Talk:Mark Driscoll

Requested moves

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Pages moved: per discussion Ground Zero | t 01:40, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

---

• Mark Driscoll → Mark Driscoll (disambiguation)
• Mark Driscoll (pastor) → Mark Driscoll

– The pastor is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. He has been on the front page of the NYT, aside from everything mentioned in the lead of his article. Daily page views for the pastor are over 10x the other two listings combined. JFH (talk) 17:53, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

• Support based on pageview statistics indicating that Mark Driscoll (American football) has been viewed 239 times in the last 90 days, Mark Driscoll (screenwriter) has been viewed 1099 times in the last 90 days, and Mark Driscoll (pastor) has been viewed 73411 times in the last 90 days. bd2412 T 18:53, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
• Support, based on BD2412's page views above. Zarcadia (talk) 22:09, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
• Easy support. Red Slash 21:31, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
• Support - With BD2412's data, we can see that over 95% of traffic is going to a single article. WP:PRIMARYTOPIC should apply. --Super Goku V (talk) 15:09, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Throwing rocks at Driscoll's children

I removed a paragraph added by an IP user containing excerpts from the following: [1]

Driscoll's claims are self-serving and have more to do with making an emotional appeal to a sympathetic audience than giving a factual account of his experience prior to resignation. He makes some serious allegations about his family being the victim of criminal violence. The news source unfortunately made no effort to corroborate -- if true, it should be on the public record.

• A media helicopter flew by his house (if so, which station and when was this broadcast?)
• "People were arrested" (did police confirm?)
• "Rocks were thrown" [at his family]. Assaulting children is a serious crime. Was this reported to police? (Driscoll also said this to a police officer.)
• "Death threats" (reported?)
• "Family moved three times". (Is his house for sale? Was this before or after rocks were thrown at his family?) (Driscoll also said this to a police officer.)
• Also, WP:COATRACK. This is not a very interesting post resignation development.

-Sigeng (talk) 01:04, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Another user reverted the removal and pointed out that Throckmorton's blog has a copy of the police report. However, this source cannot be cited due to policy - the police report is a primary source, and blogs are not suitable sources for a living person WP:BLP. If this were a significant development in Driscoll's biography, it would have been covered more extensively.

I also object to wording that "rocks were thrown at his children". That wording does not make it clear that the thrower(s) were never seen and also did not actually hit anyone. "Rocks were thrown at his children" makes me picture an actual assault; the police officer interpreted the situation as "harassment" not something more serious. I would accept a statement to the effect of "Driscoll said he and his family were harassed at their residence during his hiatus", since it is clear that much happened. I'd put this in the timeline when it occurred, not when Driscoll discussed it, for clarity.

Sigeng (talk) 20:51, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Content relates to causes for resignation. "Harassed at their residence during hiatus" - where does it state that it occurred specifically during Driscoll's "hiatus"? "Driscoll's claims are self-serving" "Wikipedia is not a place to hold grudges, import personal conflicts, carry on ideological battles, or nurture prejudice, hatred, or fear. Making personal battles out of Wikipedia discussions goes directly against our policies and goals." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_battleground — Preceding unsigned comment added by El12abethL1 (talk • contribs) 17:10, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

The date of the police report makes it clear that the "rocks at children" incident was during hiatus, although in the RNS source he does appear to lump some before hiatus events into the picture as well.

In calling Driscoll's claims self-serving, I am making an editorial judgment based on the context (statements to a sympathetic audience, and a PR effort to possibly prepare for his next position) not carrying on an ideological battle. As I outlined above, his statement makes the event appear more violent than the officer's report suggests. I also note that in the police report, the office reports Driscoll's description of rocks sizes from "golf balls to baseballs", while at the Gateway event Driscoll described "rocks bigger than baseballs", i.e. a comparison of two accounts both made by Driscoll a few months apart shows he exaggerated his claim over time. Therefore, I believe it is more appropriate to describe the fact of the event (harassment) rather than Driscoll's interpretation of it in this instance.

I do not live in Washington state and I have never attended a Mars Hill Church. I have no grudge against him. I consider him a fascinating, complex and flawed human being. -Sigeng (talk) 22:07, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Mass Delete

There has been a mass delete by an I.P. Should it be reverted for vetting? Basileias (talk) 01:08, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

I have reverted - the edit summaries claimed sourced statements were "inaccurate" but unless/until sources can be provided to demonstrate this and discussion had here, I agree that the content (which is reliably sourced should stand. Melcous (talk)

Confusing chronology

The article features parallel chronological accounts of Driscoll's biography by theme, often with earlier sections referring to later ones. For example Janet Mefferd's plagiarism accusations are referred to as a "crucial turning point" while the explanation of the charges comes much later. This makes it confusing to read. A better structure would be a single chronological account. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.209.101.50 (talk) 06:02, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mark Driscoll. 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/20110524085722/http://theresurgence.com/?q=node%2F5 to http://theresurgence.com/?q=node%2F5

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) 04:39, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 21 external links on Mark Driscoll. 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) 04:27, 18 January 2018 (UTC)