Talk:Kip McKean

Citations

This article is marked with a disclaimer stating that this article relies mostly on primary source cites. After going through them, only 5ish of the 22 cites are from the ICC. Would you all agree to remove that marker?

Author

@Cyphoidbomb, you have used a reference to justify authorship that is a little unclear. You state: "He has also written First Principles Study Series" Having read the link I fail to see any mention of or it's connection to the "First Principles Study Series"?

2ndly, you have inserted a sentence in another section that talks about after McKeans resignation the dissolution of the central leadership of the ICOC, I fail to see the connection to this article. Why is that in an article about McKean? What is the significance of that?JamieBrown2011 (talk) 13:44, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, the reference supporting First Principles highlights Kip McKean's name in yellow along with the title. The author uses McKean's work as a reference. It's in the footnote. But even beyond that, a quick Google search turns up several mentions of this work, so it's pretty clear that the work exists, and that McKean wrote it. The work itself, mention, mention, mention. You expressed doubt that McKean had ever written anything, and I think I have satisfactorily demonstrated that he did. It's not a controversial fact, so it doesn't require much. To address your second question, I reinstated that content because I didn't feel your edit summary provided a sufficient reason for removing the sourced content. In addition, your removal of the content left an orphaned reference, which AnomieBOT had to fix. Your edit summary stated, "This has nothing to do with McKean's personal page." It was unclear to me what you were talking about or what your specific objection was. I think it warrants mention that the central leadership was dissolved after he retired, since the section is covering the final days of McKean's involvement with the ICOC and that statement seems a reasonable end piece to the summary of the events. Oh, and I just noticed that I already explained this in a previous section. Please see Talk:Kip McKean#Reverted edits by JamieBrown2011. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:15, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

OK, fair enough, those both seem like reasonable points.JamieBrown2011 (talk) 16:34, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

References

Reliable Source

I am trying to figure out what constitutes a reliable source. Would something like this be a reliable source?

A CHURCH OF CHRIST OR CULT OF CASH Critics slam group as manipulative BY Dave Saltonstall , Daily News , Staff Writer NEW YORK DAILY NEWS Sunday, October 22, 2000, 12:00 AM http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/news/church-christ-cult-cash-critics-slam-group-manipulative-article-1.887922

Qewr4231 (talk) 21:27, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Where can I find out more information on reliable sources? Qewr4231 (talk) 21:28, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Would this be a reliable source?

Church's Practices Criticized -- Seattle Church Of Christ Too Controlling, Some Say By Lee Moriwaki, Susan Gilmore The Seattle Times (Winner of nine Pulitzer prizes) http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19930711&slug=1710557 Qewr4231 (talk) 21:33, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

The place to learn about reliable sources is linked at least three times on this talk page, and at least six times on your own talk page. It is here at Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. To see if a specific resource is considered reliable, you will need to search the archives at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard and read the discussions. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:08, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

I am looking at this definition: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources#Definition_of_a_source

It says:

"The word "source" when citing sources on Wikipedia has three related meanings:

the piece of work itself (the article, book); the creator of the work (the writer, journalist), and the publisher of the work (for example, Random House or Cambridge University Press)."

Henry Kriete and his wife Marilyn Kriete are the authors of the "Henry Kriete Letter" which brought to light many abuses in the ICOC. Would Henry Kriete and Henry Kriete's personal website be the authoritative source on the Henry Kriete letter? Why, when I tried posting Henry and Marilyn Kriete's own words from their own personal website about the Henry Kriete letter, do people say that it's not a proper source? Aren't Henry and Marilyn Kriete the authoritative source of the "Henry Kriete Letter?" After all Henry and Marilyn Kriete wrote the letter and are the authors of that letter. Qewr4231 (talk) 23:36, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Biased or Opinionated Sources WP:BIASED

"Wikipedia articles are required to present a neutral point of view. However, reliable sources are not required to be neutral, unbiased, or objective. Sometimes non-neutral sources are the best possible sources for supporting information about the different viewpoints held on a subject.

Common sources of bias include political, financial, religious, philosophical, or other beliefs. While a source may be biased, it may be reliable in the specific context. When dealing with a potentially biased source, editors should consider whether the source meets the normal requirements for reliable sources, such as editorial control and a reputation for fact-checking. Editors should also consider whether the bias makes it appropriate to use in-text attribution to the source, as in "Feminist Betty Friedan wrote that...", "According to the Marxist economist Harry Magdoff...," or "Conservative Republican presidential candidate Barry Goldwater believed that..."."

