1648:
talking in Talk. So no, I'm not using this as a forum, but nice try to divert attention from the issue. Again, the issue is the founder of BBW, her statements on book selection, the news stories statements on selection being directly opposed to the Krug statements, and another reference tying those two together. That's the issue. Undue weight? Wiki says to ignore all rules when they do not make sense. Libraries use undue weight to keep out ex-gay material, the BBW founder opposes that, another reference has pointed that out, and we at
Knowledge (XXG) are supposed to use the undue excuse to commit the very crime that is the basis for the BBW founder's statements? Really, that's funny. Ex-gays don't get MSM coverage, so they are undue and should not be included in an article about the BBW founder speaking out against people being cut off with claims of undue weight. The undue weight rule in this particular narrow instance does not make sense and should be narrowly interpreted to allow ths matter. --
786:
like issuing a special statement specifically decrying the rejection of books promoting conversion therapy? "You're not championing my POV specifically, so you're not truly anti-censorship." Right. Or maybe the real issue is, as Hayley
Gorenberg at Lambda Legal said, "All of the leading medical, therapeutic, psychiatric and social work organizations have a fair unanimity here about claims relating to the so-called ex-gay movement or so-called reparative therapy where the central idea is that these groups would like to try to change people's sexual orientation or gender identity, and the consensus is that it's unnecessary and damaging and can be severely harmful to people." Ultimately, this story isn't about censorship — it's about a political group's ineffective attempt to get their toxic literature into publicly funded libraries, using Banned Books Week as a convenient but inappropriate excuse.
1434:
community. Now, we didn't serve the gay community because there weren't materials to serve them. You can't buy materials if they're not there. But part of our responsibility is to identify what we need and then to begin to ask for it. Another thing we have to be real careful about is that even though the materials that come out initially aren't wonderful, it's still incumbent upon us to have that voice represented in the collection. This was exactly what happened in the early days of the women's movement, and as the black community became more visible and began to demand more materials that fulfilled their particular information needs. We can't sit back and say, "Well, they're not the high-quality materials I'm used to buying." They're probably not, but if they are the only thing available, then I believe we have to get them into the library.
993:
wider readership. But PFOX felt entitled to special treatment, and when they didn't get it, they went to FOX News, and FOX said, aha, this story fits our narrative! And that's apparently how we get to
Knowledge (XXG)'s statement that the ALA "has been criticized for not championing all books in the event." An absurd conclusion in this case. Are they supposed to become a mouthpiece for every special-interest group that exerts pressure on them? Given their political agenda and strategy, FOX News is definitely not a reliable source on the notability of this event, because this is exactly what they do: turn molehills into mountains to promote right-wing interests (like conversion therapy) and create the illusion of controversy around things that aren't especially controversial (like anti-censorship campaigns and public libraries).
1562:"We can't sit back and say, 'Well, they're not the high-quality materials I'm used to buying.' They're probably not, but if they are the only thing available, then I believe we have to get them into the library." What? Say that again? "f they are the only thing available, then I believe we have to get them into the library". That is the exact opposite of what was reported in Fox News where the library made the excuse that the publishers are small so the ex-gay books do not meet, ready for this?--the library's selection policy! You see? The ex-gay book is not banned, no, that's bad. Rather, it simply did not meet the library's selection policy. Cute, huh? Who cares what Krug said--it's just those wacky ex-gays.
381:
360:
391:
486:
803:
Week event is a major initiative concerning the ALA's declared commitment to intellectual freedom. So their disinterest in defending the banning of certain books deserves mention in this article. Fox News may be disliked by a segment of WP, but it is a reliable source. Hipocrite, do you have firm evidence that LAEC is paid to be a critic of the ALA on a wide range of issues, including BBW? Please present evidence, along with a direct quote from the COI policy that he is supposedly violating.
1180:. If I came here adding my own theories about BBW, that's one thing. But properly applying Wiki policy by making certain edits or reverting others is perfectly acceptable, even under COI restrictions. Recall how the Judith Krug page used to be a near verbatim copy of the ALA's page for Judith Krug. Yes, I had a COI, but I was allowed to edit and the page is far, far improved now precisely because of my input in ensuring Knowledge (XXG) is not a staging ground for copies of ALA web pages.
465:
1369:
books to donate to my library because they didn't have all of them - did their rejection mean that it's now the ALA's job to promote
Tolkien? No, because I'm not an attention-seeking political entity). It's received almost no coverage and is undue. However, I can see including this as a two-line note to a paragraph on Focus on the Family's actual relationship with Banned Books Week: ie. their well-known opposition to it because of its support of gay-positive books.
496:
292:
999:
equivalent of the flat-Earth theory; like modern flat-Earthers, proponents tend to be motivated by religious/political/personal convictions, but not out of respect for the scientific process of peer-reviewed studies, etc. Most libraries would have the sense to weed out flat-Earth propaganda from donations, because they have a responsibility to supply current information. To imply that this is censorship would be a false equivalency.
271:
625:
240:
695:
615:
597:
207:
1544:
And it gets even better. "Another thing we have to be real careful about....", yes, librarians need to be real careful about this, "is that even though the materials that come out initially aren't wonderful, it's still incumbent upon us to have that voice represented in the collection." Incumbent!
