Talk:Operation Rescue (Kansas)

message: I have removed the  tags from the article for several reasons. First, as the tag refers to, there should be a discussion on the talk page about why the tags were added. If there's a feeling that the page is biased, an explanation of those views should be added on this page. Second, it is not necessary to use multiple  tags on a page, one will suffice. If anyone feels they should be re-added, do so only after offering an rationale for why on this talk page. Thanks. --MZMcBride 03:37, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal of {{tl|NPOV}} tags

message: For what it is worth I surfed into this Wikapedia "Operation Rescue" article while researching another matter and supplied a reference as an edit to the loss of tax exempt status.  That is an article in the New York Times which makes no references to money laundering.  A thorough Google search reveals that all references to money laundering at least from the internet are credited to this Wikapedia article or a document called "The Newman Report" available from maggotpunks.com for $10.00.  The Maggotpunks are hardly an unbiased source.  An excerpt from thier mission statement on thier homepage proclaims that they are athiests pro choice and are actively fighting the groups bombing clinics and killing doctors:
:"The purpose of the Maggot Punks is to preserve reproductive freedoms, maintain the absolute separation of state and church, oppose the proliferation of creationism, put religious terrorists in prison, catalogue the crimes and actions of fundy fanatics, work with other progressive organizations to increase their effectiveness in promote positive social change."
While this being the only source casts doubt, it does not disprove that money laundering took place.  I am not recomending deletion or anything. Just asking, "Where is the reliable research?"
D.S. Khalsa Pocatello Idaho Dec 25,2006
:If you have the article, I suggest that you put in information from that article and delete what you can't find evidence for there. WP:BB; statements that can't be verified are un-Wikipedian. See WP:V. --Alvestrand 02:34, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: lack of creditable references

message: obviously well sourced information doesn't work, i was posting further terrorist incidents to this page that were backed by well over ten sources in the MSM.  Please see my user comments on the user page for further info, i was only now directed to this page.
All POV references of "Pro-Life" are going.  there is no negotiation on this.  "Pro-Life" is quite clearly a propaganda term from people who don't give a damn about the living.  Anti-Choice is a proper description of their stated beliefs, and actions.  Anti-Choice is also neutral in that it doesn't attribute anything to the group other than what it openly and publically states itself.  "Pro-Life" is inappropriate usage, and pure POV, these people are not pro-life in any form or fashion, other than their own.
I'm a bit peeved about posting well-sourced information repeatedly, and watching some Jihadist (if the sh*t fits, wear it) delete it repeatedly.
People wanna play the POV game, well, I contest the use of "Pro-Life" as being pure POV and only used as a term for political and religious propaganda purposes, because it bears no semblance to their actual beliefs when it comes to the living.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.41.69.113 (talk) 02:17, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please sign your comments. "Anti-Choice" is also not a descriptive term. I have substituted "anti-abortion" for "pro-life" as that properly describes their form of advocacy. Your wordy pontificating and name-calling here is not appreciated and is not helpful. Mike Doughney (talk) 02:22, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

text: *The problem is that you are writing inherently POV text, and you are not providing any links to sources to back up anything you say.  I could see a section in this article about terroristic activities of Operation Rescue, but you just write things like "(SF Examiner)" which tells us nothing.  "Anti-choice" is a POV term.  Like it or not, the word wars on this issue ended long ago and "Pro-choice" and "Pro-life" won the day.  Like it or not.  Wikipedia is not the place to re-fight this war, although you are welcome to expand the terminology section on the political framing article, although it is already covered on the pro-choice and pro-life articles.  --David Shankbone 02:27, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: further response

message: This article is confused and should be rewritten.
The first sentence ought to clearly introduce the topic.  Instead, it reads:
Operation Rescue (formerly Operation Rescue West) is a pro-life group and offshoot of Operation Rescue, a group now known as Operation Rescue/Operation Save America
Say, what?  That's completely inscrutable.  Core of this sentence is, Operation Rescue... is an offshoot of Operation Rescue... which makes no sense and the rest of it doesn't help either.
The first section is labeled Operation Rescue West, so one might think it would start with a description or definition of Operation Rescue West.  No such luck.  It starts thus:
Operation Rescue was founded by Randall Terry in the late 1980s.
Wait a minute, isn't that the other organization? What are we talking about, here?
There's a second section labeled *Operation Rescue* which duplicates some of the first section.  Sentence from section 1 Operation Rescue West:
In 2002, Newman moved the headquarters to Wichita, Kansas, to focus its efforts on George Tiller and in 2002 dropped the “West” from its moniker.
Sentence from section 2 Operation Rescue:
In 2002, Newman moved his Operation Rescue West headquarters to Wichita, Kansas, to focus its efforts on abortion provider George Tiller, and dropped the "West" from its moniker.
Once again, the section header and group names don't match.  And what are we doing with a section called Operation Rescue anyway in an article with the same name?  The whole article is about it, we don't need a section named that, too.  
Maybe the two sections should be renamed with their from-to dates or something, or maybe "the California group" and "the Wichita group" or whatever makes it clear to the reader.
Given the multiple organizations with confusingly similar names, some attention to a brief timeline history or box carefully delineating name changes or splitting off of groups would be helpful to put the rest of the article in context.
These comments refer to version 192138731 of 17 Feb 2008. Mathglot (talk) 07:41, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's an improvement, for the most part. However, I think the article becomes a little unbalanced with that much negative information (in proportion with the positive). That could, however, be combated with some more neutral information on the subject. Note that I had no prior knowledge of this incident, so take my words with a grain of salt. hmwithτ 21:30, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I mainly rearranged existing material.  If the existing material was POV; I understand, but please don't make this out to be a situation where I skewed the article.  What sort of additions do you feel it needs?  Whatever404 (talk) 11:03, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It looked like there was just a lot of negative information in the article, but, upon further examination, I realized that it was okay. I think your changes were definitely positive. Apologies, hmwithτ 17:53, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: needs rewrite

