Talk:Jack Hyles/Archive 2

message: A editor just added a totally disputed tag to the page. For interested parties on the sources visit www.Chicagotribune.com search archives for Jack Hyles and you will find the sources in the article. To read the articles you must register. The search that comes up is: Arbustoo 01:27, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A note on sources

message: Hello people, the AfD for the above article has just closed with the decision that it should be merged here. Could somebody knowledgeable in this area please do that? Thanks! Babajobu 08:59, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It basically is merged, as least the verified/national press stuff. Arbusto 05:59, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Jack Hyles Controversy]] AfD

message: Some recent edits broke the references; see it for yourself.  Obviously, they need to be fixed.  The errors were caused by people removing sentences wholesale, including their references, not realizing they were removing named references which were referred to later in the body.  --Cyde Weys 07:29, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed it. Nothing was removed but sentences were moved wholesale. David D. (Talk) 17:39, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  References broken 

message: "News reports. Wikipedia should not offer first-hand news reports on breaking stories" WP:ISNOT So, the "Controversies" section should not exist, because all of its referential basis is first-hand news reports of breaking stories. Pooua 17:59, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You completely misread that section. Posting newspaper articles on controversies surrounding the subject of the article is not a "breaking story" nor is it "first hand," first hand being original material. Arbusto 20:33, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's hard to see how there could be many breaking stories in relation to Jack Hyles.  "Controversial preacher still dead" is unlikely to make the front pages. Mind you, if Smith Wigglesworth were to show up and raise him from the dead, that would be worth an additional sentence, even if it were a current event. Just zis Guy you know? 21:28, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

text: This is a fine example that due to Pooua's personal attachment/relationship with Hyles and Hyles' church he simply is just looking for reasons to have the criticism removed. Arbusto 05:30, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia is Not an Indiscriminate Collection of Information 

message: Preying from the Pulpit was nominated for deletion.  Some interested in this article will likely be interested in participating in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Preying from the Pulpit.  I previously removed the , as I feel this is something worth discussing.  The issue of reliability of the mini-news series, raised here, probably applies more even more so.  --Rob 08:20, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would like to see some research into media attempts to defame Jack Hyles or First Baptist Church of Hammond or Hyles-Anderson Christian College. It is an amazing thing that a TV news broadcast would go so far as the now-defunct CBS news team on WJBK in Detroit went the year before their demise. It was media stories like theirs that rallied so many fundamentalists into politics in that decade. Heh, CBS had the nickname of "Communist Broadcast Service" 20 years prior to that stunt, and their recent news coverage fiascos haven't redeemed them. Pooua 20:33, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And Faux News claims to be "fairt and balanced" but that's not true either.  The myth of liberal bias in the US media is apparent to anybody outside the USA - the centre of US politics is well to the right of the world average, and a so-called left-wing source in the US rarely makes it past the left of centre anywhere else. Just zis Guy you know? 08:21, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, yes, CBS is so right wing that it waited at least a minute before hammering President Bush based on a forged letter about his National Guard Service. But, you probably expected a reference to that story, right? But, so as to get back on track, why was the Detroit station the only one that did this kind of story on Jack Hyles? Hammond is not all that close to Detroit; many other news organizations had their offices between Hammond and Detroit, if not in Chicago. And, yet, you have to go to this one-time, off-beat, news feature from a small station a few hundred miles away, to get the report you want. Why do you suppose that is? Pooua 07:33, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Preying from the Pulpit on AFD 

message: Vivaldi removed  Hyles "has given 'hundreds of thousands' of dollars to needy friends over many years but has kept no records of the transactions." Why was this removed? It seems that a direct quote from the subject of the article referring to not accounting for funds is very relevant and is an indictator of other motivations in the above discussions. Arbusto 21:50, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Phrase it so that it sounds less like innuendo. Just zis Guy you know? 22:04, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal of quotes

message: First, full disclosure. I'm a Baptist, but not a Hyles-style Baptist. I doubt his fans would much care for me, since I drink and listen to rock and -- worst of all! -- am Calvinist.
The article reads like what the Talk page confirms it is, a big battleground. It's full of the kind of POV bad writing, and poor structure that tends to result.
I got the impression that both sides were/are trying to "win" by heaping up as much stuff favorable to their side they could.
Both "pro" and "con" should be more like representative samples and less like detailed compendiums, with an emphasis on strictly applying policy.  A.J.A. 03:45, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My attention was called to this article when someone came on the religious forum I was frequenting, and said, "Hey, look what Wikipedia says about Jack Hyles!" Several people were shocked, but others knew that Wikipedia is pretty much an open sandbox, where anyone can say anything about anyone. But, I figured that we should have a reasonable representation of Jack Hyles and what he was about. Note, though, that I have not made very many changes at all to any of the article pages; I am trying to complete a fuller biography on my own, before posting it here. Pooua 05:23, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

text: The article reads like what the Talk page confirms it is, a big battleground -- A.J.A..  My response.  I agree, the article sucks.  This is the problem when one tries to compile every last bit of information that was ever published in a newspaper article into an encyclopedia article.  The entire controversy section (and most of the response to that controversy) should be condensed into a few sentences. e.g.  "Hyles' Church had a pastor that was convicted of molestations in 1993." & "Hyles' believed the man was wrongly convicted."  & "Hyle's had a former employee accuse him of financial improprieties and of commiting adultery with his wife." & "Both of these charges were denied by Hyles".  AJA, I would encourage you to help improve this article.  Be bold. Vivaldi (talk) 19:28, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

text: AJA feel free to help, but be aware some users are marking edits as minor and reverting without comment the whole page. Arbusto 20:07, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Cleanup 

message: This sentence is rather ambiguous:
:Another work, Enemies of Soul Winning tackled many issues considered controversial in fundamentalist and evangelical circles, which include the doctrine of repentance, Lordship salvation, and the role of the church in soul winning.
For instance, does Hyles advocate or deny Lordship salvation in that book? --Flex 17:52, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't recall the contents of the book, Enemies of Soul Winning, but I do remember listening to Jack Hyles' sermons in which he denounced Lordship Salvation. He introduced the concept to me. I have also read criticism that complained that Jack Hyles condemns Lordship Salvation. So, I would expect that he would have opposed it in this book as well. Pooua 18:24, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: ''Enemies of Soul Winning''

message: Shouldn't this be "Hyles Publications"?  --Kalmia 08:04, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Amazon.com shows both publishers, depending on the book. I would have to investigate to tell you the difference between the two presses. Pooua 08:44, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hyles-Anderson Pub 

message: Substituted at 20:34, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment