Talk:Robert Sirico

WP:BLP

Per WP:BLP potentially defamatory material about a living person must be sourced to reliable and verifiable sources. Articles must be written in a neutral point of view. Any statements or material which violates these policies may be removed by any editor. Edison 19:28, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

I added an Unreferenced template because none of the apparent links in the article lead to actual articles related to the subject. All but the last just lead to the present issue of the news source. The last one is broken (CBS) but perhaps the link could be found on a mirror source. Edison 19:32, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Scathing

I don't understand something here: someone had submitted a scathing entry for Sirico, some of which was true. Is the truth according to wiki just a matter of who types loudest/most frequently? Do people know that he's got a whole crew of paid staff that just sit around waiting for his entry to change on here? They won't let the truth get out about his past,. I think that runs counter to the wiki ethos. He's got the money and the staff to monitor his entry. People give this guy money all the time thinking that he's walked a particular path in life when the reality is very different. discredits this whole thing. 01:37, 29 August 2006 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Toadie3000 (talk • contribs)

The Truth

Here is the link I'm trying to post - catholic priest exposed as alleged homosexual In an open letter to a Vatican official, writer Randy Engel claims that Rev. Robert Sirico of Michigan has a history of supporting gay rights, but actually officiated at a gay marriage. Tuesday, February 13, 2007 By Randy Engel

http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:0Ow6xzNHlfAJ:www.speroforum.com/site/article.asp%3FidCategory%3D34%26idsub%3D172%26id%3D7936%26t%3DCatholic%2Bpriest%2Bexposed%2Bas%2Balleged%2Bhomosexual+first+gay+marriage+sirico&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&client=firefox-a

I'm not sure how, but I must have made a boo boo in the HTML somewhere.

I know this man and yes, this information here is true. This letter is official and can be verified by contacting the diocese. I believe the truth should be told before he takes advantage of anyone else. Would someone please be kind enough to help me fix the reference? Thanks -Konned in Kalamazoo — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.110.249.102 (talk • contribs) 05:46, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Original research, etc.

Okay, I just removed a large addition made within the last twenty-four hours. I removed it because it makes assertions that seem to me to be making a case--that is, pushing a point-of-view--rather than simply relaying verifiable, notable, encyclopedic information. The addition--found below in its entirety--clearly fails to meet WP:V, WP:RS, WP:NOR, WP:NPOV, and therefore WP:BLP. It is also largely a direct copy of one of the cited sources ([1]), which means that there may be a copyright violation issue as well. Please see my intratextual comments below. (For the sake of clarity, I'm removing the ref tag code and just leaving the citations in-line.)

Father Robert A. Sirico was born on 23 June 1951, in Brooklyn, N.Y. He is an Italian-American of Sicilian descent. He apostatized from the Catholic faith in his late teens. His time spent in the U.S. Navy after high school graduation was of short duration. Following his discharge from the Navy, he settled in Seattle where he took up with a cult called the Jesus People and joined their male commune known as Joshua’s House. (Note: MIRACLE CLAIMS TESTED BY THE HOLY SPIRIT’S WORD -A. Ralph Johnson [2]) By the age of 19, his brief flirtation with Marxism over, the charismatic youth embarked on a new career as an itinerant Pentecostal preacher and established his own “church” known for its “miraculous faith healings.”

Okay, the source used here is clearly a non-notable one. To use this by itself seems to me to fail the verifiability test.

In 1972, Sirico established a different kind of “church” - a satellite of the Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Church (UFMCC) founded by homosexual activist Rev. Troy Perry in Los Angeles in 1968. The UFMCC teaches that homosexuality is neither a sin nor a sickness and that “homosexual relationships should be celebrated and affirmed.” In 1975, Rev. Sirico moved to Los Angeles and became the Executive Director of the Los Angeles Gay Community Center, one of the oldest and largest lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) organizations in the world. He also continued his work as a minister of the UFMCC.

There are no sources offered to support these assertions, and the way that they are framed certainly leads one to believe that it is written to be persuasive rather than informative. This, in my opinion, fails to comply with WP:NPOV.

