Talk:Stop Porn Culture

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ktfleuriet, Shannonacosta, Meganjeanfreau.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 03:51, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

NPOV
I'll assume this will pass AfD, however the article is stating violence, inter alia is a matter of fact. This is definitely up for debate.Two kinds of pork Makin'Bacon |
 * it looks like the text in question is this: "to discuss the proliferation of pornography and of violence associated with its production and consumption". Could you elaborate on the POV claim or propose other wording? To me, it doesn't seem to be saying pornography always leads to or is the result of violence (which would probably be contentious if taken in the literal sense) but rather that within the broad sense of the "production and consumption" of pornography, there does exist violence. While the extent of the violence is indeed up for debate (see effects of pornography, opposition to pornography, and so on), that there are connections doesn't seem to be controversial (child pornography is probably the most obvious and most extreme example). --&mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  \\ 18:23, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
 * See Feminist Sex Wars, many among feminists will disagree with this. Here, because the article is using only self-published sources, the radical feminist point-of-view is taken at face value. --Pudeo' 18:47, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Disagree with which? Which radical feminist point of view? Is the problem the content of the article or the sourcing? It sounds like you mean the controversy/pov is inherent to Stop Porn Culture's perspective, in which case that's totally irrelevant since the job of this article is to talk about Stop Porn Culture and their point of view. If instead the controversy is in the way we present their point of view (as in the quote I copied above), I'm unclear what the controversy is. --&mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  \\ 21:32, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't think sourcing and the content can be just what ever, they're tied together and if there's a problem with sourcing that will reflect on the article. From the lead: based on their website source this article states it is an "advisory body" (perhaps a high-esteemed organisation that gives advices and those advices are taken by others). Is this a view held by others (NPOV) or just by them (SPC POV)? --Pudeo' 22:16, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Most of this can be solved by attributing claims to the group.Two kinds of pork Makin'Bacon 22:52, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

=Edits= Noticed this was a stub page so attempted to flesh it out a bit. Added an "Activism" section with information on what the organization has done/ is doing. Not sure if the section would be better labeled "Work" ?? Education Program:Richard Stockton College of New Jersey/GIS 3614 Feminist Theory (Fall 2014) Alicia Pileggi (talk) 03:11, 6 November 2014 (UTC)