1508:
Gentle now, cowboy, we are just talking in Talk. I'll assume I need not support my comments in Talk with RSs. You are correct, my opinion is irrelevant. Her words is what is relevant. "We have to serve the information needs of all the community". That's relevant. She says librarians have to serve
1205:
By the way, while I won't revert your edit, BBW really is the ALA's creation. The others climbed on board at the invitation of the ALA. To this day the ALA is the main promoter of BBW while the others hardly do anything, and even you have complained about that on your own
Librarin.net blog, several
1060:
As far as conversion therapy being equivalent to flat-Earthers, social sciences are hardly in the same league as the physical sciences. Social sciences are far more likely to be influenced by political and philosophical considerations than the physical sciences, yet even there we see strong political
998:
Additionally, conversion therapy propaganda is not just an "unorthodox or unpopular viewpoint" — it's not just "politically incorrect", it is also essentially "incorrect", in that it goes against current understanding in
Western psychology and mainstream academic studies. It has become the scientific
992:
It's only ironic if you believe that's not really part of the campaign's agenda. The ALA declined to single out the conversion therapy cause and write a statement specially endorsing their literature, because... why would they want to do that? There are many unorthodox books at least as deserving of
1768:
In the common-law tradition, censorship refers specifically to the government's prior restraint on publication. None of the sponsors claim this has happened; the acts they have in mind are perpetrated by private citizens. Yet the cases on the map almost all involve ordinary people lodging complaints
1691:
I think the bigger priority at the moment is to properly contextualize the "controversy" by writing about Focus on the Family's opposition to Banned Books Week. Then that paragraph can contain a sentence or two like "Focus, along with PFOX, has also criticized the ALA for not using Banned Books Week
1615:
Let me take this moment to say we are discussing the BBW page. I get the sense that some people oppose giving exposure to the ex-gay community, hence the need to minimize or eliminate this ex-gay issue from the BBW page. Ironic, no? Be that as it may, the ex-gay issue vis-a-vis BBW is an excellent
1597:
Now who here is going to explain why on the BBW page the creator of BBW saying "if they are the only thing available, then I believe we have to get them into the library" and Fox News reporting the exact opposite thing is not
Wikiworthy, especially where some sources directly call into question that
1481:
Whooooooaaaa, there, cut back on the OR. "Judith Krug manufactured this controversy" is in no way supported by any source here. Krug did not infiltrate FOTF and PFOX and force them to donate the books. Krug was not speaking about this "controversy" when she made that statement and she apparently has
1368:
Here from RfC. I edited this section a little while ago, but on re-reading, I don't think it belongs. When you look at the facts of the case, it's clearly a manufactured controversy - libraries have no obligation to accept all books donated to them, and frequently reject books (I bought some
Tolkien
1140:
I derive none of my income, zero, from librarian.net. Librarian.net is not and has never been a part of my job. It's just a blog that I've been writing since 1999 and has no particular advocacy position regarding ALA one way or the other, though I've made the occasional post regarding ALA. I do not
1046:
The ALA didn't have to endorse the conversion therapy literature--they just had to back up their claim to strongly support the availability of books with a wide range of viewpoints. As far as news outlets with a particular "narrative," "political agenda and strategy," few sources are as devoted to
2090:
Understood. No rush to produce
Wikiworthy material anyway. Take your time. Then, I'll look, provide suggestions, but given my COI, it'll be up to everyone else to see if they all approve. The ALA has said it will have a huge propaganda push for the 30th anniversary of BBW next September. Let's
1526:
Wait, it gets better. "f we didn't see those people, then we didn't have to include them in our service arena. The truth is, we do have to. " Now ex-gays are pretty invisible, and they darn sure don't get good MSM coverage. So, uh, what. They are invisible. Knowledge (XXG) can just overlook
1454:
She talks about the gay community. I do not think the ex-gay community differs in any way regarding this issue. Clearly Judith Krug is being very inclusive of minority interests, and ex-gays are a minority interest, so I hope no one is going to claim she didn't mention ex-gays, therefore they are
802:
Yes, it does belong. It may not be a politically-correct position, but my understanding is that the ALA likes to brag about it's commitment to intellectual freedom. Or is that freedom to read differing views in library books contingent upon political/idealogical considerations? The Banned Books
1175:
Jessamyn, I promise you my concern regarding the ex-gay issue is purely for
Knowledge (XXG) reasons. FoxNews and the Washington Post both address the issue of libraries not including ex-gay books on Banned Books Week. That makes the issue Wikiworthy, and on the Banned Books Week page, no less.
785:
No. It doesn't belong; the manufactured "controversy" was flimsy to begin with. The "Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays" got upset because some libraries didn't make shelf space for the antiquated propaganda they're pushing? And then they got miffed at the ALA because the ALA didn't feel
1647:
We are talking about the article. You are seeking to remove wikiworthy material. I am showing sources proving it is a controversy rooted in the very words of BBW's founder. I said my personal views are irrelevant but happen to match Judith Krug's point of view to be inclusive. Because we are
1579:
Interesting! We have news stories saying the ex-gay books are not weighty enough to get past the library selection policies, but at the same time 1) the BBW creator said "if they are the only thing available, then I believe we have to get them into the library", 2) the BBW creator decries book
1433:
We have to serve the information needs of all the community and for so long "the community" that we served was the visible community.... And so, if we didn't see those people, then we didn't have to include them in our service arena. The truth is, we do have to. ... We never served the gay
1242:
And I'm not "pushing for revisions." Rather, I am applying Wiki policy to create and maintain Knowledge (XXG) pages. If people are removing Wikiworthy info for POV reasons where that text has been present for quite a while and I'm reverting those POV edits, that's not "pushing for revisions."
1633:. Talk pages are presumably for discussing the content of the article, not for promoting one's personal views. I honestly don't care what you think about "ex-gays," because unless you have more reliable sources that discuss this "controversy," the article is currently giving it undue weight.