On 21 April 1975, Rev. Sirico made the annals of “gay” history as a pioneer “gay rights” activist when he performed the first same-sex “marriage” in the United States of two male homosexuals with a civil marriage license at the First Unitarian Church of Denver, Colorado. (Note: Legally wed in Colorado, 1975: pioneering gay couple Anthony Sullivan and Richard Adams didn't just get legally married 29 years ago; they stood up and demanded to be recognized Advocate, The, March 30, 2004 by John Caldwell [3])

This source seems notable, but it doesn't mention Sirico having been involved in the event that is being reported. That means that the source has no place in the article about Robert Sirico. It may be a good source for the History of same-sex unions article, though, especially since that article already mentions this event.

One year later, on 12 April 1976, Rev. Sirico, dressed in a black clerical suit with a Roman collar made the pages of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer under the headline “‘Male Slave Mart’ Raid in L.A. Called a Mistake.” As reported by the Seattle P-I, on April 10, 1976, Los Angeles policemen dressed in riot gear arrested 40 persons participating in a homosexual “slave market” held at the Mark IV Health Club in Hollywood. The bathhouse was operated by a sadomasochist cult called the Leather Fraternity. Nude “male slaves” were led on stage by an auctioneer and inspected by potential buyers. “Slaves” went for $10-75. The undercover policeman at the auction told the press that he picked up a man for $16 following assurances from the auctioneer that the ‘volunteer for charity’ would perform specific sex acts on him. The auction room came complete with its own dungeons and cell blocks and sadomasochist apparatus including leather harness restraints and chains. The event was sponsored by the Los Angeles Gay Community Center headed by Rev. Sirico, who told the P-I reporter that the Los Angeles Police Department was “out to get” the gay community. Rev. Sirico called the event a “harmless fund-raising event” staged to raise money for the Center’s venereal disease clinic.

This P-I article would be a notable one, but I have been unable to verify this source since the online archives do not go back that far. This is a pretty serious claim, especially given Sirico's current occupation, so in order to comply with WP:BLP, I think we need to be pretty sure about the source. As that policy states, "Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material — whether negative, positive, or just highly questionable — about living persons should be removed immediately from Wikipedia articles, talk pages, and user pages."

The UFMCC in Los Angeles has confirmed that the Rev. Robert Sirico involved in the two history-making “gay” events at the Unitarian Church in Denver in 1975 and the Mark IV Health Club in Los Angeles in 1976, is the same Father Robert Sirico, currently the superior of St. Philip Neri House in Kalamazoo, Michigan.

Where can I read about them having stated this? If this is original research, it can't be used, especially for making such a controversial claim. See WP:NOR.

On 13 May 1989, after completing his novitiate with the Paulist Fathers at their House of Studies in Washington, D.C., and his scholastic training at Catholic University of America, Robert A. Sirico was ordained a priest of the Paulist Order, a Society of Apostolic Life like the Oratorians. On 2 February 1961, all superiors of Religious Communities, Societies without vows, and Secular Institutes received a copy of the document “Careful Selection And Training Of Candidates For The States Of Perfection And Sacred Orders” from the Congregation for Religious. The Congregation noted that while the Instruction was “privately circulated” its contents were “a matter of public law.” [F] The principle subject of the discourse of the Instruction is the proper vetting and training of candidates for Sacred Orders. The Instruction were in force, but obviously not enforced by the Paulists, at the time of Sirico’s ordination.

Not only is this seemingly irrelevant in an encyclopedia article about Robert Sirico, it is persuasive writing rather than informative, encyclopedic writing. Also, it if offered with no sources to support it and clearly pushes a particular POV.

On the matter of the selection of seminary candidates, the essence of which is the discernment of character, the tone of the 1961 Instruction is exacting, even strident Moral certitude as to the fitness of the candidate for ordination is demanded of the superior. The Instruction firmly acknowledges that chastity is the heart of religious life and the priesthood. Any candidate unable to observe ecclesiastical celibacy and practice priestly chastity, no matter what other “outstanding qualities” he possesses, is to be barred from the religious life and the priesthood. The 1961 Instruction specifically prohibits the advancement to religious vows and ordination of habituated onanists as well “as those afflicted with evil tendencies to homosexuality or pederasty, since for them the common life and priestly ministry would constitute serious dangers.” Even though, by the late 1980s, the Paulists were routinely ordaining known homosexuals for the priesthood, their ordination of Sirico was especially alarming given his long habituation to the vice of sodomy and his public record of homosexual activism. ("Catholic Priest exposed as alleged homosexual--In an open letter to a Vatican official, writer Randy Engel claims that Rev. Robert Sirico of Michigan has a history of supporting gay rights, but actually officiated at a gay marriage." Tuesday, February 13, 2007 By Randy Engel ">)

This appears to be more original research, and it is certainly more POV-pushing. Of course, this is where we see the copyvio source being cited. I hope it is clear why I removed this large, but fatally flawed contribution. DickClarkMises 20:27, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I can't/won't support outlandish or slanderous things mentioned, but his once being Left-wing and for gay-rights is referred to in The New Zealand Herald[4] It has quotes of him saying he was and I think they're deemed respectable.--T. Anthony (talk) 10:10, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Another Paid Flunky?

