Talk:List of campus preachers

Neutral point of view???

This page starts out with this: A major contributor to this article appears to have a conflict of interest with its subject. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly neutral point of view. Please discuss further on the talk page.

That obviously refers to me. I take exception to the statement. Neutral point of view? Look at this below, copied from the article. Is this an example of a neutral POV?

Many American universities and colleges experience regular visits from itinerant campus preachers who typically occupy a prominent on-campus location for a day or two before moving on to another school. These campus preachers are often outspoken, with extreme viewpoints and rhetoric. Many (but certainly not all) of these campus preachers use a distinctive preaching style, known as "confrontational evangelism." This is a controversial approach to spreading the gospel by which the preacher focuses on the perceived "sins" of the audience in the hope that calling them out will bring them to repentance and salvation. This approach typically provokes hostile reactions from the student bodies of the schools they visit.

This paragraph is ANYTHING but neutral. This paragraph is typical of the bias that comes from people who look down on what we do. The hatred oozes out between the words. It is chock full of loaded terms carefully combined to denigrate the activity being described. This paragraph is anything but neutral.

And as far as having a conflict of interest with its subject, it's subject is a list of the preachers and where they preach. How can you have a COI with a list? It's a stupid list, for crying out loud, not a nomination for a Pulitzer prize.

I had no conflict of interest when someone else posted my information on Wiki some time ago. I thought it was amusing. My conflict arose when one of the self appointed editors thought he was sufficiently knowledgeable of the movement (of which I am a founder) to determine who should be or not be on this "LIST". Then I took offense. I always respond to arrogance negatively. Who is this pissant who thinks he can pass judgment on who should be on this simple list? If anyone should be in charge of who should be on this list, it should be an expert. I personally know most of the men in this country who preach college campuses, and I've preached with most of them. Anyone who writes on street preaching ought to filter their posts through an expert. And RepublicanJocobite is not. Plus he is anything by neutral.

Bro Cope

bigotry coming from supposed scholars

Latest comment: 18 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I find great amounts of bigotry in these comments. I get a strong whiff of annoyance, and a nose full of condescension. What wants to pass itself off as scholarship is simple unmasked hatred for what we do. Whether you know it, street preaching is rapidly becoming a unique force in the world. When I started in 1977, there were 5 or 6 doing it in the entire country. In the last couple of years, that number has risen to several thousand.

In addition, it is happening all over the world. Being one of the founders of this movement, I get reports all the time from all over the world. Do a Google search on street preach* -manic, and you will get 27,400,000 hits. Do the same search and include country names, and you will get thousands of hits in every country on the planet. I just got an email from a fellow preacher from Mongolia, where he is setting up a school to teach street preaching.

Even though I am one of the founders of this movement, some yahoo named RepublicanJacobite keeps deleting me from the "List of campus preachers". Just because HE never heard of me doesn't make me insignificant. Since this is a "list", I could provide you with about 300 names and locations, but I would be afraid that some self appointed significance Nazi would delete them. Just so you will know, RepublicanJacobite, as often as you delete, I will undo. Wikipedia is not your toy so you can act out your banal bigotries, it is a way to document the world. As it is, not as you want it to be.

==

I tend to agree with the POV in this article, but it is still POV, and so I added the tag. Brainhell 00:01, 12 April 2006 (UTC)Reply

I would look to the Garry Cattell (PSU) article for a good example of how this page should be written. It says that his views are conservative and controversial but does so from the NPOV. Mithunc 04:35, 3 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Listworthiness

Latest comment: 15 years ago6 comments5 people in discussion

We've had a few preachers trying to increase their Google ranking on here. I think we should limit this list to campus preachers with their own articles. --Adamrush 16:20, 28 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

I disagree completely to limiting the article in such a way. It's not titled "List of campus preachers with their own articles." If a preacher has made a significant impact then that preacher should be listed. I listed one who was recently involved in a lawsuit that garnered significant news coverage, so he should not have been removed. Hunter00047 16:35, 2 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

There needs to be some threshold of notability; why not use the one applied to articles? If the preacher in question has garnered significant news coverage, you might as well write up an article and add him. --Adamrush 02:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Lack or presence of an article doesn't always indicate a lack or presence of notability. It simply notes whether or not editors have elected to create an article on an individual. For example I created the article on Larry Davis (minister), a Southern Baptist minister who was caught behaving badly. Currently there is no article Annie Armstrong, who is well known in Southern Baptist circles as a leader in the home missionary movement of the early SBC. The Easter offering is named in her honor. Of the two, Annie Armstrong has far greater notability, but no Wikipedia article. SonPraises (talk) (contributions) 20:46, 26 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

A list of campus preachers? Seriously? Isn't that like having a list of grains of sand on the beach? This article should be deleted. Rees11 (talk) 12:48, 19 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

I'd agree this list should probably go to AfD but in the meantime, it should be only for subjects notable enough to have their own Wikipedia pages. This page isn't for free advertising, it's to send people to actual articles. Before someone is added to this page, I'd advise the editors to write the article first, then add them to the page. Dayewalker (talk) 19:38, 20 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Indiscriminate

Latest comment: 17 years ago4 comments4 people in discussion

This appears to violate WP:NOT#INDISCRIMINATE. This is a list of non-notable people, with no verifiable sources, of interest to very few readers. Unless it improves very soon, somebody should nominate it for deletion. See Wikipedia:Listcruft. Mrees1997 21:16, 31 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

This list is hardly indiscriminate; it simply leaves the burden of notability to the articles themselves. Furthermore, I disagree that this list is of interest to very few people. Anybody who went to a major college got to see these guys in front of the student union a few days a week. --Adamrush 12:27, 1 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Agree Adamrush. I've found that "non-notability" helps these figures become not only quite influential, but also selective about revealing the nature of their church affiliations and past problems. Tom Short for example has visited at least 60 verified and over 100 claimed campuses BUT is nearly always identified as "non-denominational" though he has that clear affiliation when researched. Furthermore, this affiliation has in the past been under scrutiny by cult watchgroups, as my article verifies through RS such as the Washington Post. The people on this list are not just local yokels. Bro. Jim for example was a Clinton advisor. Campus preachers have often been newsmakers in (sometimes) reliable campus papers, but since most libraries only carry local campus papers, it has been rather impossible for us to connect the dots until now. The term "campus preacher" however is not universal. Google "Tom Short"+"campus preacher" and you get very few hits. Google "Tom Short"+campus+debate and you get lots of relevant hits. Consider changing name to "list of campus evangelists". ClaudeReigns 17:20, 23 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

I agree with Adamrush that the article may be of interest to anyone who has experienced the phenomenon of campus preachers. But then the interest is in campus preaching rather than specific campus preachers. Maybe a detailed description of campus preaching could included in the article Open-air preaching with a list of campus ministers there.SonPraises (talk) (contributions) 20:58, 26 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

External links modified

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of campus preachers. 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/20130921053951/http://microentertainment.net/?page_id=43 to http://microentertainment.net/?page_id=43

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:47, 20 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

External links modified

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of campus preachers. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:24, 29 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

Add topic