2108:
It's worth noting that "we as a community" include people who do not see this page as a propaganda tool or needing substantive revisions. If you think there are ALA employees editing this page in bad faith, I'd suggest taking that issue up directly via the appropriate channels.
1527:
them, right? "The truth is, we do have to. " Librarians have to include ex-gays. Judith Krug just said so, though she did not name each invisible community. That would be unreasonable. Come to think of it, how could you even count invisible communities? But I digress.
1831:
The ALA's membership booklet proclaims "the public’s right (everywhere) to explore in their libraries many points of view on all questions and issues facing them." An issue facing all members of the ALA is their leaders' shameful exception of the Cuban people's freedom to
2124:
Okay Jessamyn. But the page could be improved. Almost all pages could be improved, no? You are an expert in this area--even quoted on the main page. Why don't you think of ways to improve the article? The improvements could be in areas other than those I suggested.
1047:
promoting a specific viewpoint on gay issues as the New York Times is in both its editorial pages and its news pages. So does that mean we disqualify the NYT as a reliable source on gay issues because of its strong advocacy? My guess is that if Fox News'
1273:
for this article. This is an encyclopedia article, not a running blow-by-blow of every little tiff in the US culture wars. Additionally, it is highly inappropriate to continually insert the material during an active RfC. Please remove it, and wait for a
1176:
Having a library COI does not mean I must make no edits or provide no input. If people come to this page to clean off the ALA-negative information, my library COI does not require me to sit back and take no action while someone shouts from their
2170:
Greetings; I've tagged the article for its excessive use of quotes. There are lengthy blockquotes as well as many "scare quoted" phrases herein, and this sort of usage should be minimized with paraphrasing to write a proper encyclopedic article.
761:
to include information sourced only to one fox news article regarding Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays's claims regarding ALS's unwillingness to issue a statement regarding gay-conversion books being rejected by libraries?
1662:
LOL "we're just as bad!" If it's so important, either provide sources attesting its importance, or explain coherently why something unimportant should take up about a quarter of this article. "Ignore the rules" is not a catch-all.
1321:
976:
I just noticed this ironic sentence from the lead of this article: "The United States campaign "stresses the importance of ensuring the availability of those unorthodox or unpopular viewpoints to all who wish to read them""
1141:
lead or belong to any organization that pushes any advocacy position regarding ALA. I don't believe anyone is suggesting that I have a conflict of interest, nor have they ever. I came here because comment was requested.
153:
1083:
This controversy is tangential to the main point of the article even if it's properly sourced and cited. LAEC, I believe you have a conflict of interest in continuing to push for these revisions to this article.
2091:
make sure this page is rock solid so when the ALA editors arrive like they do on this and related pages, we as a community can stand together and ensure the page is not turned into another propaganda tool. --
847:
Hipocrite has made false claims about me, and that causes me to doubt other things he has said. He said, and this is not true, that I'm a "professional, paid ALA critic." I have properly announced my
2229:
1773:
And that is fully borne out exactly one year later by the ALA using Banned Books Week to label as censors every single one of hundreds petitioning the government for a redress of grievances: "
770:
weight to a non-notable non-incident. I notice that professional, paid ALA critic LAEC is the only person that supports it's inclusion currently. Does anyone else think the paragraph belongs?
1692:
to champion 'ex-gay' books and books opposing same-sex marriage," or whatever phrasing you like, with appropriate sourcing. The back-and-forth responses probably aren't that significant.
526:
873:. (The map was produced by an unreliable source acting on his own a long time back, and the ALA presented it without attribution as if it were its own, just as I reported previously.)
766:
Including an entire paragraph on a manufactured gay-conversion books pressure group going on fox news and whinging about not being included in Banned Books Week is providing massively
1061:
currents influencing the science (e.g. man-made global warming). To make a viewpoint in the realm of the social sciences beyond the pale is the epitome of political correctness.
543:
447:
147:
2214:
870:
437:
198:
1677:
Ah, I see light at the end of the tunnel. I do not want to "take up about a quarter of this article". Why don't you write up something small that you would approve? --
2145:
Because i went to many stores and tried to sell my Black Furies Tribebook,only to get a very upset answer from the store owner saying they "Don't want that stuff here"
579:
2289:
2284:
2279:
2274:
2269:
2264:
2259:
2254:
2249:
2072:
It will take a while for me to process the new material you added, but I'll come up with a draft of the section to add and if you'll let me know what you think of it.
1051:
treatment of gay issues is examined compared to the NYT's treatment of it, Fox News would more closely track with the sentiment of the American public than The Times.
2209:
413:
2224:
569:
533:
1598:
very hypocrisy, even that very Krug quote? You see? It's not OR if it's sitting right there in the references. You just have see it and apply Wiki guidelines.
1769:
with school and library authorities. Before Banned Books Week began in 1982, such behavior was known as petitioning the government for a redress of grievances.
342:
79:
886:
And my presenting such evidence has nothing to do with COI. On the other hand, it is in everyone's interest to produce an accurate and truthful article. --
2234:
2219:
538:
2199:
1387:
I suppose you could argue it is manufactured, but then you would have the problem of the creator of BBW having been the manufacturer. BBW was created by
332:
404:
365:
44:
1455:
excluded and this quote does not apply. That would be POV and go against the clear meaning of the quote. "We have to serve the information needs of
85:
2204:
2194:
308:
1340:
No. That's a general page. There's nothing there about this issue. Just please provide a direct link so people don't have to hunt around. --
645:
509:
470:
2130:
2096:
2055:
1841:
1795:
1761:
This source already appears (currently) as footnote 15, but it is worth a look to see it is supports any other ideas people are developing.
