Talk:John Hagee

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to climate change, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to abortion, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the John Hagee article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

John Hagee was nominated as a Philosophy and religion good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (September 17, 2015). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

Christianity: Bible / Jesus / Theology / Southern Gospel / Jewish / Charismatic Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Bible portal This article is supported by WikiProject Bible (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is within the scope of the Jesus work group, a task force which is currently considered to be inactive.
	This article is supported by theology work group (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by Southern Gospel task force (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Jewish Christianity (assessed as High-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Charismatic Christianity (assessed as High-importance).

United States: Texas Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Texas portal This article is supported by WikiProject Texas (assessed as Low-importance).

Poor sourcing

I think we should remove a large portion, possibly most, of what's in "Life and career" section. We rely on NNDB, which is highly unreliable, as it's a tertiary source, which doesn't state where it gets it's information. We also rely on johnhageefamily.com, which has an inherent bias, and support self-serving claims. We shouldn't delve into details of his personal/early life, unless/until we solid third party sources. --Rob (talk) 05:01, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism that stood for almost two years

Does anyone else find it disturbing that this edit took nearly two years to be reverted? That got to be some kind of record. JayHubie (talk) 04:12, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Other than that it broke a link, and wasn't directly cited by a usable reliable source, I'd say it was so unsurprising content as to pretty much pass as "fair comment". 84.203.46.247 (talk) 16:48, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Trinity Church

This article makes at least two references to Trinity Church as if it was something important and unambiguous. There are no links to this church. Shouldn't the article state its relevance?WithGLEE (talk) 17:27, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

John Hagee's adultery and divorce

I'm not sure why John Hagee's bio omits his adultery, divorce and marriage to his paramour and how Mr. Hagee explains from a Biblical standpoint his right to remarry. Paul 3/13/13 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.88.47.114 (talk • contribs) 11:46, 13 March 2013‎ (UTC)[reply]

Spend some time here and note that he's pro Israel. Also spend some time looking at how Wikipedia deals with people who are anti Israel. Then you'll be sure...109.154.115.55 (talk) 16:41, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. The (alleged) adultery is noteworthy, and the information is probably being suppressed for the reasons alluded to.2605:6000:6947:AB00:B4E6:F5BF:BF1A:B392 (talk) 01:58, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why is it notable that Hagee disagrees with other religions?

I’m struggling to understand why there are large sections of this article that "accuse" Hagee of opposing other religions. Like that is somehow unusual or scandalous, for a religious person to believe their religion is correct and other faiths have got it wrong?
Hagee is certainly anti-Catholic, anti-Islam, anti-Buddhism, anti-Sikhism, anti-Mormonism, and so on. That is implicit in the very fact that he is a protestant Christian. Therefore I think these sections should be removed. Hagee may be the subject of controversy, but surely not simply because he disagrees with other religions! — Grand Dizzy (talk) 22:36, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:John Hagee/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Winner 42 (talk · contribs) 03:29, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Overall Comments

Looks like this might need a good bit of work, but placing under review. Winner 42 Talk to me! 03:29, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

12 dead links are present
No dab links or copyvio

Sectional Analysis

Lead
- Ref 2 is tagged as supporting information not in its citation
- This lead has some WP:Lead issues in that it does not properly summarize the article. It contains unimportant information about where he is broadcast that reads somewhat advert like rather than the main points of information found in the sections below.

Life and career
- Birth date show be here with a citation
- Is www.nndb.com a reliable source of information or could better sourcing be found?
- south of Dallas Somewhat unnecessary considering a wikilink is present.
- Did he attend high school? It is not listed here.
- This wording of immorality needs serious assessment, what immorality was committed here? The source is dead, but Google seems to suggest cheating on his spouse, if this can be reliably sourced, it can be included in the article because it is not a BLP violation.
- The sentence beginning with He subsequently divorced needs rewording for grammar.
- Article does not mention him beginning his preaching career in '58.
- The paragraph beginning with Hagee founded The Church needs a non-primary source to support its claims.
- Hagee has written more than 30 best-selling books (several titles selling more than a million copies and hitting the New York Times Best Seller's list) and is a Southern Gospel recording artist.[15] He, Matthew, Christina, and Sandy often travel together as "The Hagees". Statement is promotional and completely unsupported by reliable sources.
- On his telecast of December 14, 2008, Hagee disclosed to the audience that he had recently undergone successful heart bypass surgery. Borderline BLP violation.

Personal beliefs
- This section flows poorly and is a mess of individual sentences thrown together with borderline BLP violations thrown in for good measure.
- Because the land now known as Israel, Gaza, and the West Bank was ruled by the Ottoman Turks prior to World War I, then controlled by the British, and later partitioned under United Nations mandate, Hagee argues that the land does not belong to the Palestinian people, and that the name "Palestine" (deriving from that of the ancient Philistines) was imposed by the Roman Emperor Hadrian to punish the Jews for their revolt against the Roman Empire. Hagee has commented that there is no Palestinian language and no historic Palestinian nation. is completely unsourced.
- http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Apr06/Berkowitz18.htm is unreliable
- jpost seems unreliable for anything accept cited criticism
- How is this section different than controversial views?

Relationship with Israel
- Why does this have its own section?

Controversial views
- This seems to be a giant wall of WP:UNDUE weight, especially in a BLP.
- This section needs much stronger sourcing to support the statements given in it.

Political activities
- This section seems incomplete given the other information presented in the other sections of this article.

Review

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. Has an appropriate reference section:

B. Cites reliable sources, where necessary:

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused (see summary style):
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

Closing comment

With Winner 42 having retired from Wikipedia, I posted to CookieMonster755's talk page, noting the retirement, and asking whether we should find a new reviewer. CookieMonster755 has decided, however, not to pursue the GA nomination further, so I am closing the nomination as unsuccessful. CookieMonster755, we hope you will consider renominating once you have addressed the issues noted above. Thanks, and sorry it didn't work out this time. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:59, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on John Hagee. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:53, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 9 external links on John Hagee. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:20, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on John Hagee. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:17, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

United Nations vs. League of Nations

This sentence contains errors that beg correction:

"Because the land now known as Israel, Gaza, and the West Bank was ruled by the Ottoman Turks prior to World War I, then controlled by the British, and later partitioned under United Nations mandate . . . "

First, there was never a United Nations mandate for Palestine. It was a League of Nations mandate, entrusted to the British, after the British expelled the Ottoman Turks. Second, the UN did not actually partition Palestine. The UN General Assembly, representing the international organization that formally succeeded the League of Nations, voted to partition the territory, but UN General Assembly decisions are mere recommendations, not binding law. (See the text of the partition resolution itself.)

That being the case the sentence should be corrected to read "the UN General Assembly voted on November 29, 1947 to recommend the partition Palestine following Britain's decision to return its mandate and withdraw from the country."

Comments? Zozoulia (talk) 14:11, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on John Hagee. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080227215132/http://www.ministrywatch.com:80/mw2.1/F_SumRpt.asp?EIN=741986308 to http://www.ministrywatch.com/mw2.1/F_SumRpt.asp?EIN=741986308

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:09, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Take God's redemption stories to the USA

About 3 years ago God layer on my heart to take his redemption stories to USA but I had a fear to step out into the water in the past 2 months Jesus has gave me a boldness that iv never had God has showed my their will be thousands come to him through his story's to me what is it worth even if only one gives their life to him each weekend there will be 15 to 20,000 people who will read his story's but it take money to get started I'm trusting God to provide it.if you have 15 min I would love to share with u email me and I'll give you my New number markdriver925@gmail.com thanks Mr Hagee sensory MarkWatkins Markw9527 (talk) 05:21, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on John Hagee. 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.livestream.com/inspirationnow
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080426182127/http://www.mediatransparency.org/story.php?storyID=116 to http://www.mediatransparency.org/story.php?storyID=116
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.johnhageefamily.com/family/pastor/index.htm
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.jhm.org/misc/corn_fly.htm
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090213044841/http://www.biblestudymanuals.net/hagee.htm to http://www.biblestudymanuals.net/hagee.htm
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080316183254/http://www.catholic.org/politics/story.php?id=27105 to http://www.catholic.org/politics/story.php?id=27105
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061111194714/http://www.evangelicalright.com/john_hagee/ to http://www.evangelicalright.com/john_hagee

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) 22:37, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Vague, tired, implausible, unsourced puff

... including 62 high-power stations aired to more than 150 million households.

