Talk:Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence

Tone
User:Tomorrow and tomorrow, you added a Tone tag at the article in May in this edit. I noticed that you cleaned up some of the problems you found, thanks very much for that. Can you have another look now, and see if you think the unencyclopedic tone issues in the article have been resolved so we can remove the tag? If not, can you point to areas that still need cleanup? Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 00:15, 27 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi @Mathglot, thanks for reaching out. I think it is looking pretty good now. I feel the 'Inception' section still comes across as a bit of a rambling recollection about gay culture in SF, but not really sure how to fix that without re-writing the whole section (and cutting a fair bit of irrelevant WP:SYNTH).
 * Only other thing - I feel that there is too many quotes by sisters themselves, which get sorta merged with the WP:Wikivoice, and overall adds to WP:Tone concerns. Other than that, mostly good in my opinion. Tomorrow and tomorrow (talk) 00:39, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Tomorrow and tomorrow, Thanks for that. I've been looking at the quotes, and trying to think about what you said about quantity. I think I see what you mean, because on the one hand, the quotes are irreverent and cheeky, but on the other, I think a certain amount of that is appropriate here (as long as it's between double quotes and attributed), to give some kind of flavor to the reader of what they are about. To get a feel for how we handle that in other articles, I had a look at Monty Python, George Carlin, and "Weird Al" Yankovic, and I think some quotations, in whatever the style of the subject happens to be, are actually needed in such articles in order to get away from the necessarily dryer tone of the encyclopedic content in Wikipedia's voice, and to give the reader a little, direct taste of what all those dry words are trying to describe, first-hand. It's a judgment call, of course: how much is too much? I think I'm coming down on the side of "it's about right" in this article, for now, but I would appreciate your feedback. Especially if you could come up with 2-3 more articles that might be about some similar kind of comedic or parody subject, especially if high camp and broad farce and/or costuming was involved, and see how they handle quotations in those articles and report back. (Are you subscribed? I'll stop pinging, if so.) Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 19:40, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi, I am subscribed.
 * Honestly, I think we're good for now, if you want to remove tone tag go ahead. Thanks for being so constructive with all your edits!
 * Tomorrow and tomorrow (talk) 06:31, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
 * ✅ And thanks for all the help, and feel free to add them here, or anywhere they're needed. If an accompanying talk page section is not needed, please use the reason param in the maintenance template to give some idea of what needs attention. Tip: You can *always* use the 'reason' param with any template, regardless whether it is documented on the Template doc page or not. Thanks again. Mathglot (talk) 06:53, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Vandalism and "hate group" description
@Thegodfathero Let's avoid an edit war and discuss here. Your description of the SPI as an "anti-Catholic hate group" represents the viewpoint of a vocal minority. It is an opinion rather than a factual description of the group. This opinion is discussed in depth later on in the article, and does not belong in the first paragraph. Removal of this line does not constitute vandalism, however, I trust you are acting in good faith and therefore will not reverse your edit immediately so that we can discuss first. Bear of Tomato (talk) 06:40, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I appreciate your good attitude, but I'll revert it immediately. There is no need to discuss clear violations of policy first; much less when this is their third try. The insertion of unattributed, unquoted, opinion by a non-neutral advocate into the lead sentence of an article which involves living people does not require discussing first. This brand-new editor deserves some slack, like all new editors do, but in their 16-edit career at Wikipedia, over 25% of their edits are trying to stuff their "hate-group" point of view into this article, and they already got the patient responses the last two times they tried it. Now, they just get immediately reverted, not so patiently, along with a (still patient) edit-warring warning on their Talk page. If they try it again, they may get admin action. Mathglot (talk) 07:53, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for stepping in. I'm a novice editor myself and tend to be overcautious. I'll revert such edits immediately in the future. Bear of Tomato (talk) 03:26, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Distinction between SPI the San Francisco group and SPI the wider movement isn't very clear in the article
The infobox is specific to the San Francisco organization; however, the article deals with the greater movement which is made up of many autonomous groups. Should the infobox be adjusted to be specific to the movement? Or can we otherwise make things clearer? Erp (talk) 04:43, 29 June 2023 (UTC)


 * My inclination would be to broaden the infobox, or perhaps make a section for the SF org and move the box there. -sche (talk) 16:23, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

2009 to-do list
The following text has been copied from the former to-do banner, Talk:Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence/to do, which as Mathglot pointed out is entirely out of date; if any of it still needs to be done, tackle it; otherwise, this can be archived in due time. -sche (talk) 16:20, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Controversy section - Papal List of Heretics references, confirm, vet and ref.
 * explain their stance on Catholicism (by example and balancing statements)
 * work with multiple faith groups
 * Controversy section - The Condom Saviour Consecration and Vow
 * Three Mile Island Protest (first event?)
 * Dog Show in the Castro (with Shirley MaClaine (sp?))
 * Sistericus
 * STOP the Violence Campaign
 * Sister Sam and The Queer Army
 * Burning Man festival
 * Consisterly Conspiracy archive show
 * Princess Diana memorial
 * Pink Saturday
 * Radical Faeries
 * Operation Spanner/SPI London/BDSM
 * Klubstitute & Diet Popstitute
 * awards? (they get them every year but is there a needs to list or maybe just the more notable ones?)
 * explain their dress and make-up, holy clown, spirit masks, drag/transgender, theater device, etc.

TYT
Yeah, yeah, I know, I should just SOFIXIT myself, but like everyone I have limited time, so I'm commenting here in case anyone wants to beat me to it, help, or express opposition: now that the news cycle has (long) moved on and the fervor of recentism has died down, let's examine how much of the excessively detailed moment-by-moment account of the Dodgers game (currently given a whole section of the article) is actually given weight in the overall coverage of the Sisters (WP:DUE, WP:10YT). &#45;sche (talk) 03:00, 11 April 2024 (UTC)