Talk:Gospel for Asia

message: Gospel for Asia is an extremely influential Christian missionary organization.  It would be great to update this article and get some more sources other than its own website (which needs to be changed per wikipedia policy).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kristamaranatha (talk • contribs) 04:18, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Updating done; I've tracked down the needed citations for the various parts of this article, and added more relevant information. The article still needs a lot of help, as GFA supports such a large variety of work in South Asia. Jaydge (talk) 21:23, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editing needed 

message: Wikipedia policy and guidelines state:
*"If no reliable third-party sources can be found on a topic, Wikipedia should not have an article on it." (WP:V)
*"Self-published and questionable sources may be used...so long as...the article is not based primarily on such sources." (WP:SELFPUB)
*"If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article or stand-alone list." (WP:Notability)
*"Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published secondary sources and, to a lesser extent, on tertiary sources." (WP:PSTS)
It is NOT appropriate to cite an article almost solely to the topic's webpages, and this DOES NOT establish notability. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 03:53, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sourcing and notability 

message: "...contact page cited do list physical addresses of all of them."
This is WP:Complete bollocks, as can be seen from this contacts list:
*UK: Freepost NAT11108, York (UK site contact info lists a PO Box)
*NZ: PO Box 302580 (NZ site lists 7 Target Court, Glenfield, Auckland = address of Calvary Chapel Auckland‎, telephone book lists just the PO Box)
*Korea: PO Box 984, Yeouido
*Germany: Postfach 1360
*Australia: PO Box 3587 Village Fair
*SA: PO Box 28880
None of these indicate that GfA has a physical office in these countries.
US & Canada appear to be the only locations where they have a physical office. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 04:29, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: *WP:NOTDIRECTORY & WP:UNDUE. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 14:35, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Physical addresses 

message: The one book cited contains viewpoints contrary to Gospel for Asia's own claims and actions, the mention of which could unnecessarily damage their reputation. Gospel for Asia does not oppose Western missionary work, as this author accuses them of doing. Instead they point out (throughout their literature, namely Revolution in World Missions ) the lack of Western support toward indigenous missionary work in places where the indigenous people are generally much more effective at operating their own church outreach, and in turn they promote awareness and support of indigenous missions among Western Christian churches that are well equipped with the resources to make a huge difference among less privileged people groups. The book, Revolution in World Missions, also points out the hypocrisy of Christians who claim to follow Christ's example of caring for the poor and needy spending lavishly on needless luxuries while the world's poor go hungry and many have no lasting hope or sense of purpose.
Gospel for Asia also do not oppose humanitarian work as such, but rather use it is a cornerstone of their ministry (for example, their Bridge of Hope child sponsorship program which provides education, food and hygiene for thousands of children. However, they do believe that humanitarian work has little lasting value if it is not done with the intention of communicating the hope that Christians believe can be found in the Gospel, because that concerns the eternal state of a person's soul. (See chapter 12 of Revolution in World Missions, "Good Works and the Gospel.") 
I'm not an expert editor so I'm not sure how to bring this information into the article in a meaningful way without unknowingly violating some Wikipedia guideline, but I think the article would benefit from better sources of information than just one book, especially one that presents Gospel for Asia in a negative light and contrary to their own claims. Jaydge (talk) 19:25, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Accuracy and Relevance of Info Presented

message: Former Indian presidents A. P. J. Abdul Kalam and Pratibha Devi Singh Patil demonstrated appreciation to the organisation[citation needed]and their plea stated that "there is no negative remark about them from any corner".[15]
Dr A P J Abdul Kalam and Pratibha Devi Singh Patil were the ex presidents of India and if their name is being discussed in this article then there should be solid reference of them commenting about this organization. Here the editor had mentioned lines quoted in a petition filed by Gospel For Asia. If the editor is not able to give reference of a creditable source I think the names of the above mentioned personalities should be removed. Benedictdilton (talk) 21:36, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing the names of  A. P. J. Abdul Kalam and Pratibha Devi Singh Patil 

message: Wikipedia rules state that for controversial issues, like the case of accusations against Yohannan, there must be a neutral representation: "the differing points of view" got to be "presented as differing points of view, not as widely accepted facts". Before I edited, the last versions were widely and evidently failing to do so. They even deviate from the central topic (which is the ministry Gospel for Asia) and dedicated most of the article talking about the allegations against Yohannan, in a non-neutral manner, more critical than descriptive
--Goose friend (talk) 22:00, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lack of neutrality. 

