) 17:25, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Actually, I removed it because it is factually inaccurate. That judge actually was censured and overruled by a higher court. Also, records indicate Sesrs was already in the process of leaving for DOI when sued. Over the letter. There are so many details here that conflict with sources it is not funny. Intermittentgardener (talk) 21:47, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
 * You should have said so in your edit summary. This is pretty funny. The Commission had problems publishing it, and "Meese Commission eventually turned to Rutledge Hill, a small concern in Nashville, which published about forty thousand copies of the Final Report in an abridged version. Some Christian bookstores would not stock the work because of its graphic descriptions of movies and lengthy quotations from pornographic literature. Rutledge Hill distributed the work in a wrapper with a warning label stating it contained “extremely explicit content” that most people would find “offensive.” Not relevant to Sears but it's odd that Meese's own article barely mentions the report, and Meese report doesn't mention the publishing problem. 05:35, 18 July 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doug Weller (talk • contribs)


 * Ok, here's an academic source that says "Shortly before the Meese Commission published its findings, executive director Alan Sears issued a letter to several companies explaining that they were among the distributors of pornography about to be listed in the final report. In response, Southland Corporation, parent company of 7-Eleven, along with Rite-Aid and other retailers, announced that they would no longer sell Playboy, Penthouse, and Forum. Ten thousand stores removed the magazines from their shelves. Hefner saw it as a shake-down—“the first successful use of a national blacklist since the McCarthy era.” Playboy Enterprises, Inc., filed a lawsuit asking the court to enjoin the attorney general’s office to withdraw its threat. With the court ruling in Playboys favor, ... This doesn't suggest that any court said it was ok to name distributors, quite the opposite. I can find no suggestion that any court supported Sears. I see that he wrote to 26 companies:"The Reagan administration’s strategy involved both intimidation and legal initiatives. In February 1986, well before the Mccse Commission released its findings, Executive Director Sears wrote a letter - without informing commission members - to twenty-six companies that sold such magazines as Playboy and Penthouse stating that the commission had heard testimony that their enterprise was “involved in the sale or distribution of pornography.” The twenty-six firms included 7-Eleven, Rite-Aid, Thrifty, and Dart.*" (talk) 05:52, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Citation to SPLC Website
A sentence in the article cites to the website of the Southern Poverty Law Center, an advocacy group whose ideology is diametrically opposed to that of ADF (the organization Sears founded). I removed the material sourced to that website, but Doug Weller reinstated the material. I don't see this as a close call. The SPLC website isn't a reliable source for this page. SunCrow (talk) 16:23, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
 * then take it to WP:RSN. The idea that we can't use sources that disagree with a stance taken by a person or organisation is weird. We use the SPLC regularly - but it must be attributed. Doug Weller  talk 17:07, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Lack of Neutrality Alert regarding live person
Here is the diff page: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alan_Sears&diff=prev&oldid=933843714

The information added seems contentious regarding the author of the book, especially when the quotation is merely an opinion. I am not representing the author nor do I have contact with him, but it seems that having only one negative quote that smears the author could be libelous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ihaveadreamagain (talk • contribs) 17:29, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
 * There's no problem with that, it's attributed to the SPLC which is the key thing, we allow criticism from reliable sources and the SPLC is considered a reliable source here. It's not libelous and do you really mean that one isn't enough? Doug Weller  talk 17:39, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Oops, saved too soon. Why didn't you read my reply above this one where I replied to another editor (now blocked for disruptive editing). Doug Weller  talk 17:40, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
 * The SPLC is a respected source for subjects related to hate speech. It certainly isn't libelous for us to include this. O3000 (talk) 17:42, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. I meant that having a lone statement, that is severely negative, without providing a balance on the other side or any contrary viewpoint, seems against what Wikipedia is designed to do. I agree that until recent years, SPLC was a trusted source. However in the past 3 or 4 years, there has been overwhelming negative criticism on the way they label groups as "hate groups." Even major media (not just FOX) has criticized them for doing that. Morris Dees is gone, too, so they cannot rely on their years of quality work just like we no longer can rely on accuracy of the Daily Mail. History of being trusted cannot equate to a group always being trusted. There is a time when it becomes clear that their glory days are over. It is time to put the SPLC into the same category of other groups with an agenda -- liberal or conservative. We should not use them as a trusted source. Thank you. - sorry, I forgot to sign. Ihaveadreamagain (talk) 17:04, 6 May 2020 (UTC) ihaveadreamagain Ihaveadreamagain (talk) 17:04, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
 * the latest discussion was last year, see Reliable sources/Perennial sources. You'll have to get that changed if you are going to treat it as an unreliable source. Doug Weller  talk 17:58, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for that helpful link about the reliable sources. About SPLC that page says "Take care to ensure that content from the SPLC constitutes due weight in the article and conforms to the biographies of living persons policy." The BLP requires a neutral point of view (NPOV) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons I submit that the statement about Alan Sears is not from a neutral point of view, as it does not present any information about the book other than that one quote. NPOV requires "representing fairly, proportionately... all the significant views ... on a topic." Also: "A neutral point of view neither sympathizes with nor disparages its subject (or what reliable sources say about the subject)...." The choice of words in the post about Alan Sears's book is one-sided and is not neutral. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ihaveadreamagain (talk • contribs) 18:43, 6 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Then go to WP:NPOVN.  Doug Weller  talk  —Preceding undated comment added 19:19, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Ok. I have. I tried to figure out how to post a link here so you can follow, but not sure how. Thank you! --Ihaveadreamagain (talk) 20:16, 6 May 2020 (UTC)Ihaveadreamagain
 * Just copy and paste it.Slatersteven (talk) 09:28, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Discussion at NPOVN:
 * And so far all my efforts have turned up negative stuff.Slatersteven (talk) 11:45, 7 May 2020 (UTC). O3000 (talk) 10:44, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Founders of ADF
The founders of ADF include Alan Sears, who acted as its first president and CEO. The bottom portion of the article in a boxed section does not show Alan Sears as a founder. 216.165.249.154 (talk) 00:58, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Which ADF? Slatersteven (talk) 10:14, 19 October 2022 (UTC)