1711:
1682:
1653:
1621:
1464:
1345:
1307:
1248:
1211:
1031:
1004:
If additional sources can be found independent of FOX News, one might be inclined to take this paragraph's contents a little more seriously.
919:
891:
1395:. Here she is discussing how library selection is used to censor out material, how that is wrong, and how libraries should resist doing so:
30:
2244:
1509:
the information needs of all the community. That's what she said, that's not my opinion, though it is my opinion. Weird sentence, huh?
380:
359:
706:
649:
2239:
521:
299:
276:
99:
1978:
104:
20:
2029:
2126:
2092:
2051:
1837:
1791:
1707:
1678:
1649:
1617:
1460:
1341:
1303:
1244:
1207:
1027:
915:
887:
517:
on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
194:
190:
168:
74:
251:
135:
639:
602:
65:
2012:
1995:
954:
I've since reverted myself, as I'm not willing to get into this edit war. You can have your article however you want it.
1779:
1392:
1330:
1288:
912:
You can also view the latest map of book challenges across the US, created by NCAC's newest board member, Chris Peterson
1961:
1929:
852:
and may continue to edit as Wiki rules allow. I am becoming concerned that Hipocrite is proceeding down the path of
1944:
206:
185:
129:
109:
1746:
1482:
not clarified her statement in response to it. Your opinion that she was speaking about "ex-gays" is irrelevant.
825:
for me to reveal who a user is in real life. If LAEC announces his real name, I'll happily provide the evidence.
1811:
217:
396:
1405:
911:
257:
239:
125:
2156:
1270:
743:
739:
735:
731:
727:
723:
719:
715:
711:
175:
55:
2152:
1914:
412:
on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
307:
on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
2065:
1630:
70:
1863:
How Anti-Censors, 'Censor' the Truth About Censorship or ... Looking for Nazis in All the Wrong Places
653:
501:
1750:
1177:
2176:
1754:
1697:
1668:
1638:
1487:
1374:
1023:
959:
945:
830:
775:
161:
822:
2114:
1822:
1414:
1302:
What active RfC? Has someone gone to RfC and not provided notice here? Did I miss something? --
1146:
1089:
1009:
791:
222:
853:
767:
758:
657:
485:
464:
2046:
Tomeboy and the Annoyed Librarian are known in library circles, the latter now working for the
141:
409:
51:
24:
1325:
1283:
1110:
How is it that LAEC has a conflict of interest, but you don't as purveyor of Librarian.net?
219:
1275:
849:
2077:
2047:
2038:
2021:
2004:
1987:
1970:
1953:
1115:
1066:
982:
808:
2172:
1693:
1664:
1634:
1483:
1370:
955:
941:
826:
771:
1862:
291:
270:
2188:
2110:
1142:
1085:
1005:
787:
514:
1892:
624:
1877:
630:
1816:
1388:
694:
2073:
1774:
1111:
1062:
978:
804:
620:
491:
386:
1322:
Knowledge (XXG):Requests for comment/Art, architecture, literature, and media
1320:? The notice is at the top of this section, and this discussion is linked at
221:
701:
304:
2180:
2160:
2134:
2118:
2100:
2081:
2059:
1845:
1799:
1715:
1701:
1686:
1672:
1657:
1642:
1625:
1491:
1468:
1378:
1349:
1335:
1311:
1293:
1252:
1215:
1150:
1119:
1093:
1070:
1035:
1013:
986:
963:
949:
923:
895:
834:
812:
795:
779:
513:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the
614:
596:
940:
I have incorporated this new reliable source into the article as well.
644:. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can
1775:
2010 Banned Books Week - Top Ten Banned and Challenged Books for 2009
2151:
There should be something done,because censorship hurts everyone.
1269:
This particular issue does not appear to meet the threshold of
689:
233:
223:
15:
2146:
700:
A fact from this article was featured on Knowledge (XXG)'s
2141:
Stores refusing to carry books by White Wolf Publishing.
160:
1790:
This WSJ article is definitely worth another look. --
2230:
Start-Class United States articles of Low-importance
1616:
issue, and it does have some limited MSM coverage.--
408:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
303:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
174:
1026:. I believe that closes this particular matter. --
1878:'Left' Out - Liberal Censors You Never Hear About
871:NCAC has claimed authorship of the censorship map
33:for general discussion of the article's subject.
1829:
1766:
1431:
656:. To improve this article, please refer to the
753:Parargraph on gay-conversion books controversy
1545:Must be represented in the collection! Must!
422:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Freedom of speech
8:
1459:...." Ex-gays are part of the community. --
237:
652:. To use this banner, please refer to the
591:
459:
354:
265:
2215:Low-importance Freedom of speech articles
2064:This may apply to the Annoyed Librarian:
554:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject United States
1979:'Librarians 'Censor' Statutory Rape Book
1418:, 27 May 2009 (July 1995 interview with
650:discuss matters related to book articles
2290:Selected anniversaries (September 2022)
2285:Selected anniversaries (September 2021)
2280:Selected anniversaries (September 2020)
2275:Selected anniversaries (September 2019)
2270:Selected anniversaries (September 2018)
2265:Selected anniversaries (September 2017)
2260:Selected anniversaries (September 2016)
2255:Selected anniversaries (September 2015)
2250:Selected anniversaries (September 2014)
658:relevant guideline for the type of work
593:
461:
356:
267:
2210:Start-Class Freedom of speech articles
1747:Finding Censorship Where There Is None
425:Template:WikiProject Freedom of speech
2225:Low-importance United States articles
1706:Agree. Thanks for working with me. --
1022:I have added another reference, from
317:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Libraries
7:
2030:Why the OIF Can't be Taken Seriously
1805:Cuba: banned books the ALA overlooks
636:This article is within the scope of
507:This article is within the scope of
402:This article is within the scope of
297:This article is within the scope of
1812:American Library Association Shamed
1406:On the Line for the First Amendment
256:It is of interest to the following
23:for discussing improvements to the
2235:WikiProject United States articles
2220:Start-Class United States articles
2147:http://en.wikipedia.org/White_Wolf
1764:I see, for example, that he says:
557:Template:WikiProject United States
14:
2200:Low-importance Libraries articles
1930:'Banned' Books Week Strikes Again
1851:Tomeboy and the Annoyed Librarian
666:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Books
50:New to Knowledge (XXG)? Welcome!