message: I request admin and moderators to keep a close eye on the following articles Gospel for Asia, K. P. Yohannan, Believers Church there is a clear indication that a there can be again a massive puppetry as happened in the talk page of K. P. Yohannan.Benedictdilton (talk) 01:48, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  For the attention of Admin and Moderators 

message: I'd like to know why my contributions has been deleted. 
I consider it censorship and lack of neutrality. It's unfair not to allow in the article the statements of the very person involved here, K. P. Yohannan, who has the right to defend his integrity and the integrity of his organization. I agree that this should be presented in the article descriptively, but it should be presented in order to reach true neutrality.
::K. P. Yohannan claims that there has been a lot of wrong information surfacing on the Internet about him and his ministry. He assures that accusations are due to misinformation campaigns and a "propaganda war"  related to the anti-Christian sentiment. In his website, he says he has already been falsely accused of fraud several times, and he claims that certain authorities have confirmed certain allegations to be scams
::National newspapers, The Indian Express and the Business Standard, covered some events regarding a plea that Gospel for Asia and Believers Church presented to the Delhi High Court for removal of "defamatory and derogatory" articles against these ministries on social networks.  The complaint said:
::
::The civil suit included statements from former Indian presidents A. P. J. Abdul Kalam and Pratibha Devi Singh Patil in which they had supposedly demonstrated appreciation to the organisation . 
::In addition, K. P. Yohannan wrote a letter regarding his integrity and the accusations, which he considers to be "A New Type of Persecution". GFA became a charter of the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability (ECFA) to ensure its financial accountability to their donors., and Believers Church claims that "allegations are without any basis or data" and "no irregularities have been found".
What I wrote had "creditable" sources from newspapers, and the organization itself, or its branches. Please tell which parts of the text above are written from a "fan's point of view".
I think the fragment should be allowed, in order to introduce the point of view of the organization itself, as this article is supposed to talk about the organization encyclopaedically. Talking about the organization's own point of view may not suit biased criticisms or anti-Christian prejudices, but although opinions on a given issue differ, they should be presented. Please read Wikipedia:NPOV dispute and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.--Goose friend (talk) 23:44, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Censorship 

message: Recently, attempts have been made to delete sourced material regarding the financial accountability issues facing GFA. Doing a quick Google News archive search shows that the majority of the coverage the group has been getting has been focused on these matters, from sources both church-focused (ChristianityToday, World Magazine, Christian Post) and not (Toronto Star, Daily Beast). As such, it would be irresponsible not to cover this matter in this article. --Nat Gertler (talk) 13:41, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Financial issues 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Gospel for Asia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140808170719/http://www.believerschurch.com/cheruvally-estate/ to http://www.believerschurch.com/cheruvally-estate/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:48, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: A link to the GFA F.C. was recently deleted as confusing. While the team is using the logo of the Believers Church. I've not found references that make clear what relationship the team has to the subject of this article. (There is this piece on GFA having a student team, but that was years before the supposed 2013 establishment of the FC that has its own page.) Keep an eye out for sources that explain any link between the team and the organization. --Nat Gertler (talk) 14:43, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Football club 

message: Don't have time to integrate this into the article at the moment, but GfA has lost their right to bring money into India. --Nat Gertler (talk) 14:57, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Funds for India 

message: I was just thumbing through this page, when I realized that several citations are "401 Not Found", from Patheos. I don't know why this is, but I tried to find articles that would give me the same info to just update the sources, but couldn't find any. So with the majority of the last two sections not having any sources to verify its validity, I believe its best to remove these sections for the time being so we don't sacrifice the credibility of this page (as per the rules on citing sources). Any thoughts? James Smith1967 (talk) 04:32, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: In most cases, dead links to otherwise reliable sources should be tagged per WP:LINKROT, and should only be removed as a last resort. Are these reliable? My understanding is that Patheos is a WP:SPS site. In this case content supported by blogs should be removed if it cannot be supported by something more reliable.  If kept, at the very least, it should be treated as opinion instead of news.  Anything from Patheos would almost certainly have to be attributed as the opinion of whoever is making the claim, but even then only if there's a specific reason to include it at all. WP:RSN has probably already gone over this at some point. Grayfell (talk) 04:52, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: User:Grayfell, Thanks so much for your input. After reviewing the links you posted and doing more research, I agree with you that this needs to be changed to keep in step with the guidelines stated above. James Smith1967 (talk) 06:18, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

text: The Patheos blog has been moved to https://www.wthrockmorton.com/. 31.50.240.5 (talk) 10:15, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link Issues 

message: Below article recently decided court case regarding the rubber plant. I nominate section for deletion due to unverified claims that couldn't be proven in court. http://www.newindianexpress.com/states/kerala/2018/apr/13/harrisons-case-setback-may-cost-kerala-government-dear-in-erumeli-airport-project-1800878.html Dt502 (talk) 15:09, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Rubber Plant

message: , who has for a year been doing substantial edits to this article with a pro-GFA bent, has now disclosed that they are a paid editor, and his since continued doing substantial edits on the article. Their edits need to be reviewed carefully. They are encouraged not to edit the article directly, but to suggest or request edits on this Talk page, due to their strong conflicts of interest. --Nat Gertler (talk) 23:43, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Paid editor with conflicts of interest 

message: I have been advised to suggest edits here instead of implementing them myself as it may be perceived as a COI. I had previously made edits before being advised against it, but the edits made were only to correct misinformation and provide updates to ongoing stories. To continue this effort of updating the info here, I would suggest providing information in the Affiliate Offices section. Some helpful unbiased info can be found for different offices on the respective country's charity registration sites. For example, founding date and office locations may be found at Canada's charity registry.
Would any fellow editors like to help find and insert this info? --Mckaylagrace (talk) 17:47, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: We should not be listing addresses of the offices; Wikipedia is not a directory. At the moment, the far more urgent need is to scrape out all of the promotional material that has been added to this article. --Nat Gertler (talk) 18:53, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