message: I have rewritten the article.  I moved much of the information duplicated at Operation Rescue (Kansas) and Operation Save America and painstakingly interleaved the material into one coherent whole, found at History of Operation Rescue.  I also attempted to sift through the remaining material and place it at one of the three appropriate places.  Comments are welcome.  Whatever404 (talk) 18:35, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's an improvement, for the most part. However, I think the article becomes a little unbalanced with that much negative information (in proportion with the positive). That could, however, be combated with some more neutral information on the subject. Note that I had no prior knowledge of this incident, so take my words with a grain of salt. hmwithτ 21:30, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I mainly rearranged existing material.  If the existing material was POV; I understand, but please don't make this out to be a situation where I skewed the article.  What sort of additions do you feel it needs?  Whatever404 (talk) 11:03, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It looked like there was just a lot of negative information in the article, but, upon further examination, I realized that it was okay. I think your changes were definitely positive. Apologies, hmwithτ 17:53, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Rewrite

message: Operation Rescue's URL as listed is unreachable 403 error.Magnum Serpentine (talk) 22:24, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Operation Rescue website unreachable 

message: The recent edit [] by  has me a little confused. The edit says "according to documents at the Sedgwick County Register of Deeds office, Alison White, purchased the building formerly housing Central Women's Services, an abortion clinic in Wichita, Kansas. White donated the former clinic to her father's anti-abortion organization, Survivors of the Abortion Holocaust.", but the cited documents appear to be from Cuyahoga County, Ohio and Orange County, California and list Cradles of Love as the receiver of the property. The documents, however, seem to be legitimate. Although the Flickr source is certainly not reliable here.—C45207 | Talk 05:03, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  68.103.121.70's recent edit re: Alison White 

message: In 2009 why did this organization make a self-confessed woman hater their person of the year?
What next, celebrations for rapists?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.173.194.31 (talk) 17:09, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  so 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Operation Rescue (Kansas). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081127021753/http://www.prochoice.org/about_abortion/facts/face_act.html to http://www.prochoice.org/about_abortion/facts/face_act.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110708124709/http://www.cbs42.com/content/localnews/story/Planned-Parenthood-Caught-Breaking-the-Law/C41MzG-1vU-u0KRpHkAl3A.cspx to http://www.cbs42.com/content/localnews/story/Planned-Parenthood-Caught-Breaking-the-Law/C41MzG-1vU-u0KRpHkAl3A.cspx
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090215145024/http://www.operationrescue.org:80/three-statements-concerning-randall-terrys-unbiblical-lawsuit-against-troy-newman/ to http://www.operationrescue.org/three-statements-concerning-randall-terrys-unbiblical-lawsuit-against-troy-newman/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070519024628/http://www.irs.gov:80/charities/charitable/article/0,,id=141466,00.html to http://www.irs.gov/charities/charitable/article/0,,id=141466,00.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:51, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Operation Rescue (Kansas). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090213052333/http://www.operationrescue.org:80/background-history-of-the-notorious-clinic-medica-para-la-mujer-de-hoy-abortion-chain/ to http://www.operationrescue.org/background-history-of-the-notorious-clinic-medica-para-la-mujer-de-hoy-abortion-chain/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:20, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Operation Rescue (Kansas). 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/20090608010802/http://www.holysmoke.org/fem/fem0249.htm to http://www.holysmoke.org/fem/fem0249.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081223225034/http://www.courttv.com/trials/kopp/index.html to http://www.courttv.com/trials/kopp/index.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:29, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: The original edits and contributions to this article were entirely accurate and historically relevant.  I have recently noticed that all of this material was removed and in all likelihood merged into daughter articles.  This makes it seem, according to this current version, that the group had no major history prior to the 2000s.  This is entirely irresponsible from an editorial POV and is yet another example of whitewashing.  This group made a name for itself in the 1980s due to their extremist and horrendous violent acts.  I will be restoring this material and fixing the timeline. Viriditas (talk) 21:52, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historical revisionism