693:
623:
613:
595:
494:
484:
463:
389:
379:
358:
290:
269:
238:
205:
45:Click here to start a new topic.
574:This article has been rated as
442:This article has been rated as
337:This article has been rated as
2205:WikiProject Libraries articles
2195:Start-Class Libraries articles
2181:19:38, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
1996:Celebrate 'Banned' Books Week!
1631:Knowledge (XXG) is not a forum
320:Template:WikiProject Libraries
1:
2135:03:12, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
2119:02:35, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
2101:16:36, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
2082:16:26, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
2060:02:22, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
1846:01:46, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
1800:01:34, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
1716:22:47, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
1702:20:02, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
1687:15:51, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
1673:15:19, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
1658:15:08, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
1643:14:35, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
1626:07:09, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
1492:06:29, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
1469:05:43, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
1379:05:17, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
1350:19:24, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
1336:19:15, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
1312:18:57, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
1294:18:49, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
1253:03:46, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
1216:03:41, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
1151:02:52, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
1120:02:07, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
1094:01:08, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
1071:00:00, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
1036:22:41, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
1014:22:38, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
987:20:56, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
964:20:02, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
950:19:52, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
924:18:34, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
896:18:29, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
835:14:47, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
813:13:50, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
796:12:52, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
780:08:14, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
416:and see a list of open tasks.
405:WikiProject Freedom of speech
311:and see a list of open tasks.
42:Put new text under old text.
2013:ALA Asks The Wrong Questions
1780:American Library Association
1393:American Library Association
2127:LegitimateAndEvenCompelling
2093:LegitimateAndEvenCompelling
2052:LegitimateAndEvenCompelling
1838:LegitimateAndEvenCompelling
1792:LegitimateAndEvenCompelling
1757:, 24 September 2009, p.W13.
1708:LegitimateAndEvenCompelling
1679:LegitimateAndEvenCompelling
1650:LegitimateAndEvenCompelling
1618:LegitimateAndEvenCompelling
1461:LegitimateAndEvenCompelling
1342:LegitimateAndEvenCompelling
1304:LegitimateAndEvenCompelling
1245:LegitimateAndEvenCompelling
1208:LegitimateAndEvenCompelling
1028:LegitimateAndEvenCompelling
916:LegitimateAndEvenCompelling
888:LegitimateAndEvenCompelling
2306:
2245:WikiProject Books articles
1962:'Some 'Censorship' is Good
1893:You Gotta Buy'em to Ban'em
669:Template:WikiProject Books
580:project's importance scale
448:project's importance scale
428:Freedom of speech articles
343:project's importance scale
2240:Start-Class Book articles
2166:Excessive usage of quotes
2161:02:29, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
608:
573:
510:WikiProject United States
479:
441:
374:
336:
285:
264:
80:Be welcoming to newcomers
515:United States of America
397:Freedom of speech portal
1915:The ALA Celebrates BBW!
1945:'Censors' Are So Scary
1834:
1787:, 24 September 2010.
1771:
1740:WSJ worth another look
1436:
560:United States articles
246:This article is rated
75:avoid personal attacks
821:It is a violation of
757:Is it a violation of
300:WikiProject Libraries
250:on Knowledge (XXG)'s
199:Auto-archiving period
100:Neutral point of view
2008:, 30 September 2009.
1940:, 29 September 2008.
1206:times, I believe. --
502:United States portal
105:No original research
1991:, 23 February 2009.
1755:Wall Street Journal
1024:The Washington Post
910:Further evidence: "
528:Articles Requested!
1823:Laurel Leader-Call
1415:American Libraries
744:September 18, 2022
740:September 26, 2021
736:September 27, 2020
732:September 22, 2019
728:September 23, 2018
724:September 24, 2017
720:September 25, 2016
716:September 27, 2015
712:September 21, 2014
323:Libraries articles
252:content assessment
86:dispute resolution
47:
2042:, 6 October 2010.
2034:Annoyed Librarian
2017:Annoyed Librarian
2000:Annoyed Librarian
1983:Annoyed Librarian
1974:, 8 October 2008.
1966:Annoyed Librarian
1957:, 6 October 2008.
1949:Annoyed Librarian
1938:Annoyed Librarian
1934:Annoyed Librarian
1925:, 1 October 2007.
1923:Annoyed Librarian
1919:Annoyed Librarian
1908:Annoyed Librarian
1457:all the community
1334:
1292:
750:
749:
688:
687:
684:
683:
680:
679:
640:WikiProject Books
590:
589:
586:
585:
458:
457:
454:
453:
419:Freedom of speech
410:Freedom of speech
366:Freedom of speech
353:
352:
349:
348:
230:
229:
66:Assume good faith
43:
25:Banned Books Week
2297:
2025:, 15 March 2010.
