|This page was nominated for deletion on 11 April, 2006. The result of the discussion was no consensus.|
|WikiProject Christianity||(Rated Stub-class, Low-importance)|
|WikiProject Australia / Sydney||(Rated Stub-class, Low-importance)|
Put your issues with POV in here Rebecca Rowland 06:35, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
- Anything that's taken straight from their website is clearly going to be POV and/or have copyright problems. I've softened it a bit, but it's best to have some neutral sources. JPD (talk) 08:10, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:Koorong.jpg
Image:Koorong.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 10:32, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Other interesting stories to add?
Hi here is some things maybe we could add into the article on Koorong?
Talks about Koorong and Word being the largest Christian Books Stores. http://www.christianmarketplace.org.uk/engine.cfm?i=43&cma=1194 Could this be used for a citation of the claim in the first paragraph.
- The reference that I incorporated, stating that Koorong had 400 staff, is supportive of the fact that Koorong is easily the largest. Industry sources tell me that Word is much smaller than Koorong. An analysis of Word's web traffic suggests that its webstore has 1/3 the traffic of Koorong's. Torquil Sorensen (talk) 13:18, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Website is now Koorong.com not Koorong.com.au Kathleen.wright5 17:22, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
- Koorong actually has a number of mirror websites, which include koorong.com, koorong.com.au, koorong.biz and koorong.net. Torquil Sorensen (talk) 13:13, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
It's clear that someone with an axe to grind has highlighted Banner of Truth Trust, Matthias Media, Brian Houston, Benny Hinn, and Kenneth Hagin as a valid 'from-to' representative sample of Koorong's product range. The impression given is of a simplistic Reformed=good/Pentecostal=bad dichotomy. While there is no denying that the publications of these authors and publishers are/have been available through Koorong, this list does not accurately reflect Koorong's stock range or the interests of Koorong's customer base in a broader sense. The works of Kenneth Hagin, in particular, are not much in demand today. The quantities of Banner of Truth and Matthias titles in stock are significantly less than titles from publishers like Zondervan, Thomas Nelson, Baker, IVP, Harper Collins, Tyndale, and Lion Hudson. Yes, there are Hillsong and Benny Hinn devotees among Koorong's customers, but there are also strong followings for authors like Alister McGrath, Tim Keller, Joyce Meyer, Beth Moore, C S Lewis, A W Tozer, Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Francine Rivers, Max Lucado, Rick Warren, John Piper, Sheila Walsh, and Gary Chapman, to name but a sample - evidently a fairly diverse range. In the interests of balance and accuracy, I would suggest that the Wiki entry be edited to reflect the relative diversity within Koorong's products and customer base, in contrast to the cherry-picked polarity that features currently.Nic Genver (talk) 01:29, 29 January 2014 (UTC)