Jump to content

Talk:Bob Larson

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 173.230.188.74 (talk) at 04:39, 2 August 2013 (Additional sources we can use:). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Removal of demonology section

Why is the demonology section repeatedly being removed? Exorcism and demons are one of Larson's main focuses. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cogito-ergo-sum (talkcontribs) 17:06, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

John Safran exorcism

This page definitely needs information about the John Safran exorcism. Simply adding the link at the bottom without explaining its significance is not standard Wikipedia practice. Sumthingweird 01:11, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's standard Wikipedia practice to fix problems as you spot them. If you feel that more should be mentioned on the Safran exorcism, you should add it. The editor who added the link probably hoped someone who knew more about the incident would add some information about it. Cnwb 01:40, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
well, I am the editor who added the link, but I was just being lazy and didn't add a description. I watched the Exorcism today with some friends, and then saw your comments & wrote a quick summary of the events. I was a little lazy when writing so I probly haven't conformed to perfect wiki standards, but the information is there.


SB: Cleaned up the Safran exorcism section a little bit, making mention of the fact that Safran was Jewish (hence the significance of his 'forgiving Hitler') 00:47 UTC (November 25, 2005)

Bigjimmic --Bigjimmic 01:20, 25 January 2006 (UTC)I gotta say - i think the Safran bit is is incorrect - he didn't ever accept jesus into his life, and i think the lisp bit is a big silly - he was groaning and his lisp is that pronounced.[reply]

Someone has apparently deletede the Safran exorcism section. check the edit history Ropata (talk) 09:28, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is an encylopedia, not a soapbox

To the anonymous AOLer User:207.200.116.134 who added significantly biased changes, please read Wikipedia's NPOV policy. The idea is to provide objective information from a neutral point of view. Cheers. ~ ~ ~ Papeschr 06:42, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Ken Smith

It is true that Ken Smith was denied a license to practice law by the Colorado Bar allegedly because of his work on Bob Larson. (http://home.earthlink.net/~19ranger57/injunction.htm). However are Ken Smith's legal issues relevant on a page about Bob Larson?

They might be, actually. However, I'm a bit worried about sourcing. The document you cite is a) hosted on a private website, which might raise some questions about authenticity of the document, b) written by a party in the case, which might raise some questions about reliability. -- Antaeus Feldspar 00:35, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]


The proper url to the actual Colorado Bar ruling may be found at:

http://www.cobar.org/opinions/opinion.cfm?OpinionID=5343

There is no question that Mr. Smith's actions regarding Larson raised alarm for the bar in regard to how a license to practice law might be employed. As such it is very much relevant to the milieu regarding Larson and his professional activities.

I find it hard to credit a statement that "there is no question that Mr. Smith's actions regarding Larson raised alarm" when the source cited does not mention Larson at all. Needless to say it also doesn't support the "obtained documents from the ministry's trash dumpster" that you also keep trying to add in over and over. -- Antaeus Feldspar 23:57, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm surprised that the brief comment regarding Fr. Ashcraft was removed since he was a Larson insider and remains the only person in that circle so far to have publicly challenged Larson on the charges. I think this is an important point in the critique of Larson's activities. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.138.163.112 (talk) 21:44, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh great, another Ken Smith stalker!74.100.60.53 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:59, 5 May 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Additional sources we can use:

http://music.westword.com/Issues/1994-03-02/news/citylimits2_full.html might have something useful we don't have yet. -- Antaeus Feldspar 00:17, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also http://www.vice.com/en_uk/Fringes/teenage-exorcists-full-length173.230.188.74 (talk) 04:39, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Exorcisms?

are there any sources for his claims that he has performed over 10,000 exorcisms? The demons that he claims to exorcise tend to be named after the sins, rather than typical demonic names

whether true or not, the tapes he played on Coast To Coast AM are frightening Bunnygod888 03:30, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Hair Transplant

Who did Bob Larson's hair transplant? Is he ever going to get the other "treatments" so that he does not look so ridiculious? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.132.86.220 (talk) 19:17, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TBN Series

This article seems to fail to address Bob Larson's prime-time television series from the mid-1990's. --Aaron Walden 00:48, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What no Criticism?

Come on, please don't tell me that this prominent televangelist and exorcist doesn't have one single common criticism of his work. Wikipedia researchers and editors should know better than that. As I was watching the Safran video, it was at least clearly noticed by me that he had signs of religious bigotry and what seemed to even be outright racism. Surely there is at least one professional out there who would point out how ridiculous Larson is or perhaps even offer some clue that hypnosis and suggestion is a possible working tool that Larson uses. The least you could do is leave a doubting individual as myself feeling like there's enough that's been looked at to guess that maybe at the last minute Safran's mother was to blame as a last possibility that cannot be proven but would feel most likely since nothing else could make much more sense about it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.27.124.108 (talk) 16:01, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I concur that this article is inaccurate and does not reflect a npov standard, there is a lot of material that needs sourcing, adding and probably removal. Will work on it some when I have a chance, maybe others will as well. Tmtoulouse (talk) 03:29, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Trey Azagthoth

The YouTube user who had uploaded the Trey Azagthoth vs. Bob Larsen tapes has taken them down[1], saying, "Trey's family told me they were fake and asked me to remove them." In the absence of a reliable source disputing this, I have removed the reference to them from the article. WikiMarshall (talk) 22:12, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-gay actions

No word on his homophobic actions i.e trying to "heal" gays http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwoDGcwEHwk&NR=1

20:09, 14 August 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.81.226.60 (talk)

No discussion of him being a fraud?

http://www.holysmoke.org/sdhok/larson09.htm

how about how he didn't actually write "his" book on satanic ritual abuse, but that one of his employees did? how about how he has a poor track record of following up on his "callers," who have a high chance of being shills? how about how this article reads like a damn advertisement? inb4 NPOV 108.218.14.108 (talk) 01:07, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of his daughters?

Larson's three daughter are also involved in his ministry. I think it is notable enough to include in this article. 2602:306:3032:30F0:5BD:5382:7F7B:36E4 (talk) 22:18, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]