1445:Interesting, no?
1410:Beverly Goldberg
1328:
1286:
1282:replacing it. -
869:By the way, the
697:
690:
674:
673:
670:
667:
664:
646:join the project
633:
628:
627:
617:
610:
609:
599:
592:
562:
561:
558:
555:
552:
504:
499:
498:
497:
488:
481:
480:
475:
467:
460:
430:
429:
426:
423:
420:
399:
394:
393:
392:
383:
376:
375:
370:
362:
355:
325:
324:
321:
318:
315:
294:
287:
286:
281:
273:
266:
249:
243:
242:
234:
224:
210:
209:
200:
179:
178:
164:
95:Article policies
16:
2305:
2304:
2300:
2299:
2298:
2296:
2295:
2294:
2185:
2184:
2168:
2143:
2048:Library Journal
2039:Library Journal
2022:Library Journal
2005:Library Journal
1988:Library Journal
1971:Library Journal
1954:Library Journal
1910:
1858:
1853:
1826:, 2 March 2007.
1807:
1742:
755:
671:
668:
665:
662:
661:
629:
622:
559:
556:
553:
550:
549:
548:
534:Become a Member
500:
495:
493:
473:
427:
424:
421:
418:
417:
395:
390:
388:
368:
322:
319:
316:
313:
312:
279:
247:
226:
225:
220:
197:
121:
116:
115:
114:
91:
61:
12:
11:
5:
2303:
2301:
2293:
2292:
2287:
2282:
2277:
2272:
2267:
2262:
2257:
2252:
2247:
2242:
2237:
2232:
2227:
2222:
2217:
2212:
2207:
2202:
2197:
2187:
2186:
2167:
2164:
2142:
2139:
2138:
2137:
2106:
2105:
2104:
2103:
2085:
2084:
2044:
2043:
2026:
2009:
1992:
1975:
1958:
1941:
1926:
1909:
1906:
1905:
1904:
1889:
1874:
1857:
1854:
1852:
1849:
1828:
1827:
1806:
1803:
1759:
1758:
1751:Mitchell Muncy
1741:
1738:
1737:
1736:
1735:
1734:
1733:
1732:
1731:
1730:
1729:
1728:
1727:
1726:
1725:
1724:
1723:
1722:
1721:
1720:
1719:
1718:
1606:
1605:
1604:
1603:
1602:
1601:
1600:
1599:
1588:
1587:
1586:
1585:
1584:
1583:
1582:
1581:
1570:
1569:
1568:
1567:
1566:
1565:
1564:
1563:
1553:
1552:
1551:
1550:
1549:
1548:
1547:
1546:
1535:
1534:
1533:
1532:
1531:
1530:
1529:
1528:
1517:
1516:
1515:
1514:
1513:
1512:
1511:
1510:
1499:
1498:
1497:
1496:
1495:
1494:
1474:
1473:
1472:
1471:
1449:
1448:
1447:
1446:
1440:
1439:
1438:
1437:
1426:
1425:
1424:
1423:
1399:
1398:
1397:
1396:
1382:
1381:
1361:
1359:
1358:
1357:
1356:
1355:
1354:
1353:
1352:
1315:
1314:
1297:
1296:
1266:
1265:
1264:
1263:
1262:
1261:
1260:
1259:
1258:
1257:
1256:
1255:
1229:
1228:
1227:
1226:
1225:
1224:
1223:
1222:
1221:
1220:
1219:
1218:
1192:
1191:
1190:
1189:
1188:
1187:
1186:
1185:
1184:
1183:
1182:
1181:
1162:
1161:
1160:
1159:
1158:
1157:
1156:
1155:
1154:
1153:
1129:
1128:
1127:
1126:
1125:
1124:
1123:
1122:
1101:
1100:
1099:
1098:
1097:
1096:
1076:
1075:
1074:
1073:
1055:
1054:
1053:
1052:
1041:
1040:
1039:
1038:
1017:
1016:
1001:
1000:
995:
994:
975:
973:
972:
971:
970:
969:
968:
967:
966:
952:
931:
930:
929:
928:
927:
926:
903:
902:
901:
900:
899:
898:
879:
878:
877:
876:
875:
874:
862:
861:
860:
859:
858:
857:
840:
839:
838:
837:
816:
815:
799:
798:
765:
754:
751:
748:
747:
698:
686:
685:
682:
681:
678:
677:
675:
635:
634:
618:
606:
605:
600:
588:
587:
584:
583:
576:Low-importance
572:
566:
565:
563:
547:
546:
541:
536:
531:
524:
522:Template Usage
518:
506:
505:
489:
477:
476:
474:Low‑importance
468:
456:
455:
452:
451:
444:Low-importance
440:
434:
433:
431:
414:the discussion
401:
400:
384:
372:
371:
369:Low‑importance
363:
351:
350:
347:
346:
339:Low-importance
335:
329:
328:
326:
309:the discussion
295:
283:
282:
280:Low‑importance
274:
262:
261:
255:
244:
228:
227:
218:
216:
215:
212:
211:
181:
180:
118:
117:
113:
112:
107:
102:
93:
92:
90:
89:
82:
77:
68:
62:
60:
59:
48:
39:
38:
35:
34:
28:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2302:
2291:
2288:
2286:
2283:
2281:
2278:
2276:
2273:
2271:
2268:
2266:
2263:
2261:
2258:
2256:
2253:
2251:
2248:
2246:
2243:
2241:
2238:
2236:
2233:
2231:
2228:
2226:
2223:
2221:
2218:
2216:
2213:
2211:
2208:
2206:
2203:
2201:
2198:
2196:
2193:
2192:
2190:
2183:
2182:
2178:
2174:
2165:
2163:
2162:
2158:
2154:
2153:Werewolffan98
2149:
2148:
2140:
2136:
2132:
2128:
2123:
2122:
2121:
2120:
2116:
2112:
2102:
2098:
2094:
2089:
2088:
2087:
2086:
2083:
2079:
2075:
2071:
2070:
2069:
2067:
2062:
2061:
2057:
2053:
2049:
2041:
2040:
2035:
2031:
2027:
2024:
2023:
2018:
2014:
2010:
