Talk:Tim A. Peters

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Biography  
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 

Article qualty[edit]

This article is in a terrible format, and is of poor quality. Please read Wikipedia:Manual of Style in order to improve this article. Bastiqueparlervoir 18:16, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

An impressive amount of work has been done on the article since the above was posted. -- Visviva 09:52, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

I have removed some odd material regarding alleged cult membership. The only sources given were an anti-cult website and a Wikipedia article. Per WP:BLP, we are bound to be particularly strict in enforcing Wikipedia's verifiability policy with regard to living persons. One of the links mentioned a Newsweek article in which Peters had admitted to this connection; if that article actually exists, it would be an ideal source for that information. -- Visviva 09:58, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

I have tried to reduce the "libel level" of the accusations against Tim Peters. His former membership in the Children of God is not at issue -- he was in that church at one time. However, he left that organization many years ago (based on personal communication from Tim Peters, 3 August 2007). With respect to "The Family," Peters is not a member of this group, nor is he a member of The Family International. The cited references do not even make the claim. (If the author of the original version agrees with me, let him/her re-edit the text to reflect the truth.) Finally, the effective accusation that Peters either supports child molesters, or worse, is one himself (the clear implication of the previous wording) is simply guilt by association to an unproved accusation about the Children of God. Peters belongs to the Family Missionary Fellowship, an umbrella organization that helps many missionaries world-wide.Frazmi 15:23, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't want to get into a version war over this. However, WP is no place for emotionally laden words. We need to focus on verifiable facts as opposed to assessing intent. Why someone did something is very difficult to pin down. For example, it is a matter of historical record that Peters started Helping Hands Korea. Did he do so out of humanitarian concern, because he was directed to do so by some clandestine organization, or due to a mix of reasons? Frankly, we don't know. Someone may believe he or she knows the reason, but unless we have a direct quote from Peters, I submit it's better not to speculate. Frazmi 15:23, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

LifeFacts to Frazmi: Please don't fall prey to the name game. His membership in the Children of God is not a closed question and the COG are not a "church." The cited references SHOW HIS CLAIM of being a member — the "Family Missionary Fellowship" is a pseudonym for the COG. The FCF through which he collects donations is an umbrella organization inextricably linked to the COG, and virtually all projects it supports are run my recognizable members of the COG. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LifeFacts (talkcontribs) 03:04, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Stating facts is not libel. For something to be libel, there has to be intentional, malicious falsehood. The statements made on the current version of this page are so factual that Peters himself would not be able to claim libel in a court of law. Fact: Peters is/was a known member of the COG. Fact: Peters uses the FCF which is linked to the COG. Fact: the COG has a court-documented history of abuses. Fact: Peters who personally went online to declare membership in the COG ("FMF" is a pseudonym) has not personally reappeared to claim otherwise. Fact: he continues to use the FCF to collect donations. Frazmi, by reading into factual statements and reflecting on them as "the effective accusations" and "inuendo" is clearly the one who is emotionally invested in covering up the simple researchable facts. Fact: according to his daughter, Peters is aware of the request that he formally distance himself from the COG for the record, but refuses to do so, which is his right. But it is also the right of the public to go by last known factual information which he himself provided. .LifeFacts —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 03:28, 14 October 2007 (UTC)


Frazmi to LifeFacts: This article is about Tim Peters, not the Children of God. Your wording is that of "guilt by association." You basically argue that unless Peters acceeds to your demand to formally renounce the Children of God, he must condone all of the sorry activities that may or may not have been done by other members of that organization. That's like saying that a Catholic who refuses to renounce Catholicism thereby condones the sodomy committed by certain high officials of that faith.

I suggest that you take your COG and FMF discussion to the WP pages devoted to the organizations in question. Say all you like there, I don't care, and probably might even support your edits if they were sourced.

With respect to Peters, it should be enough in this bio entry to state that:

(1) Formerly he was a member of the Children of God. (He has told me personally that he withdrew his membership years ago. Since you apparently accept what Peters' daughter told you as worthy of acceptance, please accept what Peters personally told me.)

(2) He uses the FMF as an umbrella organization to collect funds. This organization functions in this capacity for many missionaries and projects.

With respect to your 'facts'... Fact 1: Addressed above. His membership in COG is past tense. Fact 2: The linkage between FCF and COG probably exists in that certain people serve in both organizations, but this is irrelevant to an article about Peters -- unless you are claiming that he either participates in or actively endorses the nefarious activities attributed to COG. Fact 3: The so-called court documented history of COG, even if it were really that (it's not, in my opinion) is irrelevant. Take it up on the COG page -- again, unless you are going to accuse Peters of participation? Fact 4: Peters did not personally go online to declare membership in the COG. That is your interpretation of his statement of using FMF as an umbrella organization. Fact 5: Yes, he uses FMF.

