Talk:Annie Lobert: Difference between revisions
Rabbit67890 (talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 60: | Line 60: | ||
*I agree. [[User:Ltwin|Ltwin]] ([[User talk:Ltwin|talk]]) 06:15, 23 May 2009 (UTC) |
*I agree. [[User:Ltwin|Ltwin]] ([[User talk:Ltwin|talk]]) 06:15, 23 May 2009 (UTC) |
||
*I too agree. Material is redundent. Until there is something more substantial on thei "Hookers for Jesus" org, it makes sense to merge. [[User:Proxy User|Proxy User]] ([[User talk:Proxy User|talk]]) 14:55, 6 June 2009 (UTC) |
*I too agree. Material is redundent. Until there is something more substantial on thei "Hookers for Jesus" org, it makes sense to merge. [[User:Proxy User|Proxy User]] ([[User talk:Proxy User|talk]]) 14:55, 6 June 2009 (UTC) |
||
== Conflict of Interest == |
|||
Additions made by Oz Fox represent a Conflict of Interest in violation of Wikipedia Terms of Use. These comments present biased and speculative information inappropriate according to Wikipedia standards. Additionally, this information negates a neutral point of view. Unless something has actually taken place and is indeed "fact" this information does not belong on Wikipedia. For example, stating that Annie is an author, when in reality, her work has never been published. Once her work is published, the notation of "Author" should be included. But not until that point. Speculative information regarding approval of tax exempt status is additionally not appropriate for Wikipedia. Once status has been confirmed and presented with references and citations, then at that point, it should be included within the article. But not until these facts have been shown to be true and verified. Additionally he has removed notations stating that a citation is needed. Wikipedia content must include citations and be verified with reliable, secondary sources. Statements presented by the subject's husband lacking documentation and citations are not appropriate in this forum. Verified COI and NPOV. Continued revisions will result in escalation to the Administrator and/or editorial response team.CatGirl 05:18, 31 May 2010 (UTC) |
|||
Please keep in mind the 3-revert rule. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edit_war [[User:Cindamuse|Cindamuse]] ([[User talk:Cindamuse|talk]]) 05:46, 31 May 2010 (UTC) |
Revision as of 05:54, 31 May 2010
Biography Unassessed | |||||||
|
Suggesting article rewrite with Suggested Points Missing from the Original Article
Agree with the article rewrite. Not agreed about notability. This is definitely a notable person, but the article is missing that aspect.
Several points that need including in a future update:
1) Direct connection to "Hollywood Madam", Heidi Fliess is missing. This woman was Heidie's protege.
2) Controversy concerning her organization in Christian denominations
3) Documentary Information from IMDB and other film sources
4) Relationship to other famous people during her time as a prostitute
5) Her relationship to police agencies and joint projects, which are significant are left out.
6) Her significant role in the creation of the "Minnesota Connection" to Las Vegas Prostitution is missing from the article (e.g. http://www.heart-intl.net/HEART/080105/JuvenileProstitutionMinn.pdf). She and her first Pimp created the primary network of human trafficking of teenage girls from Minnesota to Nevada.
This article should also be linked to the following on Wikipedia in a "See Also" section:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-pornography_movement
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heather_Veitch
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Toviaheli (talk • contribs) 22:09, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi Tov. While I agree that the article needs extensive work, the points provided cannot be supported with verifiable citations and references.
1. Annie has had no direct contact with Heidi Fleiss and in fact, they have never met.
2. Information regarding the controversy over the name of the organization and assumptions regarding her lifestyle could be beneficial. And yet, it could also be contentious and potentially libelous or harmful. As such, it would ride a fine line respecting compliance with Wikipedia Terms of Use. Any notation regarding controversy would require an unbiased presentation of all suppositions, along with careful and meticulous sourcing.
3. Information regarding the documentary may be better set aside until the film is released. It is now in post production. But who knows what the future holds? In this same vein, statements regarding the future publication of her memoirs should probably be deleted. While she was working with a literary agent in late 2008, after reading her first chapter, various national secular and religious publishing houses have chosen not to move forward with a contract.
