Talk:List of ministers of the Universal Life Church

RfC: Should Jesse Hughes be included?

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Jesse Hughes should not be included. Me-123567-Me (talk) 19:11, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Should Jesse Hughes himself be included on this list?

1. Is http://sbwire105.rssing.com/chan-11626485/all_p1.html a reliable source?
2. Should Universal Life Church World Headquarters be on this list? Me-123567-Me (talk) 18:14, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

• Comment: I thought Universal Life Church World Headquarters is just where they are based and the site url has HQ in it as seen here? If you don't want to use the source here is one from the official website of the band http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:chvkdQjIEnMJ:eaglesofdeathmetal.com/news_item%26NewsID%3D3765647609930+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us 92.237.211.110 (talk) 18:52, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

@Me-123567-Me: I think the confusion is because they had similar names so HQ changed its name to Universal One Church as seen on their verified Facebook post and others [1] and it was originally that on his page but was changed by request. 92.237.211.110 (talk) 19:26, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

• Comment: 1) No, it's not a reliable source. As for Jesse Hughes, I found this somewhat better source, although it all seems as hearsay and nothing is verifiably confirmed. 2) What does the HQ have to do with a list of ministers? Best, FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 15:47, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
• comment: FRS here no he shouldnt be listed Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ (talk) 18:44, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Wendie Malick

I've fixed a few sources on the article, and I came across Wendie Malick (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). You'd think if she was a ULC minister, there'd be all sorts of sources besides just a chat on a TV talk show, but I could not find any, so I removed her from the list. Me-123567-Me (talk) 18:33, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Collect's removals

I reverted the removal Collect (talk · contribs) made. for a few reasons.

1. The book reference is not self-published, and none of the people in the book, so far as I can tell, deny being a ULC Minister.

2. I can't comment on NNDB's notability, but many who are listed there have additional references.

3. Block may require a new source, I freely admit. Me-123567-Me (talk) 22:29, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Problem is we need "self-identification" or an actual "reliable source" for claims that anyone is an "ordained ULC minister." nndb.com has been ruled "non-RS" a fair number of times, and the other source is by a head of the ULC (Ashmore) - which makes the claims of all these famous people being ordained ministers in his church a teensy bit problematic. See the posts at WP:RS/N. If the only "source" is by a person who stands to benefit from calling people "ordained ministers" in his church and zero outside reliable sources make the claim, there is a possibility that the source is not reliable at all. As for saying dead people do not deny being an "ordained ULC minister" - I would be supremely surprised to find a dead person deny that she or he is an elephant <g>. Facts require positive statements not the absence of a denial as any logician can explain. Collect (talk) 22:48, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

On Block: Read her post please!

We’re playing a lot of past Eros Day Shows on RadioSuzy1TV these days, as part of our foreplay to Eros Day 2006. Just in case you don’t know, on Eros Day, we celebrate EROS, who is both a Great and Powerful God, according to classical mythology, and a little Cock-Shaped Planetoid, according to modern astronomy. Right now, we’re playing Eros Carnavale, otherwise known as the Eros Day Wedding Orgy. On this Eros Day in late January of 2003, America was on the brink of War in Iraq, wrapped up in Thanatos (Death), the opposite of Eros (Life). Our response was to wrap up Venus, the Mother of Eros – played by stunning actress/activist Sara Sue Robertson – in nothing but the American Flag. Venus wore Old Glory well, and, after conquering her human shyness with Olympian determination, got right into the Eros Day spirit, opening the flag to proudly flash her own spectacular naked glory, inspiring Kelly and Hamilton Steele to launch into a passionate threesome with Erica Kole right in front of my broadcast bed, followed by two different kinds of erotic bullwhipping by Robert Dante and Mistress Cyan and leather studded human pony rides for all the topless ladies.

I fear that a blog post like that does not inspire me to regard it as a "reliable source" for anything at all. Collect (talk) 22:55, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

I'll start an RFC on this then. Block - she herself admits she's an ordained ULC minister. For this, that's all the reliable source we need. We don't need the ULC to issue a statement to that fact - otherwise this list would not exist. Ashmore's book - You can point to your noticeboard post all you want, but so far it's just your ramblings with no other responses. Wait for a clear consensus. Me-123567-Me (talk) 23:12, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

RFC: Reliable sources

Should Susan Block's own blog support her inclusion in this list? Should Ministers solely backed by the NNDB be removed? How reliable is Ashmore's own book whom is used as a source for many on this list? Me-123567-Me (talk) 23:14, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