2007:
2006:
2001:
1997:
1993:
1990:
1989:
1984:
1980:
1976:
1973:
1972:
1967:
1963:
1959:
1956:
1955:
1950:
1946:
1942:
1939:
1935:
1931:
1927:
1924:
1920:
1916:
1912:
1911:
1907:
1902:
1898:
1894:
1890:
1887:
1883:
1879:
1875:
1872:
1868:
1864:
1860:
1859:
1855:
1850:
1848:
1847:
1843:
1839:
1833:
1825:
1824:
1819:
1818:
1813:
1809:
1808:
1804:
1802:
1801:
1797:
1793:
1788:
1786:
1782:
1781:
1776:
1770:
1765:
1762:
1756:
1752:
1748:
1744:
1743:
1739:
1717:
1713:
1709:
1705:
1704:
1703:
1699:
1695:
1690:
1689:
1688:
1684:
1680:
1676:
1675:
1674:
1670:
1666:
1661:
1660:
1659:
1655:
1651:
1646:
1645:
1644:
1640:
1636:
1632:
1629:
1628:
1627:
1623:
1619:
1614:
1613:
1612:
1611:
1610:
1609:
1608:
1607:
1596:
1595:
1594:
1593:
1592:
1591:
1590:
1589:
1578:
1577:
1576:
1575:
1574:
1573:
1572:
1571:
1561:
1560:
1559:
1558:
1557:
1556:
1555:
1554:
1543:
1542:
1541:
1540:
1539:
1538:
1537:
1536:
1525:
1524:
1523:
1522:
1521:
1520:
1519:
1518:
1507:
1506:
1505:
1504:
1503:
1502:
1501:
1500:
1493:
1489:
1485:
1480:
1479:
1478:
1477:
1476:
1475:
1470:
1466:
1462:
1458:
1453:
1452:
1451:
1450:
1444:
1443:
1442:
1441:
1435:
1430:
1429:
1428:
1427:
1421:
1417:
1416:
1411:
1407:
1403:
1402:
1401:
1400:
1394:
1390:
1386:
1385:
1384:
1383:
1380:
1376:
1372:
1367:
1364:
1363:
1362:
1351:
1347:
1343:
1339:
1338:
1337:
1332:
1327:
1323:
1319:
1318:
1317:
1316:
1313:
1309:
1305:
1301:
1300:
1299:
1298:
1295:
1290:
1285:
1281:
1277:
1272:
1268:
1267:
1254:
1250:
1246:
1241:
1240:
1239:
1238:
1237:
1236:
1235:
1234:
1233:
1232:
1231:
1230:
1217:
1213:
1209:
1204:
1203:
1202:
1201:
1200:
1199:
1198:
1197:
1196:
1195:
1194:
1193:
1179:
1174:
1173:
1172:
1171:
1170:
1169:
1168:
1167:
1166:
1165:
1164:
1163:
1152:
1148:
1144:
1139:
1138:
1137:
1136:
1135:
1134:
1133:
1132:
1131:
1130:
1121:
1117:
1113:
1109:
1108:
1107:
1106:
1105:
1104:
1103:
1102:
1095:
1091:
1087:
1082:
1081:
1080:
1079:
1078:
1077:
1072:
1068:
1064:
1059:
1058:
1057:
1056:
1050:
1045:
1044:
1043:
1042:
1037:
1033:
1029:
1025:
1021:
1020:
1019:
1018:
1015:
1011:
1007:
1003:
1002:
997:
996:
991:
990:
989:
988:
984:
980:
965:
961:
957:
953:
951:
947:
943:
939:
938:
937:
936:
935:
934:
933:
932:
925:
921:
917:
913:
909:
908:
907:
906:
905:
904:
897:
893:
889:
885:
884:
883:
882:
881:
880:
872:
868:
867:
866:
865:
864:
863:
855:
851:
846:
845:
844:
843:
842:
841:
836:
832:
828:
824:
820:
819:
818:
817:
814:
810:
806:
801:
800:
797:
793:
789:
784:
783:
782:
781:
777:
773:
769:
763:
760:
752:
745:
741:
737:
733:
729:
725:
721:
717:
713:
709:
708:
703:
699:
696:
692:
691:
676:
672:Book articles
659:
655:
654:documentation
651:
647:
643:
642:
641:
632:
626:
621:
619:
616:
612:
611:
607:
604:
601:
598:
594:
581:
577:
571:
568:
567:
564:
551:United States
545:
542:
540:
537:
535:
532:
530:
529:
525:
523:
520:
519:
516:
512:
511:
503:
492:
490:
487:
483:
482:
478:
472:
471:United States
469:
466:
462:
449:
445:
439:
436:
435:
432:
415:
411:
407:
406:
398:
387:
385:
382:
378:
377:
373:
367:
364:
361:
357:
344:
340:
334:
331:
330:
327:
310:
306:
302:
301:
296:
293:
289:
288:
284:
278:
275:
272:
268:
263:
259:
253:
245:
241:
236:
235:
232:
214:
213:
208:
204:
196:
192:
189:
187:
183:
182:
177:
173:
170:
167:
163:
159:
155:
152:
149:
146:
143:
140:
137:
134:
131:
127:
124:
123:Find sources:
120:
119:
111:
110:Verifiability
108:
106:
103:
101:
98:
97:
96:
87:
83:
81:
78:
76:
72:
69:
67:
64:
63:
57:
53:
52:Learn to edit
49:
46:
41:
40:
37:
36:
32:
26:
22:
18:
17:
2169:
2150:
2144:
2107:
2063:
2045:
2037:
2033:
2020:
2016:
2003:
1999:
1986:
1982:
1969:
1965:
1952:
1948:
1937:
1933:
1922:
1918:
1900:
1896:
1885:
1881:
1870:
1866:
1835:
1830:
1821:
1815:
1789:
1784:
1778:
1772:
1767:
1763:
1760:
1456:
1432:
1419:
1413:
1409:
1365:
1360:
1279:
1048:
974:
764:
756:
705:
638:
637:
631:Books portal
575:
539:Project Talk
527:
508:
443:
403:
338:
298:
258:WikiProjects
231:
202:
184:
171:
165:
157:
150:
144:
138:
132:
122:
94:
19:This is the
2066:WP:NEWSBLOG
1817:Nat Hentoff
1420:Judith Krug
1389:Judith Krug
856:against me.
