Talk:Andrew Wommack

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Biography (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 
WikiProject Christianity / Charismatic (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Charismatic Christianity.
 

Cut down the quotes[edit]

An article should not be built out of a series of quotes; we may want to cover much of what he's saying, but not how he says it. We need to be covering more what people say about the subject, both for neutrality and to establish notability. --Nat Gertler (talk) 14:51, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Amen! (no pun intended... er... well... okay, maybe it was) I just cleaned-up a couple of them to at least reflect that they came from his books and websites; but, indeed, they're almost preaching. As proof that a lot of it is just lifted (copied-and-pasted) from his website, I noticed, when I was editing, that some of what's already there had the kind of slanted quotation marks where are not possible in the Courier-New fond in which we make all of these edits.

I also made it crystal clear, in the part about his college, that all of its claims were from its website.

Yikes! This thing is almost like an ad for this guy! It needs to be cleaned-up. I once wrote a WAY less self-promoting article about a seminary in South Africa that was both actually accredited, and infinitely more credible this this guy and his unaccredited "college," and powers-that-be around here yanked it in its entirety within a week (and put it in my sandbox for improvement). If that article couldn't stand-up to Wikipedia standards, then trust me when I tell you that this one comes not even close!

Gregg L. DesElms (Username: Deselms) 21:46, 5 September 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deselms (talkcontribs)

"Controversy"[edit]

There are no sources given showing any controversy arising from the situations listed; unless some sources are provided, the section should be removed or at very least renamed. --Nat Gertler (talk) 19:29, 28 January 2012 (UTC)