Jump to content

Talk:John Clayton Nienstedt

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

POV-section tag added

[edit]

The paragraph copied here is both inaccurate and NPOV dispute:

In October 2012, Neinstedt used over $600,000 from the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis to create DVDs and to send letters to registered Catholic households essentially telling them to vote "yes" on the marriage amendment on November 6, 2012. Minnesotans at the polls on November 6, 2012 rejected by six percentage points this attempt to limit marriage equality.

1. Nienstedt's name is spelled incorrectly.
2. The claim of $600,000 is misleading. The Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minnesota has said that $650,000 of "investment income" was dedicated to the amendment, with $350,000 of that given to Minnesota for Marriage, the group in favor of passage. None of this money was spent on DVDs, which confuses a 2010 DVD sent that to Minnesota Catholics funded by anonymous donors (possibly including the Knights of Columbus). It is also speculating that the money was spent on letters, although the exact use of the money is not known. Source1, Source2, Source3
3. NPOV violation by use of phrase "limit marriage equality." The amendment's title was "Recognition of Marriage Solely Between One Man and One Woman," which is what voters rejected.
4. The final margin on the amendment was actually 5.12%, not 6%.
50.202.180.245 (talk) 03:43, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hearing no feedback in 1 week, I am making the following changes (where my numbers match those above:
1. Corrected spelling of Nienstedt's name.
2. Added "investment income" to the sentence in question, removed "to create DVDs and to send letters to registered Catholic households essentially telling them to," and added an additional citation.
3. Changed "limit marriage equality" to "define marriage as between one man and one woman.
4. Changed "six percentage points" to five.
50.202.180.245 (talk) 01:40, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

After 4 weeks of no discussion, removing POV section tag.
67.6.41.156 (talk) 03:11, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

stepping aside temporarily

[edit]

In the news today: He has agreed to (temporarily) give up public ministry because of complaint about inappropriate touching. His vicar general will fill in. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.20 (talk) 22:35, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Immediate deletion of subsec added 7/17 was not appropriate

[edit]

Deletion of new subsection 7/17 or 7/18/14-- I added new subsec. on 7/17 addressing major controversy re the archbishop's handling of accusations and findings of sexual abuse by priests. This has been widely reported locally and in some national publications such as the N Y Times. The new subsection included cites with reference links. The references support statements Re to the archbishop himsellf. Someone deleted the new subsection without any discussion for the stated reason "guilt by assoc."--there is no guilt by assoc in this subsection. I reinserted the sub sec from the history at about 1:20 CDT on 7/18/14. Smiley's Point (talk) 18:45, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As the reviewer who reverted (not deleted) the addition, my concerns are WP:BLP (specifically WP:BLPCRIME) and WP:COATRACK. While I do not believe the edits were vandalism, I did not think them appropriate for a BLP. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 19:05, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Continuation of discussion on subsection originally added 7/17 (handling of sex abuse by priests)

[edit]

I could not seem to add to previous conv. So had to start new thread. I do not agree that this is a BLP problem nor a coat rack problem. Just because a type of controversy may exist elsewhere among other persons does not mean it is not specific to a subject and significant to the history of a person in office. If the archbishop's strategic plan, e.g., or as allegations about personal misconduct, are relevant to his performance in office, then surely allegations of serious malperformance with regard to managing numerous cases of priestly misconduct, are important to a well-rounded understanding of the archbishop's period at the archdiocese.

For convenience's sake, here is what I posted in talk elsewhere on this topic.

I disagree with your reversions because the subsection deals with the archbishop's own performance as leader and Archbishop of Saint Paul and Minneapolis.  It is at least as relevant to the subject, and arguably even more significant, than allegations of personal misconduct in the subsections below it. Moreover, the text and sources in this subsection do not attempt to paint him as guilty of sexual abuse by association, rather they deal with questions about whether under his leadership the archdiocese followed canon law in handling accusations/findings of priestly abuse, and/or showed disregard for victims. The information in this subsection is so relevant to the subject at hand that there are public calls for his resignation in light of them. Smiley's Point 

Smiley's Point (talk) 19:24, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on John Clayton Nienstedt. 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) 09:58, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on John Clayton Nienstedt. 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) 15:25, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on John Clayton Nienstedt. 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) 10:51, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:John_Clayton_Nienstedt&oldid=1205663609"