Talk:Equality Florida

This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies articles

Organizations Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Florida Low‑importance

	Florida portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Florida. If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.FloridaWikipedia:WikiProject FloridaTemplate:WikiProject FloridaFlorida articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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): Tkamerso, Amandafreda, Rosekeating, Ckasaha. Peer reviewers: Nfmaruca, Hayleebilbray, Cassandradefalco.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 12:20, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Inconsistencies with Wikipedia Policies

Hi. This article does not seem to adhere to NPOV[[1]]. Most of the sources are just direct links to Equality Florida's main website or other websites they have created. I may be wrong, but the way it is written seems like a PR team or staff for the company wrote it which is not disclosed. Please let me know if anyone agrees with me or not. If this is the case I have no conflict of interest and will happily rewrite or substantially edit to make sure this article is properly written. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.242.91.242 (talk) 02:51, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree, even just paragraphs 2-4 in the summary seem like a PR page. Pastelll (talk) 01:34, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My edit explanation (since it got cut off)

“Big non-neutrality problem (this article might need more work)” Someone… somewhere… who is intrigued by Super Dave… Somewhereattheendofspace (talk) 19:51, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Needs a controversy section

For an unbiased review, the controversity regarding this organization's practices should probably be mentioned: including both "for" viewpoints and "against" viewpoints. Userafw (talk) 00:45, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]