• Only reliable sources per WP:RS can be used Self-published sources, and most especially sources directly linked to that church are not reliable per Wikipedia guidelines and policies, and no consensus can ignore those guidelines and policies. In the Block case, the claim relies on what appears to be a column about a porn convention of some sort, and is thus, as far as I can tell, not reliable as a source for any claims of fact. In the other cases, claims which rely directly on claims by that church are not valid for claims about persons in general at all, as any such church can list hundreds of dead people as "ordained ministers" and it makes no sense to say that the dead person must actively deny the claim. Sorry - the level of sourcing here has been and remains abysmal. I note repeated discussions at WP:RS/N have invariably deemed NNDB to be "not a reliable source" and I doubt that it can be found to be "reliable" here. (In fact, one discussion there noted that NNDB had used Wikipedia as a source!) Collect (talk) 13:08, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Can you give us proof of your claim that NNDB is not notable? Like a direct link to one of the discussions? Me-123567-Me (talk) 16:51, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
  • When you go to remove people from the list, do you first look for any other sources that may back them up being on this list? Me-123567-Me (talk) 17:09, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Made this easy for you. All entries that had NNDB as their only source now have at least one additional source. Me-123567-Me (talk) 18:03, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
• Re: NNDB being ruled bad at WP:RS/N Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_26#NNDB "NNDB is not a reliable source by any stretch of the imagination. Worse than that, it was actively spammed to countless articles by people behind the site, as discussed on the WP:EL talk page several times in the past.", Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_101#NNDB " Agreeing with the above. NNDB is run by the people behind Rotten.com and has a distinctive bend towards sensationalist information (from the article on NNDB here: "one-night stands ... illnesses, phobia, addictions, drug use, criminal records") often with dubious sourcing, sometimes purely speculative. Basically not at all suitable for BLP sourcing ", Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_3#NNDB "Having looked further... there is some indication that they pull material from... Wikipedia! For us to use it as a source might result in a circular reference.... and as such, I can not call it reliable.", Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_155#http://www.nndb.com "In a word, no. "Our standard is correctness over verifiability (the reverse of Wikipedia)".[76] Previous discussion from this noticeboard has some more info", and so on. Clear? Collect (talk) 18:27, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
• When removing poorly sourced information it is not necessary to find actual reliable sources In short - the source was repeatedly found in the past to fail WP:RS so it is not my requirement to find "real sources" Collect (talk) 18:29, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
• Ashmore is an official of the Universal Life Church His own book published by "Universal Press" is thus a "self-published source" which may be reliable about Ashmore himself, but fails WP:RS mightily. A person who runs the putative "new church of physiognomy" who then lists three hundred notable people as "ordained" b that church does not make the source "reliable" at all for those people. In fact, the "Universal Press" appears to be ... the Universal Life Church itself. Collect (talk) 18:38, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
• New York Times source "According to its Web site, the church has 20 million ordained ministers, a long list of well-known ones including Glenn Beck and Doris Day. Weddings by the group’s ministers are legally binding in all states, though some require additional documentation. The NYT does not make any claims as "fact" only says the church claims names on its web site. Does that pass muster for claiming the NYT says that the persons are actually ordained in that church as a fact? Collect (talk) 18:43, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

• Now backed up with a source from his own website. Only one person was sourced with this link. I double-checked the two additional NYT sources, and they seemed ok. Me-123567-Me (talk) 18:52, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Glenn Beck's own site is RS for himself. Cheers. Collect (talk) 19:27, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

• www.universallifechurchministers.org is extraordinarily unlikely to meet WP:RRS. Collect (talk) 18:48, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
• outsideleft.com does not appear to remotely meet WP:RS. It is a blog. How many other such "reliable sources" are there here? Collect (talk) 18:48, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Don't be a dick. ""Don't be a jerk" is a fundamental rule of all social spaces. Every other policy for getting along with others is a special case of this rule. Although nobody is expected to ban or block somebody for jerkitude (as that itself would be an instance of such), it's still a bad idea to be a jerk. So don't be one. If a significant number of reasonable people suggest, whether bluntly or politely, that you are being one, the odds are good that you are not entirely in the right." Me-123567-Me (talk) 18:33, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
    • Those who cite that essay generally point the finger at themselves. Cheers. Collect (talk) 18:40, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
• Note A great deal of the names added by [2] are sourced to blogs as well as the sourced already shown to fail WP:RS. Last I checked, blogs in general are not considered "reliable sources." Collect (talk) 19:32, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Opinion- Her own words on her own blog should be a reliable source for herself. Elmmapleoakpine (talk) 22:56, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

• Remove Block and Fanthorpe; possibly others. -- In this context, unless a fact is substantiated by WP:RS, not only may it be inaccurate, it is also a strong indication that it violates WP:NOR, since no one else (like a journalist or published author) besides a Wikipedia editor or two has decided to do the necessary research to identify a person as a minister of the ULC. -- DanielKlotz (talk · contribs) 13:57, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
• Take Block at her word per WP:ABOUTSELF her own blog is a reliable source for anything that is not outrageous or unduly self-serving. That seems to apply here. Collect is right about one thing, though: Any editor may remove unsourced material. No one is required to find more sources for it. It's nice if you do but it's not required. Darkfrog24 (talk) 21:08, 8 February 2016 (UTC)