Talk:The Dove Foundation

message: The verifiability of the comments of Rolfe may be controversial.  But his address is listed in the financial forms on the organization's web site, and his phone number is in the phone book.  So anyone can call him up.  When I called him he was quite forthright about how the system operates.
Ccrrccrr 03:27, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I think official comments from the Dove Foundation should be an important part of this article, but they must be done as part of a neutral point of view. The best way to do that is through attribution and contrast, e.g., "Although many have criticised the Foundation for its automated calling program, the foundation itself maintains that it is designed to measure the attitudes of Americans", etc.
:I like this approach.Ccrrccrr 13:41, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that integrating these makes sense.  A phrase like you proposed above, "The Foundation itself maintains...", could easily go in here.Ccrrccrr 13:45, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm not convinced that this is short enough to meet the criteria (see specifically this paragraph WP:Fair_Use#Text).  But we could put it up and then request review by the experts, as suggested on the fair use page.Ccrrccrr 13:54, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm fine with that. Dick, any thoughts? Vectro 17:57, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Official POV 

message: The opinion poll and call center operations are one and the same, and should not have separate sections. Perhaps we can add the opinion poll link as a reference, like so:
==Call Center Operations==
The organization conducts a survey by telephone and internet , which has generated controvery
for several reasons: Firstly, the methodology and results of its
survey findings are accused of strong sampling bias,
as call recipients are only invited to participate in the survey if their answers to initial
screening questions show they generally agree with the Foundation's positions Secondly, they have been found guilty of using the telephone
survey as a ruse to sidestep the Do-Not-Call Implementation Act and help a partner sell products.  
Comments? Vectro 12:24, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that integrating these makes sense.  A phrase like you proposed above, "The Foundation itself maintains...", could easily go in here.Ccrrccrr 13:45, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opinion Poll, Telemarketing, or Call Center? 

message: Although the poll does not, in fact, demonstrate that "millions of families would like to see more wholesome movies, without explicit portrayals of sex, violence and profanity" (because of its lack of  statistical validity), I think there is room for an official take on the calling program in this article. I suggest something like the following: "Although the survey results may not be  statistically valid, many respondants do indicate that they would like to see more wholesome movies, without explicit portrayals of sex, violence and profanity." Comments? Vectro 12:24, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: "Millions of families"

message: We can use the official survey result text under fair use. If we do that, however, the fair use explanation must be clearly noted as a comment in the article source (which I failed to do), and the original text preserved and clearly demarced. I think that adding the official survey results, preceeded by a note about the survey's reliability, can improve the article. Comments? Vectro 12:24, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not convinced that this is short enough to meet the criteria (see specifically this paragraph WP:Fair_Use#Text).  But we could put it up and then request review by the experts, as suggested on the fair use page.Ccrrccrr 13:54, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm fine with that. Dick, any thoughts? Vectro 17:57, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Official survey results 

message: This tidbit may or may not be true, but it doesn't really belong in this article. I could see adding it under the "quotes" section, but it probably really belongs (properly attributed) in Motion Picture Rating System. I should point out that the current US rating regime has only been around since 1968, so if this quote is added in a factual context to any article, it should probably be verified. Vectro 12:24, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  12 times more R than G 

message: :Image:Dovefoundation.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 07:48, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Dovefoundation.gif

message: The word "affiliation" does not accurately describe the association between Dove and Feature Films for Families. When one organization hires another, there is no membership or "branch" relationship implied. It's like hiring an accountant to do your taxes. You wouldn't say that you're "affiliated" with that accountant. The word "association" is more accurate. Finz7 (talk) 23:26, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: (I moved the above comment here and added the section title hoping to help keep things findable here.)Ccrrccrr (talk) 01:22, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

text: I'm not sure whether the relationship between two entities who conspire to break a law is better described by "affiliation" or by "association", but I'm happy to leave it as "association".  I think it would be of interest to have some source cited that describes the relationship as Dove hiring FFFF.  Finz7, if you have a reference for that it might be of interest. From my reading of the press on the lawsuit it doesn't sound like the relationship was that simple. Ccrrccrr (talk) 01:22, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relationship to FFFF 

message: I just got a "survey" call from Feature Films For Families.  Dunno if it's still being done by the Dove Foundation, but the FFFF "survey" is still going on in the US. --Dan Wylie-Sears 2 (talk) 13:54, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Phone survey ended in 07?