Talk:Marriage Law Project

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Notability[edit]

The Marriage Law Project is notable because it is a frequent contributor as a pundit in the cultural homosexuality debates, especially from a catholic point of view. Sample contributions of MLP from the news are below. Somone interested in Marriage Law Project citations ought to be able to learn about who they are. MLP participated in filing the injunction against San Francisco when that city's clerk decided to issue same sex marriage licenses.

November 2006: national catholic reporter “The race is one of the most hotly contested and important in the country ... and the votes of the Catholic community are likely to provide the margin of victory,” complained Catholic University law professor Robert Destro, head of the school’s Marriage Law Project, in a letter to the university’s president, Fr. David O’Connell. “The university is clearly taking sides and has no business doing this in one of the most important elections in the country.”
  • Feb 2004: planet outGroups that oppose marriage for gays and lesbians promised a court fight. The Marriage Law Project and the Alliance Defense Fund announced plans to seek an injunction to block San Francisco from issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
  • July 2002: bp news There are a lot of people there who are very upset over what's going on, but none of those people are on any of the courts in New Jersey," noted Bill Duncan, the director of the Marriage Law Project at the Catholic University of America.
  • May 1998: [www.bpnews.net/storydownloadall.asp?da=13&mo=5&yr=1998 bp news] Litigators for homosexual activists "want to use the U.S. Constitution to force every state to accept same-sex marriage," noted David Orgon Coolidge, director of the Marriage Law Project at Catholic University in Washington, of a recent court case there.

So I would argue that unless there are ojections, the call for speedy delete should be rescinded. MPS 18:39, 10 November 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • I still see no notability for this pressure group. There are no independent articles listed in the article and those here are comments by members of the group in news stories rather than being about MLP. Nuttah68 18:47, 10 November 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
What do you mean by independent? Are you suggesting that planet out is a conservative Catholic publication? What sources do you consider "indepentent" if not a gay publication?
Are you suggesting that statements by the director of an organization does not count as a representative of MLP? I respectfulyl disagree. I can try to find more sources, but I think I have established basic notability in the sense that newspapers have talked about this organization. speedy delete is reserved for Vanity. If you want to AFD then that is your call, but CSD is to hasty now that basic notability has been established. MPS 18:53, 10 November 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I consider the sources you have used independent. However, the stories are not about MLP, the are stories that the MLP have commented on. IMO, to prove notability you need articles about MLP. Nuttah68 18:57, 10 November 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Here are some more links. You call it a "pressure group." Not sure what that means. I consider it an advocacy group, which is fairly common in Washington DCC
Washington Times
National Review
Concerned Women for America
Denver Rocky Mountain News
Dakota Voice
brigham university law review
Maryland University law review
I am not sure what you are getting at. You mean you think there should be expose' articles in the news about the organization of MLP? For me, 'description' in independent sources means that the sources say who the director is and where it is located. Clearly, a newspaper is not going to be redundant and say "Mariiage Law Project at Catholic University is a Catholic project devoted to legal issues surrounding marriage" I have cited numerous reputable sources that refer to Marriage Law Project's statements and its director(s) and its location and some of the statements and symposia that they have issued. As an advocacy organization that makes influential (cited by other advocacy groups) statements about the homosexuality, I think this constitutes a pretty good description and establishes and that it is a notable subject for an article. MPS 19:24, 10 November 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
What I am 'getting at' is that I would expect a notable organisation to have at least one independent article dedicated to outlining their aims and views. So far you have only provided articles that mention MLP, I am looking for an article ABOUT MLP. As summed up at [[1]] asertions of notability point 2. Nuttah68 19:30, 10 November 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, I am from Third opinion, my advice is to wait and let an admin make the decision on the speedy, and if it fails then AfD it. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 19:37, 10 November 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks.. .here are two more stories. ::: try this out for size. [2] It's catholic, but indepentent ...Also ... washington Blade has a story on the attempt to start a Gay-Straight Alliance and how the MLP influenced this decision. MLP played significantly initiating the movement on campus and has a whole bio written apparently by the Washington Blade. [3] MPS 19:45, 10 November 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This seems very borderline - I'd much rather see this go to an AfD rather than just be speedied. --Robdurbar 00:43, 11 November 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

dead link[edit]

This link is dead:

Planet Out Groups that oppose marriage for gays and lesbians promised a court fight. The Marriage Law Project and the Alliance Defense Fund announced plans to seek an injunction to block San Francisco from issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. RJFJR (talk)

So I tagged it [dead link]. Anyone can do that. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 19:46, 14 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I do not know why you have put my signature next to this; I just added a WikiProject.--Johnsoniensis (talk) 11:16, 15 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It appears to have been added in 2009 by User:RJFJR--Johnsoniensis (talk) 11:22, 15 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry. Now I've fixed that. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 18:09, 15 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you.--Johnsoniensis (talk) 21:35, 15 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Marriage Law Project. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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 IITalk to my owner:Online 00:18, 18 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Marriage Law Project. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 10:12, 25 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]