Talk:Jonathan Penner

• "Airai" in light orange needs to be added to the list of tribes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.252.61.209 (talk) 01:27, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Religious ???

The so-called "Church of Jonathan Christ" isn't really a religion, is it. Sure looks like a spoof on the Survivor series. Isn't it really a not-so-funny joke that can only be found on survivorsucks.com?

Gouveia2 (talk) 22:34, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

I have my doubts. It only turns up a miserable 19 Google hits [1]. Although maybe that's because the CoJC doesn't promote the use of the internet... Either way, unless we get some definitive information it isn't really notable. -- THE DARK LORD TROMBONATOR 04:07, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

It's not a joke. If you are a member of Jonathan Christ, you are considered a Jonatheist. 99.245.204.79 (talk) 01:26, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

LOL It's not a real religion until you have a preacher shouting on TV and asking for contributions. Does this doubt make me a Jonathagnostic? lol Gouveia2 (talk) 15:49, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

It is a religious thread that Jonathan himself posts in on survivor sucks. Just because it does not have it's own website does not mean it is not notable or worthy. (UTC) Undertakeress (talk) 08:47, 22 March 2008 (UTC)Undertakeress (talk • contribs)

Amen. 99.245.204.79 (talk) 19:46, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Yay, citation! Unfortunately, this comes from the same place that told us that Terry likes to "jerk it to" ***. Yet, we don't have that on his page for some reason. Should I mention that as a self-proclaimed spoiler site, the (mis)information there is not encyclopedic, and - oh, yeah - we're building an encyclopedia here, not a Jonathan Penner fansite. Furthermore, how can we prove that the person editing as Jonathan on Survivor Sucks is actually him. Did I mention that I'm actually Mark Burnett? Will someone lying about his identity sway you to do what he says? Actually, it will, as proved with the Essjay controversy. I'm sorry, but it has no place here. -- THE DARK LORD TROMBONATOR 22:39, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Jonathan himself has stated that he has lately found the "church" and "Christ" comments as offensive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.197.249.37 (talk) 23:36, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

It's a real church; it's a real religion. I don't understand why it can't be on wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment. 02:16, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

This section should be deleted unless there's an reference from a legitimate source that describes the Church of Jonathan as a real church. SurvivorSucks and self-serving blog sites are NOT legitimate sources, doncha know? Otherwise, this should be considered vandalism and counter to the spirit of Wikipedia.

Gouveia2 (talk) 17:44, 26 March 2008 (UTC) <--- may create a "religion" that considers Wiki-vandals the agents of Satan

How is Survivor Sucks not considered a legitimate source? In who's opinion? Does one have to register with the government and get a tax exempt ID to be considered a legitimate religion? Just because Jonatheists choose to post on Survivor Sucks, and that is the origin of the church, does not make it less, even by Wikipedia standards.Undertakeress (talk) 05:46, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Your POV is hardly convincing. SurvivorSucks is a self-proclaimed spoof of Survivor, and therefore, is not neutral. Personally, I find it entertaining, but it's not a reliable source of neutral information.

You asked so here are the Wikipedia standards:

"Editors should provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is challenged or is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed."

"Articles should rely on reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy."

Nice try. Gouveia2 (talk) 16:43, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Anyone who does not believe in the Word of Jonathan Christ needs to examine the meaning and purpose of their life. And, to be fair to the naysayers, I think you are taking this far too seriously. Amen. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ponikwe (talk • contribs) 23:36, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree. Let JC fill your heart, not Demonic Dan Barry. The Church of JC is a legitimate part of Jonathan's biography/wiki page. Penner himself has acknowledged it and legitimately posts on it. Exuberant (talk) 01:55, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Do you not see the hypocrisy in your saying that we are narrow-minded tyrants who are having a dictatorship of this Wikipedia (more or less), whilst proclaiming that those who do not bend to their knees and worship a reality television contestant are living a meaningless life? Exuberant: if Penner really does contribute to this blog, then how can we prove it was him? On the internet, we can all be anyone we want. See Essjay controversy for more details. How about you go talk to him, and persuade him to come out in the New York Times? Unlike Survivor Sucks, that is a reliable, third party source as required by the Wikipedia standards. Ponikwe: we are not taking this too far. We are building an encyclopedia here, and need to verify everything that goes into it, just as you would do if writing the Encyclopedia Brittanica. The information about this so-called Church is fine to go in when - and only when - the correct sourcing material is available. -- THE DARK LORD TROMBONATOR 01:21, 29 March 2008 (UTC)