Talk:Anti-pornography movement in the United States

This is a very interesting sub-ext to the anti-pornography argument. If there are false groups out there, then why? What is their purpose. I have added an example of a false anti-pornography group to this article.

"In November of 2006 a mysterious group that launched Scottsdale's latest porn controversy has no known members and likely does not exist, those following the story said.^[1] The Northeast Valley Coalition Against Pornography raised eyebrows in north Scottsdale, Arizona, by distributing a flier warning of the impending move of Kevin and Sandra Otterson, a married couple known to their Internet fans as "Hubby" and "Wifey" from the hard-core Web site Wifey's World to a Scottsdale neighborhood. The flier listed no contact information, and several community leaders said they had never heard of the group. Otterson bought property in the upscale Ancala subdivision in March 2006. The lot in the 12800 block of North 119th Street has a cash value of $353,500, according to the Maricopa County Assessor's Office.^[2]" Republic of Texas (talk) 20:37, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

And I have reverted it again. There is nothing of substance here, just a "mysterious group" "with no known members and likely does not exist." That is not worth including in any article, let alone this one. The only substance is that someone wrote a flier, and you want to turn that into something as important as Supreme Court decisions?! Please read WP:UNDUE. The other details appear to be a violation of WP:BLP. Please, if there is any reason to include this "information" in the article, build a consensus for it before re-adding it. The questions you ask at the beginning of your note sound like original research, which isn't allowed on Wikipedia. -Phoenixrod (talk) 00:02, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

The fact that false anti-pornography movements exist is, I believe, a significant issue. This is similar to 'false-flag' operations conducted by governments / military, and political groups. (Check out the link!) People do those things to try to discredit an organization or movement. The example that I used - and cited - was the best example that I could find that was well documented and well sourced. The false anti-porn group tried to use the example of diminishing property values as a reason to run those 2 people out of the neighborhood. The link I provided to the property tax office proves that this is not the case, that property values actually increased - and increased greatly, and that the recent reduction in property values was simply the result of the downturn in the housing market as a whole, not something that was the fault of these two people moving into the neighborhood and making porn in their house. Since I cannot use 'original research' I had to provide links to the relevant newspaper articles and tax records to prove this up.

If someone can come up with a better example of a false flag operation in the anti-pornography movement, by all means, list it. But this was the best documented - and sourced - example that I could find. It doesn't do any good to talk about false flag operations in the anti-pornography movement if you cannot provide actual examples of such a thing. Republic of Texas (talk) 17:57, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

I've replied on your talk page. For other editors reading here, the relevant parts are these: I believe the edit I reverted violated the synthesis part of WP:OR by reaching a conclusion about false anti-pornography groups that the sources did not support. If better example exist, then great, add them. But at this time, I don't see significant coverage in secondary sources about the concept. Maybe that will change in the future. -Phoenixrod (talk) 02:44, 11 August 2010 (UTC)