Talk:The Salvation Army in Australia
|WikiProject Christianity||(Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)|
|WikiProject Australia||(Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)|
This page needs to be protected as it has been consistently vandalized by user Satruth who has been adding and re-adding the following message, which violates a number of wiki policies, to wit, Wikipedia:POV, Wikipedia:Personal remarks, Wikipedia:Original research, Wikipedia:Neutrality, Wikipedia:Advocacy, Wikipedia:Sources as well as spelling and grammatical errors.
The salvation army cares more for drug addicts and alchoholics than it does for the children of its "officers", with many childhoods destroyed by relocations and parents so pre occupied with helping others that they let their own children suffer, the salvation army owes compensation to many children for mental anguish and suffering but instead they send there officers on a tour of the mediteranian and uk at no expense, this is where your donations go. stop donating to these scumbags.
While the users criticisms of the Australian Salvation Army may be valid, they are not sourced and are presented in an POV manner. This has been going on for awhile and needs attention by the admins.--Bellerophon5685 (talk) 02:06, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
What I've added is nothing but the truth and my gramtaical errors are due to under schooling caused by the salvation army's forced changeing of schools, sometimes as soon as three months and at most, two years at the one school. Feel free to clean what I've added up, to be written correctly. But the truth, which it is, needs to be told, wikipedia is about truthfull facts isnt it? I am annoyed that this person removes truthfull facts because gramatical errors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Satruth (talk • contribs) 02:56, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
Firstly its "because of grammatical errors". Secondly, your message is unsourced (personal experiences are not considered Wikipedia:Reliable sources), it advocates a certain position, specifically asking the reader not to donate to the organization in question, as well as being POV (to the point of referring to the subjects as "scumbags"). If you or someone else can find a(n) reliable source(s) to back up your claims, be my guest and add this in as NPOV a manner as possible.--Bellerophon5685 (talk) 05:44, 9 May 2013 (UTC)