Talk:Chuck Pierce
Add topicLatest comment: 2 years ago by Nowa in topic Is "Straight White American Jesus" RS?
 | This article was nominated for deletion on April 21, 2015. The result of the discussion was delete. |
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
Concerns of prior Afd
[edit]In 2015, an earlier version of this article was deleted. See Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Chuck_Pierce. Since then the subject has become much more notable with numerous RS. Hence the article has been recreated. Nowa (talk) 02:41, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
Notability
[edit]@Mandarax has tagged the article for notability. Can anyone provide more detail? It seems to me that there are enough RS to support notability. Nowa (talk) 19:35, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
- No, I did not tag the article. I have made exactly one edit to the page – correcting a spelling error. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 19:42, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
- Oops. My bad. @Melcous added the tag. Sorry about that. Nowa (talk) 23:06, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
Is "Straight White American Jesus" RS?
[edit]user:Flod logic cited the podcast Straight White American Jesus (SWAJ) as a reference in a recent edit. Are podcasts in general, and SWAJ in particular, considered reliable secondary sources? Don't they fall under the heading of self-published sources? Nowa (talk) 16:55, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- As I understand it, Taylor made the documentary for part of his work as a Protestant scholar at the Institute for Islamic, Christian, and Jewish Studies and released it through Axis Mundi, which has been nominated for public scholarship awards. His work on the topic has been published in a number of third-party news sources (a bunch mentioned here). Looking at Wikipedia:Identifying and using self-published works, I think that's okay? flod logic (talk) 17:16, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the explanation. I listened to the podcast preview and it seems to be about Ché Ahn and not Chuck Pierce. I'm feeling, however that the phrase "run by the 'spiritual oligarchy'" is a bit POV and needs a better reference. We've already mentioned that Chuck Pierce is a "founder" and "leader" of the NAR movement, but that's very different than "run by" or that he is a part of an "oligarchy". Any chance of coming up with a better reference for that particular characterization of Pierce? If this is just Matt Taylor's characterization, should we say "According to Matt Taylor..."?
- Do we even need any additional explanation of what the NAR is in this particular article? We already have a link to the main article on the NAR. Nowa (talk) 21:39, 21 April 2024 (UTC)