Talk:Riverview Church

message: OK, I've been asked to have a look at this article. It's largely unsourced but there is very little that seems controversial there, although some bits appear to be blowing the church's trumpet a bit. The most recent edits seem to have removed any criticism of the church or its role in Perth society, although those claims do need sourcing. Some spare notes have been left around so I'm going to try and follow this up in the library this week when I get time and make a properly sourced article if that's even possible. Will also check literature on the movement in Perth libraries and see if any discussion of Riverview/Rhema's role in the scene can be introduced (i.e. we know it was the largest but was it influential?) Ultimately this article needs to be brought up to Wikipedia standards with appropriate referencing. I also deleted a rather odd section on "spinoff characters" which doesn't seem to have any relevance - even the church's own website doesn't mention them, if they even exist. I didn't fact-check the US church thing, I wrote to the pastor on his blog and he confirmed it directly so it is not controversial, it's just a matter of finding it in print somewhere. DanielT5 05:05, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've been able to reference some parts - unfortunately by the sheer nature of this thing, so many of them are effectively self-references to contemporaneous church publications. If I had time, I'd go through Western Mail and Daily News in 1987, and Sunday Times and West Australian in 87-89 and in 93. I admit this is hardly my finest work, especially given potential CoIs that exist (although I think they're suitably long ago that they no longer apply), but the nature of Wikipedia is such that you do what you can then leave the rest to others to improve. Wish you luck - this won't be an easy one. Orderinchaos78 08:05, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Oh, and regarding the edits (although I will stay out of the debate due to the wish to avoid a POV war of any kind), Riverview was not a continuation of RFC. Rhema actually closed, and at that time had a membership of just 800 or so. The auditorium was leased out to all manner of groups in the meantime, with the income being used to pay for the debts and to restart and rebrand the church later on. It took *years* for Riverview to get anywhere near the size of its former incarnation, as most people had trickled off to Victory Life by then (which would almost certainly be Perth's largest now, although I don't have figures). Orderinchaos78 08:11, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Yeah I know next to nothing about the church, and thanks for referencing all that stuff. Now we've got to reference the other stuff. You said 87-89 but it seems even 82- would be good, is there any index of papers going back that far? I think even just searching for Rhema in that entire time frame would be good as its not a common word and wouldnt be likely to come up much DanielT5 09:07, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

text: I have updated minor details about the status of the US campus, the service times, and the current TV adverts. I've also added the mission statement and 'focus' details etc. I've called it the largest christian church in WA, which is factual, but i cannot find any evidence to substantiate. As an attender of the church it is difficult to maintain neutrality, so i invite all to edit my diction. Jordaneden 10:49, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I've also added an image from a recent event, is it appropriate for wikipedia purposes? Jordaneden 11:01, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I looked at it, the only things I could find wrong were the external links in the text which broke up the flow a bit, and I removed the section on the women's ministry which is on the website and a couple of parts of sentences which couldnt be verified, e.g. without a list of all churches and their attendance for example we dont know which one is the largest, Victory also claims to be even though they probably aren't, and I looked on a search engine and couldn't find any media references apart from the ones already quoted. All the other changes were good I think. 139.230.245.20 05:54, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Neutrality issues

message: I removed a couple:  Firstly the blog site per external links policy; and secondly the Michigan church which does not seem to be associated with this except by name.  Perhaps I'm missing something - feel free to revert me if i was.  —Moondyne 07:53, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: external links

message: I've changed the 'home groups' link in the History section. It now links to the Wikipedia page for Cell_group, which seems a better match than the Clandestine_cell_system page, which applies more to espionage. Meticulo (talk) 04:19, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Home groups

message: I have made some changes, nothing major, but there was a fair bit of inconsistency in place in regards to alternating between the use of only a first name, and using the full name of individuals. To preserve consistency, and to avoid the article seeming too casual, I have changed all names to the full name. 
Victor-aus (talk) 07:20, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consistency