Talk:Charisma (magazine)

This article was nominated for deletion on 7 January 2010 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Evangelical Christianity Low‑importance

	Evangelical Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Evangelical Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Evangelical Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Evangelical ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject Evangelical ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject Evangelical ChristianityEvangelical Christianity articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Christianity: Charismatic Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Charismatic Christianity (assessed as Low-importance).

Magazines Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Magazines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of magazines on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MagazinesWikipedia:WikiProject MagazinesTemplate:WikiProject Magazinesmagazine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
See WikiProject Magazines' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

Florida Low‑importance

	Florida portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Florida. If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.FloridaWikipedia:WikiProject FloridaTemplate:WikiProject FloridaFlorida articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Charisma (magazine). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090223130836/http://www.charismamag.com:80/columnistbio/index.php to http://www.charismamag.com/columnistbio/index.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 18:51, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy

I am removing the controversy section. The sourcing (Salon and Newsweek) are not strong sources to be singly used to make such a claim. Until better sourcing is found making these claims about the magazine, please do not reinsert. Mr Ernie (talk) 12:03, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Materialscientist, since you reinserted, do you think the sourcing is strong enough? Salon and Newsweek are not considered strong RS per [1] and Right Wing Watch certainly isn't. WP:UNDUE may also be applicable here. Mr Ernie (talk) 12:05, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Added citations to HuffPost and The Independent. These have drawn noticeable commentary. --GRuban (talk) 12:45, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The HuffPost isn't really a strong source for that either. Mr Ernie (talk) 12:55, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The two together, however, are fine. There are others. This is probably the capstone, an academic journal: https://muse.jhu.edu/article/627332. In fact, your query has prompted me to notice that there are so many others, that it may be worthwhile to expand this into a larger section than the single sentence it gets now. --GRuban (talk) 13:21, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't necessarily agree that several poor sources combine to form a better one. But if there is enough sourcing to expand, that isn't a problem, as long as the sourcing is ok. Mr Ernie (talk) 14:13, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If better sources can be found, then Salon, RWW and Newsweek should all be pulled; they don't become stronger sources by association, and if another source, in turn, is strong enough to replace them it should do so. Incidentally, Materialscientist, for our (or his) convenience doesn't get pings. SERIAL ^# 13:35, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would think it should be pulled until better sourcing is found, but I'm not going to revert an admin. Mr Ernie (talk) 14:13, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Don't be afraid of admins, they're people too. In fact, as a rule, they're more reasonable than most editors. It's kind of a requirement to be an admin!

Discuss. For example, discussion of the most recent edit to this article: User_talk:Yamla#Charisma_(magazine)_cover_removal. --GRuban (talk) 19:27, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think the Rick Wiles stuff needs better sourcing, and more important is unjust; it's apparently a rebuttal by Wiles to an anti-Wiles article, so describing it as "Charisma lets Wiles publis anti-semitic screed" is not really correct. --GRuban (talk) 19:34, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]