Talk:Pat Robertson

message: As much as I really don't lament the passing of , WP's rules are there for a reason. I had to undo a move vandalization-- some passing admin might wanna consider breaking out the green lock, 's all I'm sayin'. Xterra1 13:21, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: This was the first instance of page move vandalism, so it isn’t necessary now. - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 13:26, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough; I hadn't checked the edit log before I made that comment. Plus, I'd just woke up. Heh, guess that's why I don't have the blockhammer! :-P -Xterra1 15:08, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

text: Agreed, he is no longer in the category of 'living persons' such protections would no longer seem to apply. BeefsteakMaters (talk) 16:35, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Assuming that by "" you mean contentious material, BLP can (and should) still apply.  We don't throw those kinds of protections out the window immediately upon someone's death.  Generally, it's up to editorial consensus based on the situation and the material in question (WP:BDP). ButlerBlog (talk) 16:47, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Correct. BLP applies to living and recently deceased people. - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 16:50, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggesting move-protection 

message: Under the controversies section, I request that this is added to the article.
Robertson also expressed support for Ivory Coast President Laurent Gbagbo, claiming he was the victim of voter fraud in the 2010 election.https://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/11/us/12evangelical.htmlhttps://archive.thinkprogress.org/inhofe-beck-and-pat-robertson-defend-brutal-ivory-coast-dictator-4126d6867190/
'''
I would add that after the sentence that mentions his support for Charles Taylor and Mobutu. 217.180.201.156 (talk) 19:45, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done for now: Adding this material to the article would constitute undue weight. If you can find more significant coverage in reliable sources that discuss this, the proposed addition could be worth discussing. — SamX [talk · contribs] 04:28, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 9 June 2023 

message: The following sentence (n.53) makes no sense: 'Robertson added that Jerusalem is a "spiritual symbol that must not be given away" because "Jesus Christ the Messiah will come down to the part of Jerusalem that the Arabs want," and this would be "not good."' As it stands, it alleges that PR is opposed to the Second Coming happening at Jerusalem.  Can you Wikipeople write English? 145.224.21.211 (talk) 01:07, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: You could have made your point just fine without adding insults to it. Please review the civility policy. ButlerBlog (talk) 01:18, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

text: I do not see anything particularly wrong with that sentence in the article. The text (quote and all) is taken almost exactly from the referenced source. There are not many ways to summarize what Robertson said. Any better phrasing would only come after finding a better source than what was used and one which had the full text of Robertson's remarks. Whether the text of the article "alleges that PR is opposed to the Second Coming happening at Jerusalem" (your statement) appears to be your conclusion, not necessarily that of Robertson, nor that of the WP article writer. The reader can determine for himself what Robertson might have meant by his remarks. --L.Smithfield (talk) 06:02, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  This sentence makes no sense 

message: Despite being a stalwart against sex before marriage Robertson married his wife six months after impregnating her, lied about it and worse. This should very definitely be added to the Family and relationships section.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/1987/10/09/no-big-deal-for-robertson/09870d6b-2a44-4d14-8438-cb101c2ce1c3/ 2404:440C:27BF:7338:E9A2:8A9F:B60F:8491 (talk) 10:06, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hypocrisy on Sex Before Marriage