I find it a tad suspicious that you (DickClarkMises) have been editing the SAME article since 2005, as if it has some special significance to you. I would challenge you to disprove any bias you may have by using the notable citations (which all match Mr. Sirico's history of addresses found doing a simple people search) and insert the verifiable information yourself with proper citations. Clearly, if you have this much time to dedicate to this man's wiki article you also have the time to be more thorough than a poor n00b like myself. I would bet real money that you won't put anything incriminating up here even if it were empirical truth. You cannot treat history as if it began with the dawn of the internet. Will you accept my challenge? If so I too will put more effort into finding the original articles and documents which support these claims. -K. I. K. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.110.249.102 (talk • contribs) 04:04, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, first off, as you can see from the page history, my first edit to the Robert Sirico article was on 15 February 2007—eleven days ago. Of course, if you had an account you would likely know that users can make use of the "watchlist" function which shows them recent changes to articles that they are "watching." By default, most editors' watchlists are composed of those articles that they have edited. Now, as the article history also shows, I extensively revised this article drawing from sources on the web (much like I did for my contributions to Benjamin Anderson, Frank Fetter, William Harold Hutt). In so doing, I did a google search for "Robert Sirico" and other permutations of his name. I was unable to find any notable, verifiable sources that justify the kinds of claims made in the addition that I critiqued above. WP:BLP is very explicit about what sorts of sources are necessary to make controversial, potentially defamatory claims about living persons, and it is my opinion that the sources cited for the claims at issue here do not meet the requirements laid forth by the policy. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a publisher of original thought, and not a soapbox. DickClarkMises 14:41, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Just to clarify, WP:BLP actually states that poorly sourced assertions of a possibly defamatory nature regarding a living person ought not even be moved to the article talk page. In order to better explain my deletion of the rather large addition above, I chose to temporarily move the material to this talk page in order to assure other editors that I was acting in good faith. Regarding the sources that are currently being offered, I would again quote the policy governing biographies of living people, which states that

If an allegation or incident is notable, relevant, and well-documented by reliable published sources, it belongs in the article — even if it's negative and the subject dislikes all mention of it. If it is not documented by reliable third-party sources, leave it out.

In my estimation, the sources offered are not reliable, third-party sources. If and when there are accounts published in notable, reliable third-party sources one could make an argument for inclusion. Until such time, policy is pretty clear on how this should be treated. DickClarkMises 19:33, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Also, I would refer you to this similar situation where concerns about defamation based on a single source were at play. DickClarkMises 21:25, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

5 Jan reversion

I have reverted this revision by an anonymous editor due to WP:BLP concerns. My rationale is identical to that offered above. Controversial assertions about living persons must be written neutrally, and must be based on independent, reliable, verifiable sources. DickClarkMises (talk) 20:01, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

NPOV

There is obviously a lot more going on here than I first thought. This man did a lot for civil rights and economic thought, but apparently there is a lot of controversy going on. I have referenced sources which are either scanned documentation released under the Freedom of Information Act, newspaper articles or scholary sources to try and add some simple facts. These were neither tabloid nor outrageous. I have enacted NPOV under WS:LTRD and request that the recorded facts speak for themselves. —Preceding unsigned comment added by VeritasEst (talk • contribs) 04:19, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

I am open to comment from other users, but in my view "riteofsodomy.com" is not a reliable source, especially for controversial assertions about a living person. DickClarkMises (talk) 04:23, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

The site's personal content is not referenced except for scans of actual documentation that is available in public records. These materials themselves are valid references. The opinions of the person hosting them is incidental and were obviously not used. However, I also used several other references which were mass deleted en-masse. —Preceding unsigned comment added by VeritasEst (talk • contribs) 04:35, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Furthermore, I believe that because of DickClarkMises' affiliation with the Libertarian Party as well as Mises, two organizations that have ties to the person in this article that they are certainly very biased towards how this article should be edited. I would request another admin with a radically different outlook or social circles to intervene here.

