Talk:Louisiana Family Forum

Conservatism Low‑importance

	Conservatism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism 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.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Louisiana Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Louisiana portal This article is supported by WikiProject Louisiana (assessed as Low-importance).

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.

Ax to Grind

Not sure why Neutrality continues to attempt to revert this page to its edits. It appears the editor has some type of ax to grind with the group. From what I can gather it appears Neutrality wants to gear this article around one controversial article about this group and not let the version of the page which is a better description of the group stay. Anothersliceofhistory 05:39, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The description of the group is entirely lacking and slanted. The LFF promotes "faith, family, and freedom"? That is a political slogan that tells us nothing. "Educational association" is a very nice way to say pressure group, no one except those who oppose it use the term "homosexual marriage", and the similarly misleading "balanced science teaching" should say "teaching creationism in public schools". Balipratipada (talk) 02:18, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am making some edits to more accurately reflect the organization's stated goals. They perform no "research" and their "education" is primarily limited to providing voter guides and pressuring law makers. They are primarily an advocacy group (as defined on wikipedia.) Also, since the term "homosexual marriage" is cited on Wikipedia as "Same-sex marriage" I have changed it to reflect that. They do not promote "family", but "traditional family". A search of their site yields no hits on the phrase "balanced science" and I have removed that descriptor. Gene Mills (talk) 04:43, 13 March 2010 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by Gene Mills (talk • contribs) 04:42, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Deletion

I placed the Speedy tag on the article, as at the time it did not contain enough content to justify its own notability. This has changed per recent edits, and I am removing the tag I placed myself as these problems have largely been fixed. --Jayron32|talk|contribs 05:28, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick re-evaluaion! I would have gotten to the extra contributions later, your nomination sped me up! --Zeke pbuh 05:30, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral POV

The first paragraph reads like copy from one of this organization's pamphlets. Guill 01:59, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't it interesting that a very one-sided article newspaper article is pasted on the page but then other parts of the page are called into question on neutrality grounds?--Anothersliceofhistory 19:03, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Still not happy with the flow of this one.

Need to expand this whole thing. Most of the sources I find are not kind to LFF but are considered reliable and verifiable. I am going to see if I can't find other items to attempt to balance them. If not, then so be it. We only can put in what we can verify and source. spryde | talk 18:21, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the huge number of award winners. It's referenced and not encyclopedic. Also the "prior history" info is not useful information and can be posted on the discussion page if relevant. Gene Mills (talk) 03:31, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Louisiana Family Forum. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080306060322/http://pewforum.org/news/display.php?NewsID=14359 to http://pewforum.org/news/display.php?NewsID=14359&IssueID=48

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 5 June 2024).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:50, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Louisiana Family Forum. 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/20100307043157/http://www.lafamilyforum.org/action%20center to http://www.lafamilyforum.org/action%20center

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 15:31, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]