LifeFacts, your personal remarks to me are unwarranted. You do not know my motivations, and need not comment on them.

Let's keep the facts about Tim Peters as facts about Tim Peters, and avoid throwing mud at him. That mud might stick on an organization twice removed from him, but it is not right to accuse him by inuendo. Frazmi 13:49, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

LifeFacts to Frazmi: Your perception of so-called "guily by association" statements on my part, was my presentation of the other side of the story to: "widely regarded as one of the world's foremost advocates for human rights." It depends who is doing the regarding. Thus the sentence began with "Conversely, he is also....." I appreciate that you are striving to place only known established facts. I wish only to do the same.

My remarks about your motivations are in response to yours about mine. You opened the first salvo. If you can reduce my endeavors at providing factual information on record from a number of sources to "one person" and "one hostile personality" accusing Peters you left it wide open. If you do not wis to warrant comments on your own motivations, do not do the same for me.

On another point, if you are to present the references, they are to be verifiable (online, or viewable in print). Are your "personal communications" on record anywhere? If not, your assertion that Peters is no longer a member is based on personal claims by an editor with an apparent agenda of denying the facts.

In regards to FCF, it is still primarily used for and run by known and recognizable members of the COG, whose leaders are in hiding from criminal prosecution.

As asserted, his current membership is not yet a closed question. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LifeFacts (talkcontribs) 15:12, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

LifeFacts to Frazmi: One more thing: there are no private pet interpretations on my part. To have "FM status" as Peters claimed, is verifiable terminology used at the time, for being a member of the COG. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LifeFacts (talkcontribs) 15:26, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Controversy[edit]

I tried to edit this page yesterday with UPDATED information on Tim Peters and Helping Hands Korea as I have been recently notified that he is NO LONGER associated with FCF but rather is now working with Asia Reach Ministries, which does not have--nor has ever had--any connection whatsoever to The Family aka COG aka etc., etc., whatever name you would like to pin on the group. However, someone very uninformed has stupidly removed my ACCURATE information to replace it with what they believe to be correct. I thought only factual information was printed here. Obviously, some people cannot let their hatred go and even though they are clearly wrong, will post anything that pleases them. Shame. --Jadedchick76 (talk) 20:22, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

  • Since I was the one who undid/reverted your last edits, allow me to explain. First of all, you really didn't update anything; you just removed all the controversial stuff (which is well documented) and removed anywhere it stated that Mr. Peters was ever a member of the Children of God (COG) or received money from the Family Care Foundation (FCF). All of this is documented (see the references section). These details should remain in the article and that is why I reverted your edits. I don't know Mr. Peters or anything about his work, so I don't have any "hatred" towards the guy. If he really is no longer a member of the COG and no longer receives money from FCF, we can state that. However, his past connections should remain. As I pointed out before, we have plenty of references to back up both claims (that he "was", at least) and there is nothing "clearly wrong" or "stupid" about keeping them in the article. Wikipedia is supposed to exhaustive, after all. --Thorwald (talk) 00:51, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

BLP cleanup[edit]

Since the edit summaries did not appear to have been heeded by the last two editors to revert my cleanup of this article, let me be perfectly clear: If any administrator makes a change noting "per BLP" or the equivalent in the edit summary, any editor who reverts that change without obtaining either that administrator's consent or consensus at a relevant venue such as WP:BLP/N is subject to being blocked. Defamatory accusations sourced to self-published sources are simply not acceptable, and reverting them back onto a page is as bad as adding them in the first place. Jclemens (talk) 06:24, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Justcheckinguser1, 4 March 2011[edit]

{{edit semi-protected}}

This page is not vandalized and the editor who locked it did so for pov reasons. The edit he removed is accurate and he is clearly biased since he labeled the following edit as vandalism: His fund raising activities are not vetted. And in contrast to most charitable institutions no accounting is given for any finances funneled through his fund raising activities. No figures at all of how much he raises or how or where anything is spent. Justcheckinguser1 (talk) 15:31, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

If you want to include contentious material about a living person, you need an independent, reliable, secondary source. Failing that, an extremely dim view will be taken of any efforts to add such material to the page. Claiming that I have POV reasons for protecting the article from such inappropriate edits will win you no friends, either. Jclemens (talk) 18:03, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Tim A. Peters. 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:

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

As of 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 the "External links modified" sections if they want, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • 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 IITalk to my owner:Online 19:41, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Assessment comment[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Tim A. Peters/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Needs splitting into sections. Tim (Xevious) 11:19, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Last edited at 11:19, 5 March 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 08:46, 30 April 2016 (UTC)