Talk:The World Tomorrow (radio and television)

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

"New" series looks dead

I've been paring away unsourced claims about the "new" series being still in production. They were never sourced, and given that the ministry's website is gone, and the YouTube channel hasn't had an episode added in a year (and even then, it was HGArmstrong reruns.) Barring some sourced material, I see no reason to claim that it's in production. --Nat Gertler (talk) 04:31, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • The following response was posted to my user page. I am copying it over here as this is the appropriate place for discussion. I have removed a paragraph of what look to be odd personal attacks and attempts to communicate with some third party through my talk page. --Nat Gertler (talk) 14:59, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

:Mr. Holt has been the host since the Dr. died, and a handful of others fill in occasionally as hosts. Regular weekly new shows air each week on the US national satellite religious stations of TheWalkTV. Major US market stations airing new programmes every week in Atlanta, Chicago, Phoenix, Miami, Orlando, Denver, Charlotte, Indianapolis, US Virgin Islands, Sacramento, Nashville, Knoxville, and Sydney Australia to name a few. The Line upon Line live YouTube and simulcast podcast airs as a live webcast bible study every Friday night. It is hosted by Dr. Ricks. And a new Holt hosted Valentine Day episode aired recently too.

David A. and Matthew A.
LIVE ACTIVE WEBSITE ADDRESSES (Not dead, as your phishing statement claimed)
https://www.garnertedarmstrong.org
http://www.herbert-w-armstrong.com
http://cogwwm.homestead.com
http://www.intercontinentalcog.org/index.php
http://www.herbert-armstrong.org
http://icg.org.au — Preceding unsigned comment added by TGTAEA (talk • contribs) 06:59, 6 April 2018 (UTC) [reply]
    • The website I was referring to being gone is http://www.thechurchofgodworldwideministries.org , which was the one that was used as a reference in the article. The list of websites you give seems to be an assortment of websites of various groups and individuals. The one that seems to have anything about a this-century production of The World Tomorrow is the http://cogwwm.homestead.com one, and what that has on its front page is an embedded months-old video of what looks to be an HGArmstrong episode with a brief teaser tag on it that was put on some time after the death of GTArmstrong. That hardly provides reliable third-party source for any of the claims above. There is contact information overlaid in the video and at the end for http://cogwwm.org , which looks to be the same site as that homestead address. Youtube says that the video has seen 6 viewings in the time its been up there... or less than one per week. And I think two of those viewings was me checking it out. We are still lacking reliable source for there being any new episodes of a The World Tomorrow tv broadcast being produced. --Nat Gertler (talk) 15:21, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.denveropenmedia.org/search/node/The%20World%20Tomorrow — Preceding unsigned comment added by TGTAEA (talk • contribs) 18:21, 6 April 2018 (UTC) [reply]

Follow this link for a list of brand new shows in current production. It links to the local Denver Colorado Comcast TV station, complete with showtime listings, and current titles, and production dates. Just because you have not seen it on TV in your market, or on your satellite or cable service does not mean the program is not on the air. And you need to look further into the website links provided than a glance at the homepage to see the current episodes next time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TGTAEA (talk • contribs) 18:17, 6 April 2018 (UTC) [reply]

"And you need to look further into the website links provided than a glance at the homepage to see the current episodes next time." No, actually, I do not have to do what you want me to do. I am a volunteer for an online encyclopedia project, not some employee of yours. And as a volunteer, part of my goal is to see that the articles are based on reliably-sourced information. Information that is not reliably sourced can be removed. Going to the page you just linked to and checking the first page of results, I see none that were "published" this year... not that the publication dates listed there are particularly reliable indicators for content, as listings like this one show a 2014 publication date for a show where the key content was clearly produced well before, as it's a HGArmstrong talk.
Meanwhile, you should be reviewing our guidelines on conflicts of interest to see whether you may have such a conflict with regard to this article, and how to deal with if you do. --Nat Gertler (talk) 23:09, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest you take your own advice regarding conflicts of interest. You received a message form another interested editor last night, who has in the past tried to get this article removed or spliced into separate show articles. You have acted as a destructive editor camped out on this page working as a puppet for your pal.

Your destructive editing history, on behalf of your good buddy - is obvious upon a review of your history at this article.

And, I have no conflict as I am not in any way associated with the show, it’s church or affiliations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TGTAEA (talk • contribs) 02:01, 7 April 2018 (UTC) [reply]

Nope, no conflict of interest. I respond to that editor much as I respond to you. I have not acted as a puppet for anyone. Said editor is not my buddy, he is someone I've interacted with in dealing with the editing of this article, just one of hundreds of editors I end up interacting with here. --Nat Gertler (talk) 06:35, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@NatGertler: see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Garnerted. I've struck through the sock's edits, but feel free to delete this whole section, including my comment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doug Weller (talk • contribs) 13:07, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • removing the information regarding the 21-century edition until adequate sourcing can be established, thanks. Roberticus talk 14:58, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Link removal