710:section on
707:On this day
248:Start-class
148:free images
31:not a forum
2189:Categories
1903:, undated.
1888:, undated.
1873:, undated.
1178:WP:SOAPBOX
2173:Elizium23
1694:Roscelese
1665:Roscelese
1635:Roscelese
1484:Roscelese
1371:Roscelese
1276:consensus
1271:relevance
956:Hipocrite
942:Hipocrite
827:Hipocrite
823:WP:OUTING
772:Hipocrite
702:Main Page
314:Libraries
305:Libraries
277:Libraries
88:if needed
71:Be polite
21:talk page
2111:Jessamyn
1580:banning!
1366:Comment.
1143:Jessamyn
1086:Jessamyn
1006:AtticusX
854:WP:STALK
788:AtticusX
768:WP:UNDUE
759:WP:UNDUE
203:300Â days
186:Archives
56:get help
29:This is
27:article.
1901:Tomeboy
1897:Tomeboy
1886:Tomeboy
1882:Tomeboy
1871:Tomeboy
1867:Tomeboy
1856:Tomeboy
1785:OIFTube
1391:of the
1049:overall
704:in the
578:on the
446:on the
341:on the
154:WPÂ refs
142:scholar
2032:," by
2015:," by
1998:," by
1981:," by
1964:," by
1947:," by
1932:," by
1917:," by
1895:," by
1880:," by
1865:," by
1814:," by
1777:," by
1749:," by
1408:," by
1280:before
850:WP:COI
742:, and
544:Alerts
254:scale.
126:Google
2074:Drrll
1832:read.
1331:cont.
1289:cont.
1278:here
1112:Drrll
1063:Drrll
979:Drrll
914:." --
805:Drrll
663:Books
603:Books
169:JSTOR
130:books
84:Seek
2177:talk
2157:talk
2131:talk
2115:talk
2097:talk
2078:talk
2056:talk
2050:. --
1842:talk
1796:talk
1712:talk
1698:talk
1683:talk
1669:talk
1654:talk
1639:talk
1622:talk
1488:talk
1465:talk
1375:talk
1346:talk
1324:. -
1308:talk
1249:talk
1212:talk
1147:talk
1116:talk
1090:talk
1067:talk
1032:talk
1010:talk
983:talk
960:talk
946:talk
920:talk
892:talk
831:talk
809:talk
792:talk
776:talk
648:and
162:FENS
136:news
73:and
1326:2/0
1284:2/0
570:Low
438:Low
333:Low
176:TWL
2191::
2179:)
2159:)
2133:)
2125:--
2117:)
2099:)
2080:)
2068:.
2058:)
2036:,
2019:,
2002:,
1985:,
1968:,
1951:,
1936:,
1921:,
1899:,
1884:,
1869:,
1844:)
1836:--
1820:,
1798:)
1783:,
1753:,
1714:)
1700:)
1685:)
1671:)
1656:)
1641:)
1624:)
1490:)
1467:)
1422:).
1412:,
1377:)
1348:)
1310:)
1251:)
1243:--
1214:)
1149:)
1118:)
1092:)
1069:)
1034:)
1012:)
985:)
962:)
948:)
922:)
894:)
833:)
811:)
794:)
778:)
738:,
734:,
730:,
726:,
722:,
718:,
714:,
201::
193:,
156:)
54:;
2175:(
2155:(
2129:(
2113:(
2095:(
2076:(
2054:(
2028:"
2011:"
1994:"
1977:"
1960:"
1943:"
1928:"
1913:"
1891:"
1876:"
1861:"
1840:(
1810:"
1794:(
1745:"
1710:(
1696:(
1681:(
1667:(
1652:(
1637:(
1620:(
1486:(
1463:(
1404:"
1373:(
1344:(
1333:)
1329:(
1306:(
1291:)
1287:(
1247:(
1210:(
1145:(
1114:(
1088:(
1065:(
1030:(
1008:(
981:(
958:(
944:(
918:(
890:(
829:(
807:(
790:(
774:(
746:.
660:.
582:.
450:.
345:.
260::
195:2
191:1
188::
172:·
166:·
158:·
151:·
145:·
139:·
133:·
128:(
58:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