I could only find other sources which probably lifted the same line from Wikipedia, or the organization's own publicity organ (which I could not find).

What does "aired to" even mean? I don't think there's 150 million households left in America capable of receiving 'aerial' signals. What TV has that any more? Or do you mean "households capable of having an aerial, if they were so inclined". No? So then I take it you mean various cable networks? Then what is this noise about "high-power" stations. Transmission power? All-star morning hosts? Direct line to the big guy, above? Even if that boast was once true (in some dimension), it's probably due for a 2017 reality check, proximal era: cord cutters. — MaxEnt 21:54, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. If there isn't a reliable secondary source, get rid of it. Freikorp (talk) 01:04, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on John Hagee. 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/20080313055155/http://www.catholic.org/national/national_story.php?id=27068 to http://www.catholic.org/national/national_story.php?id=27068

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) 21:53, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on John Hagee. 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) 13:29, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Article had face-preposterous claim that Criswell anointed Hagee: deleted

I deleted the claim that W. A. Criswell anointed Hagee (& his 2nd wife). It is not supported by any reliable source. Also it seems preposterous on grounds that 1) Criswell was a southern Baptist, not a pentecostal; 2) Hagee was not a baptist, 3) anointing pentecostal preachers (or any preacher) is unheard of baptist practice. 5) baptists do not anoint wives of pastors. Such a claim requires reliable sources, not some publicity statement by Hagee. (PeacePeace (talk) 18:13, 3 January 2018 (UTC))[reply]

Judaism - POV concerts

Most sources seem to cover Hagee as pro-zionist or pro-Jewish figure. Our current section focuses on alleged negative statements, using long quotes, and repeating the word "antisemitism". This is unbalanced.Icewhiz (talk) 12:33, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

He's said antisemitic comments while supporting Israel. There have been cases in which Zionists have been linked to antisemitism. Zionist antisemitism. 2600:8801:FB13:6B00:5439:9FE6:86AA:ACC0 (talk) 05:56, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits

I reverted, due to several BLP violations introduced to the page. This include negative material which was OR based on PRIMARY sources, and sourrces such as talk2action which should not be used for a BLP.Icewhiz (talk) 04:48, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In combined diff I subsequently removed additional material in the article that was unsourced or poorly sourced and introduced higher quality sources for much of the article. Icewhiz (talk) 07:37, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of constantly reverting blindly, maybe REMOVE THE INFORMATION WITHOUT REVERTING. - R9tgokunks ⭕ 07:51, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:BLP and WP:RS. In particular - a press release from catholic.org is a highly inappropriate source for anything but the "Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights"' attributed opinion (and even that - would be probably UNDUE absent a secondary source) - in the revision I reverted, it was being used for an unattributed stmt, in Wikipedia's voice, for facts and stmts of Hagee - clearly inappropriate - and this (as well as other similar inappropriate content) was removed per WP:BLPREMOVE. Icewhiz (talk) 07:59, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You are blatantly ignoring what other people are saying to you. REMOVE THE CONTENT WITHOUT REVERTING. I made nearly a hundred good edits, removing bad links, fixing grammar and syntax, removing dead links and spam links, and removing duplicate information, and condensing the article sections, and you are constantly reverting my improvements. - R9tgokunks ⭕ 08:19, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think someone said something once about glass houses. Please do not blanket-revert to a version that contained several different WP:BLP issues that were removed per WP:BLPREMOVE's instructions to Remove immediately any contentious material. Icewhiz (talk) 10:00, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please both calm down. @R9tgokunks:, BLP concerns trump just about everything else here so please go carefully and discuss the material before reinserting it. {[re|Icewhiz}}, it would be really useful if you could outline what exactly your BLP concerns are. I've had a quick scan through the diff you linked above; I have to say I'm none the wiser, but I've not got a lot of time to read it in detail today. Reverting a large amount of material like this because it contains some BLP material is not very helpful; for the other person in the discussion, it feels like they're playing a big game of "guess what I'm going to object to" and it can easily end up having material repeatedly reverted because they haven't guessed right; this is very disheartening. I realise you've done a lot of work since that I guess you see as addressing this, but it'd still be very useful for everyone concerned if you could give a summary of your concerns here. GoldenRing (talk) 09:56, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think there was a misunderstanding of who did what revert - I actually re-applied many of R9tgokunks' changes after the IP reverted. I removed 2 classes of material on BLP grounds (or provided citations in some cases) - unsourced material (no inline citation), material sourced to a non-RS (e.g. blogs). In some cases I removed material which was PUFFERY in my eyes and sourced to Hagee or one of the organizations he is involved with. I did a fairly big pass here - prior to which most of the sources in the article were not RSes we would use for a BLP.Icewhiz (talk) 10:15, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