text: Thanks for your recent edits here. But I noticed one recent edit removed material, flagging it is as ADVERT. The removed material seems to be specific records and examples of the work of the organization without asking for monetary support or any type of promotion.Mckaylagrace (talk) 17:59, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The adding of the ADVERT tag applied it not to a single edit, but to the article in general. --Nat Gertler (talk) 18:05, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Ahh okay. May I ask for a few examples of what comes across as advertisement?Mckaylagrace (talk) 18:31, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: "K.P. and his wife, Gisela Yohannan, have dedicated their lives to spread the knowledge of Jesus throughout South Asia in hopes that people who have never heard of Jesus would have the option to follow the Christian faith." "These wells provide free, clean water to individuals regardless of caste, class, social designation or religion." " in 2018 GFA assisted “more than 70,000 children, free medical services in over 1,200 villages and remote communities, 4,000 wells drilled, 11,000 water filters installed, Christmas gifts for more than 200,000 needy families, and spiritual teaching available in 110 languages in 14 nations through radio ministry.”" (quoting a press release, naturally.) There's a difference in the goals of a press release and the goals of an encyclopedia. --Nat Gertler (talk) 19:55, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Affiliate Offices 

message: The final paragraph of the Believer's Church section reads, "GFA has been criticized for engaging in predatory proselytization while providing aid in the aftermath of the 2004 tsunami. The Hindu American Foundation condemned the organization for pressuring vulnerable tsunami victims to convert to Christianity, setting up illegal unregistered orphanages and forcing orphans recite the Christian prayers several times a day.[76]"
I suggest that this information be removed or edited as it contains emotionally leading verbiage from a source that would naturally be in opposition to the organization as a "competing" religious movement. The source link is also unavailable, so the many claims cannot be verified. Mckaylagrace (talk) 18:12, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Before I could get to it, another editor added an archive link, so the HAF material is verifiable, as well as adding a link to an article from a third party source covering some of the same material. So it looks covered to me. --Nat Gertler (talk) 02:19, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you, Nat. Another discrepancy I noticed is reference 70. The Hindu reported the Church of South India leaving the KCC but according to the official KCC site and the Kerala Coucil of Churches Wikipedia site, CSI did not leave the KCC. This should be updated. Mckaylagrace (talk) 15:05, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Support a modification as per https://www.newindianexpress.com/states/kerala/2017/sep/02/no-severing-ties-with-kerala-council-of-churches-csi-bishop-clarifies-1651381.html  which denies removal but does state a lesser action of non-participation. Don't have time to edit right now --Erp (talk) 22:05, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Just wanted to pop back in and say this edit still needs to be made. Thanks for the support link, Erp. I would also like to point out that Narada News referenced in this section has been shut down as a publication pertaining to issues of bribery amdist the sting operation it uncovered.https://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/naradacom-shuts-shop-journalists-threaten-hunger-strike-over-dues/299122https://www.livemint.com/Politics/8JI3SDpREIoh4IOA4SlenL/Narada-News-CEO-Mathew-Samuel-detained-on-arrival-from-the-U.html What is the required protocol in adjusting information provided by an unreliable source? Mckaylagrace (talk) 19:28, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: You can raise the question of its reliability at the Reliable Sources Noticeboard. I will say that "he was arrested a government official who his sting operation showed had taken bribes" is not a great argument for showing unreliability. --Nat Gertler (talk) 20:26, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

text: I have a similar concern with the HAF reference. The Hindu American Foundation also has many allegations against it as being a nationalist/supremacist outlet with clear affiliations with specific political and religious parties while it claims neutrality.http://coalitionagainstgenocide.org/reports/2013/cag.15dec2013.haf.rss.pdfhttp://www.coalitionagainstgenocide.org/press/cag.pr.06dec2013.pdf What is the best way to go about ensuring the neutrality of the encyclopedia entry in this case? Mckaylagrace (talk) 19:46, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The HAF is only used as a source for their own statement, which is not presented in Wikipedia's voice. To judge whether that view has significance (which serves our goal of neutral point of view, we look for third-party sources... and in this case, we have third party coverage in the reference that follows. I will also note that the "many accusations" you source are two documents from a single source that has faced some criticism itself. --Nat Gertler (talk) 20:35, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Believer's Church 

message: I am uncertain of the reliability of The Karma News, who are reporting fresh legal entanglements for the Believer's Church, which is funded through GFA. --Nat Gertler (talk) 02:45, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Developing news 

message: Material was just added regarding Rwanda, but it's all sourced to a single article from OneNewsNow.com - a site that has fared poorly on the Reliable Sources Noticeboard in the past. This article is pretty clearly WP:CHURNALISM of this piece written by a "GFA Staff Writer". --Nat Gertler (talk) 23:28, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  OneNewsNow source