4. Providing information pertaining to famous relationships maintained during her time working as a prostitute would be highly inappropriate in this forum. It would be considered contentious and potentially libelous or harmful. Additionally, any claims would be hearsay, lacking documentation and/or sources.
5. While information could be provided regarding joint projects and collaboration with legal authorities and government officials, much of this cannot be sourced. And as such, it's simply hearsay.
6. While Annie is often credited with a viable link with the Minnesota Connection, consider it urban legend at best. While Annie arrived from Wisconsin via Minneapolis, neither her nor her first pimp were responsible for creating a network of teenage girls trafficked from Minnesota to Nevada. In fact, when Annie would occasionally discover an underage girl working, she would covertly encourage them to get out any way they could. The facts regarding the Minnesota Connection and Annie's involvement cannot be documented through verifiable sources.
Annie Lobert is definitely a notable person. Her current activities, ministry, and history have been reflected in several media appearances and national network news magazine programs. Google provides links to over 105,000 Web sites for Annie Lobert and over 62,000 for her organization, Hookers for Jesus. At various times, online searches for "Annie Lobert" have trended in the top searches on google.com. Since 2006, her blogs have been consistently ranked as the most visited and commented on MySpace.
And finally, I agree that a link could be provided to the Anti-pornography movement page on Wikipedia. However, while an inline link has been provided to Heather's Wikipedia page, in my opinion, additional links are unwarranted. Annie and Heather work in two separate organizations. They attend separate churches and share neither vision in ministry nor resources. While they are friends, they do not ordinarily work together. While Heather's focus involves reaching out to dancers in the strip clubs, Annie's focus involves working with prostitutes and the Destiny House in Henderson. Over three years ago, Heather and Annie shared a desire to create video diaries under the guise of "Saving Sex City." However, the project was short lived and is no longer in development. - Cindy Nelson
Cindamuse (talk) 10:23, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Suggesting article rewrite
I noticed that a lot of Cindamuse's edits have been copy-and-pasted from Hookers for Jesus' website:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Annie_Lobert&diff=prev&oldid=263160826 "Hookers for Jesus is a grassroots organization founded in January of 2005, birthed from the heart of Annie Lobért"
http://www.hookersforjesus.net/aboutus.cfm "We are a grassroots organization founded in January of 2005, birthed from the heart of Annie Lobért."
I suggest this article undergo some serious rewriting. There's not only POV problems, there's also issues with US-centrism "interviewed in major news publications across the nation and throughout the world" and in general the article reads like someone who feels very strongly on this topic decided just to copy and paste to promote the organization. The prose is coming out pretty damn purple and I think Wikipedia can do better.
Muncadunc (talk) 15:54, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
I am neither an involved party promoting myself nor did I plagiarize. I am the sole author of the original material posted for the Annie Lobert and Hookers for Jesus Wikipedia pages. This information was additionally used on the Hookers for Jesus Web site. Your statements attempting to harm my credibility and reputation are bad form at best and at worst are libelous. Prior to posting future messages on talk pages, you may want to consider reviewing the talk page guidelines regarding appropriate behavior. In hindsight, while I agree with some of the edits that were made, the personal attacks on the Cindamuse talk page were inappropriate. Thanks. Cindamuse (talk) 08:44, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Merger proposal
I am proposing that we merge Hookers for Jesus with this article as the two articles already say just about the same thing. There are currently issues with both article but by putting them together and doing a bit of research and clean up I believe these could be cleaned up and made into a more acceptable article according to Wikipedia Guidelines. TimonyCrickets (talk) 19:10, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
- I agree. Ltwin (talk) 06:15, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
- I too agree. Material is redundent. Until there is something more substantial on thei "Hookers for Jesus" org, it makes sense to merge. Proxy User (talk) 14:55, 6 June 2009 (UTC)