To be specific - in this revision the following would seem to be clear BLP vios: uncited material, OR on primary religious texts, Texas Birth Index, Catholic League, HuffPost opinions, Talk2action, onfaith. (and I might be missing some).Icewhiz (talk) 11:46, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Icewhiz banned

I have restored my extensive and constructive edits since Icewhiz will no longer be causing problems at Wikipedia and reverting good edits. - R9tgokunks ⭕ 18:52, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Start class versus GA

I noticed that in 2015 an editor began the vetting process to rate this a GA (Good Article). However, when I checked to see what rating the article has presently, it is stuck at "Start class." Is that inconsistent? I am going to elevate the rating to C or B which seems more consistent with an article that was considered for GA status. I hope you all agree. FairlyFlatFoot (talk) 11:56, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"known for his activism on behalf of the State of Israel"

The above statement in the lead is a serious violation of NPOV because it assumes that Hagee's activism is to the benefit of Israel. Many supporters of Israel believe exactly the opposite about Hagee, very strongly. Here is a recent example (if you can only see the start due to the paywall, believe me it gets worse as it goes on). I'm not sure about the best wording; Hagee supports the extreme right-wing of Israeli politics but it needs proper sourcing to write that. Meaning I'll change it to something that is at least innocuous. Zero^talk 12:22, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

George Wallace

Yesterday I discovered an article in the San Antonio Express that detailed an event held in August 1968, where John Hagee was the keynote speaker. In order to present the facts, I included a short 2 sentence section with the information, that is verified and is not to my mind exceptional. However, a short time ago another well-meaning user undid that edit. At the time of the undo, the well-meaning editor explained that the information needed more sources because it was "Exceptional" information. I disagree with that. I don't think it is exceptional that someone supported a candidate for president. And since the original well-meaning redactor of my edit has not really proven that it is exceptional, the edit should stand because the source is a primary source of an event that was held where thousands of people attended. It is also the PRIMARY news source in the area that reported on this event. I therefore request that the edit be re-instated as soon as possible.SeedEWound (talk) 16:11, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Aroma Stylish is acting under bad faith, and is possibly a vandal. This is true because the editor refuses to discuss this, even though a link was provided for verification. I declare that Aroma Stylish should not be permitted to edit this anymore if Aroma Stylish will not have good faith and oversee the edits of others. I put the link to a local news article published in 1968, and I even have transcript I can provide. This is a legitimate source, but Aroma Stylish has never taken the time to audit the information. SeedEWound (talk) 15:56, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

::You are showing an alleged newspaper clipping from 1968 with no url to check it nor lasting effect that has been ignored subsequently by sources so UNDUE. Also possible BLP violation. And for the last time, don't engage in personal attacks.--Aroma Stylish (talk) 15:41, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation

An IPA guide may be helpful for his last name 2600:8801:FB13:6B00:D45:152:A8EC:A9F7 (talk) 11:04, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]