There have been repeated attempts to remove links from this talk page, both one that shows an old edit and one to a sockpuppet investigation of one of the editors here, using the claim that somehow these items are harassment. Neither would qualify as harassment; at most, one could claim that the edit itself that was linked to was harassment (although it is hard to see why), but that would be addressed by using the process described at Wikipedia:Revision deletion, not by refactoring others comments. I have (again) restored the talk page. --Nat Gertler (talk) 03:58, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Harassment noted herein includes actions calculated to be noticed by the target(s), certain named celebrities and is clearly suggestive of targeting them, where no direct communication takes place with the celebs named in the discussion.
This particular individual and his name has been reverted/deleted under the WP:HA policy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.210.136.169 (talk) 09:31, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The items that you are deleting are one revision link, which the link in itself contains no reference to anyone, and a link to a sock puppet investigation, with the link itself containing only a Wikipedia user name, and no harassing statement. (If you're trying to posit that the user name Garnerted is a reference to Garner Ted Armstrong, that could not possibly be harassment of him, as that individual has been dead since 2003 and is likely to remain that way.) If you wish to see either that revision or that sockpuppet investigation removed from Wikipedia, you will have to use other processes; removing the links on this page will not do so. --Nat Gertler (talk) 21:48, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Looking around a bit more, it seems like you might be referring to another Garner Ted besides Armstrong, the one that the editor using that handle identified himself as. If you have evidence that the user was not in fact that individual, you might be able to address that at the appropriate noticeboard, but that would not make the links to the user's sockpuppet investigation inappropriate. It's needed here for the record of why edits were done. --Nat Gertler (talk) 22:04, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you, Mr. Gertler, personally harassing and attempting to make contact with a major celeb and his family in this strange manner.

You are the one feigning ignorance about what you are doing, and what this is all about, while you are camping at this obscure talk page since 2018 continuing to revert the harassing links and reinstating the links to harass a celeb who has nothing at all to do with this tv show, it’s production or any of this subject or it’s material whatsoever.

Criminal harassment and civil filings are being contemplated if your behavior continues, but we believe that is exactly what you want - attention drawn to yourself.

A cease and desist court order is already in place against the individual who contacted you, your accomplice and friend (Redacted), way back in in 2018 when Wiki editor (Redacted) solicited and reached out personally contacting you to ask you to assist him and aid and abet him with his twisted harassment, when he and (Redacted) were apparently trying to bring attention to this old tv show and their freshly created wwcg-archives website, and you gladly took up his cause, and began harassing on his behalf.

Please give it up - 5 years of your assisting (Redacted) is enough already. Get a life, or you will get more than you bargained for - please stop harassing this major celeb, his family and his assistant in this twisted and bizarre manner.

Again - they have nothing to do with the production of this tv program, the links are to fake stories, fake news, in an attempt by (Redacted) and yourself to draw attention yourselves and to this tv show and subject matter, you appear to be obsessing over for 5 years or longer running.

Best - — Preceding unsigned comment added by DRUnfiltered (talk • contribs) 13:37, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You are drawing attention to this talkpage by not following the guidance at WP:TPO. Don't mess with other people's talkpage comments. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:04, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • And for anyone looking on: that user is currently block for making legal threats, under the WP:NLT policy. But the accusations have zero grounding in reality. I am neither trying to contact nor harass anyone by undoing the refactoring of others comments. I am merely maintaining this talk page according to guidelines, as I have frequently done for many pages. --Nat Gertler (talk) 05:00, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New 2004 claim

An IP editor just added the claim to the intro "In 2004, a new version of The World Tomorrow television program began production." with three misformed links to Denver Open Media. The problems with this are:

  • Denver Open Media, a public access TV site, is not a reliable source
  • None of the pages linked to give a 2004 date
  • I looked far enough into the second one to see that it's a Herbert Armstrong piece, and as HWA was quite dead by 2004 and I've seen no sign that he's gotten better since, this was not a new production. It may have been new tags slammed onto an old production, but that doesn't make it a new production any more than the removal of the Billy Joel theme song from reruns of Bosom Buddies made them new productions.
  • The introduction is for summaries of content in the article body, which this is not.

I am trying to maintain my retirement from article editing. Could someone review this new addition and, if they find similarly to me, revert it? --Nat Gertler (talk) 19:31, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And now they're edit-warring in the material, but switching "2004" to "in recent years"... as though 2004 still qualifies as a recent year (babies who were born that year are now legal adults for most purposes.) No new sources have been given to show when these episodes were produced, to whatever extend they are new productions. --Nat Gertler (talk) 20:09, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I'm concerned, those "sources" do not support "a new version" regardless of any of the above. They just seem to be random videos and say nothing of detail suggesting a "reboot" IMO. ButlerBlog (talk) 20:39, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I requested partial-protection be applied. ButlerBlog (talk) 20:40, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Title card

The title card currently shown in the infobox is not the ideal example; it is clearly from a post-2003 version/rerun/series of the same title/whatever. I don't know if a pre-1994 item is available with rights cleared (and I don't feel like reviewing what-we're-allowed-to-use-at-low-res at the moment.) I know this title card was a subject for hassle in the past, although I was not involved in that. --Nat Gertler (talk) 18:02, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_World_Tomorrow_(radio_and_television)&oldid=1210995877"