VeritasEst (talk) 01:10, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Please see my previous response at Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard/Archive59#Robert_Sirico. FWIW, I can assure you that my outlook and social circles are probably quite different from either the subject or the other editor. Please don't add links to the riteofsodomy.com site again.   Will Beback  talk  05:52, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

So if the same newspaper articles were available on a more scholary site and included pictures or some information that clearly identified that this was the same man then they would be acceptable? Are you saying that the main reason this information cannot be used is due to the researcher's personal motivations?VeritasEst (talk) 05:58, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Newspaper articles, if verifiable, don't require a link to a site that doesn't have the copyright to host them. Primary sources should only be used if already mentioned in a reliable secondary source. Please see WP:PSTS, as I already wrote.   Will Beback  talk  06:14, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh, now I see the problem. Thank you so much for clearing up this confusion. Sorry to make you re-explain that. I still stand by the suspicion that DickClarkMises may not be the most neutral editor, but I definately respect the word of a Platinum Admin. Cheers!VeritasEst (talk) 06:20, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Removed the Denver Post source because it's impossible to tell from the scan that there's not more to the article that's not been included. That would not be unreasonable to suspect, since the scan comes from a blogger who has demonstrated on numerous occasions a decidedly non-neutral attitude toward Robert Sirico. Soonersfan168 (talk) 19:02, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Also, that Denver Post article contains an essential factual error--Robert Sirico was not the pastor and founder of the Metropolitan Community Church in Santa Barbra. That's an error in a key aspect of the story--the rest of the partial article cannot be assumed reliable. Bluespoonfactory (talk) 19:06, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Removed the NCR source too--it makes direct reference to the false statements about Sirico in the Denver Post article, and the article is written in about the most non-NPOV style possible Bluespoonfactory (talk) 19:47, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

It's true that FrontPage Mag is edited by David Horowitz, and would therefore not generally be a reliable source, but what is sourced to that article is a quotation only, not any sort of qualitative statement about Robert Sirico, so it seems to me a reliable source for what it's being used for. Soonersfan168 (talk) 19:17, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia's policy is to take more care over quotes than other material, not less. And there is always a danger of a partisan source quote mining. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 04:08, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Ah hah, I see. There doesn't seem to be much chance of quote mining here, but given Wikipedia's policy to take more care with quotations, it would be reasonable to look for an alternate quotation. I'll pull the quotation as it is off in the mean time. Soonersfan168 (talk) 14:44, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

10/24/2010

Coming full circle from the beginning of this discussion page: Per WP:BLP potentially defamatory material about a living person must be sourced to reliable and verifiable sources. Articles must be written in a neutral point of view. Any statements or material which violates these policies may be removed by any editor. From the link added to the External Links section quoted: "...the goal of suppressing St. Philip Neri House and removing Father Sirico as its superior. This is the ultimate purpose of posting The Sirico Brief." This article is clearly not neutral. Also, per Wikipedia:External_links I have removed social network external links. Vilepickle (talk) 20:26, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Topics of Sirico's writings

Now that Sirico's writing in a variety of publications has been established and cited, those articles provide substantiation for most of the claims in the next sentence about what he covers in his writing. I will look for something he has written about bio-ethics, and at that point, there will be full sourcing for that sentence. WP:NOTOR is not violated, I don't think, by extracting the subjects of the articles from their titles. The question is, should all the citations, which are currently each after the individual publications of the previous sentence, be moved all in a row to the end of the paragraph? That seems really clumsy to me, so I won't do that unless someone thinks it's necessary. Soonersfan168 (talk) 15:01, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Gay Rights Activism

I've added some well-referenced history on his gay activism. It's presented very NPV and the sources cited are the Seattle PI which is the major daily newspaper in Seattle. There's more that could be written, but his performance of gay marriages, founding of gay groups, and gay activism/arrests are part of the story and I think well-referenced newspaper accounts should be part of the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.237.214.179 (talk) 15:33, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

The language in this section is highly misleading. MR Sirico had left his gay-rights activism behind him when he came to the Catholic church. He does not subscribe to the same ideas he once had, but rather the ideas of the Catholic church. 2601:3C3:403:D710:C922:4A11:8322:B2F2 (talk) 00:02, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

...however, he did once have them. Why did you remove them? Is Sirico trying to hide from his gay past? It's public record in newspapers, dude and part of his bio. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.237.214.179 (talk) 01:34, 26 November 2016 (UTC)