I think some of the sources that people are disregarding as unreliable may in fact be reliable as Wikipedia states on it's reliable sources page. Biased or opinionated sources are accepted by Wikipedia as long as they meet "editorial control and a reputation for fact-checking." A person can't argue that a source is not reliable simply because the source is biased or opinionated. Biased and opinionated sources are acceptable according to Wikipedia policy. It would seem that sources biased against or opinionated against the ICOC/ICC/Kip Mckean are acceptable as long as they meet "the normal requirements for reliable sources, such as editorial control and a reputation for fact-checking." Qewr4231 (talk) 23:51, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

See also WP:UNDUE and WP:FRINGE as previously noted. And this sort of "discovery" of what constitutes a reliable source is better suited for an environment like the Wikipedia Help Desk or the Wikipedia Teahouse where other editors can help you learn how to use Wikipedia per your schedule, rather than here. There are more resources available to you in these other venues than here, and we've been going in circles here for what, 2 years now? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 07:59, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

I would like to propose adding some information about Kip Mckean

Thinly disguised soapboxing --NeilN talk to me 19:56, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

The ICOC has been the subject of much criticism while Kip Mckean was its leader. The Seattle Times, a newspaper based in Seattle, Washington that has won nine Pulitzer prizes, featured an article on the Seattle Church of Christ calling the Seattle Church of Christ too controlling. Church's Practices Criticized -- Seattle Church Of Christ Too Controlling, Some Say Even the New York Daily News has reported that critics of the International Churches of Christ are calling the International Churches of Christ manipulative. A CHURCH OF CHRIST OR CULT OF CASH Critics slam group as manipulative A Lawsuit was filed against the International Church of Christ in 2005 by Jack and Kay Pelham in Nashville, Tennessee alleging that the International Church of Christ has a pattern of "widespread fraud, misrepresentation, and deceit in the solicitation of funds through coercion and false advertising." Further, the Pelham's claim that funds marked as charitable donations to the poor were diverted and used by high ranking ICOC leaders as personal income. Pelham Lawsuit Last, but not least, there are the admissions by ICOC leaders themselves: “Appearances and real issues of greed have now caused thousands to stumble and question our spirituality.” Henry Kriete Letter — Spring 2003 Henry Kriete on the greed amongst ICOC leaders “Financially over-extending the church” Toronto Apology Letter — April 9, 2003 Toronto Church of Christ Letter “Also in regard to finances we want to apologize to you for the fact that money was not always spent wisely.” Boston Apology Letter – March 16, 2003 Boston Church of Christ Apology “Not protecting the churches in San Diego and the Southwest. These churches have been incredibly sacrificial. We have sent hundreds of people as well as millions of dollars to support missions and ministries around the world. However, our churches have been hurt so that others could be built up. We have lacked people and funds for our teen, campus, singles and other ministries.” Guillermo Adame Letter – Monday, April 14, 2003 Guillermo Adame Letter “The sin was compounded by what were at times unreasonable budget increases that should have been prevented by better planning.” Los Angeles Apology Letter — Feb 28, 2003 Los Angeles Church of Christ Apology Letter “Coercive giving is practiced, wide-scale. Of course there are may sincere and generous disciples who love to give, but the fact remains, our entire scheme for collecting the contribution is not based on the heart, or about love offerings, or true concern about the spiritual impact our system of ‘getting’ has on the rank and file Christian. That is not what is most important. Accountability, intense scrutiny and follow up and man made pressures are the order of the day. When a Christian is cajoled into a ‘multiple’, tracked down for their tithe, categorized on official spreadsheets for everyone to know so that sector leaders ‘can be on top’ – all to maintain budgets that we have created, this is coercive.” Henry Kriete Letter — Spring 2003 Henry Kriete Letter Kip Mckean has now left the ICOC and started his own church called the International Christian Churches, but many people say Kip Mckean has not changed at all since his days as leader of the Interntional Churches of Christ. The evidence speaks for itself. As leader of the International Christian Churches Kip Mckean purchased a luxury condo worth $650,000. Kip Mckean owns a condo worth $650,000 According to the company that manages the luxury condos www.azzurra-delrey.com, the combination of maintenance fees and property taxes alone would be close to $3,000 per month. A former leader in Kip Mckeans International Christian Churches had the following to say: "By this method, I can responsibly estimate that Kip and Elena McKean together cost the church somewhere between $150,000 and $200,000 per year. Which, for business leaders, would not be unreasonable. And yet for the church Jesus established, completely, utterly out of line . . . While living in Los Angeles and attending the church, I managed to get by just fine while earning less than $40k a year, giving close to 25% of my income to the church, paying down thousands in student loans and saving up other thousands in my rainy day fund. (All without a penny of assistance from government, family, friends, or anyone else.)" Ex leader in the International Christian Churches Qewr4231 (talk) 09:34, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

It's all factual information. It's all true. Instead of complaining, prove that it's not true. You can't prove that it's not true because it's all true. Qewr4231 (talk) 11:28, 5 May 2015 (UTC)