Talk:Universal Life Church/Archive 1

message: In pursuant with the Three-revert rule the user ULCGUY has been blocked from posting on Wikipedia.org for repeatedly vandalizing the external links of this article. The link to ULCHQ.com's Myspace has been removed in pursuant with the Official Wikipedia.org's policies regarding social networking sites. Wikipedia.org's states that "Certain kinds of pages should not be linked from Wikipedia articles."
ULCHQ.COM was in violation of the following :
3. A page that contains factually inaccurate material or unverified original research, as detailed in Wikipedia:Reliable sources.
5.  Links intended to promote a site, especially if that site's primary purpose is to advertise or sell products or services, or if the site requires payment to view the relevant content. This is colloquially known as external link spamming.
7. Links to blogs, social networking sites (such as MySpace), or discussion forums unless mandated by the article itself.
The material contained on the myspace not only slandered but also told users and I quote "DO NOT submit your ordination request to this website!!!  This site remains an UNAUTHORIZED site".
ULCHQ.com has made an attempt to smear and slander our website ULC.ORG for there own personal gain. Might I remind you that we are a separate entity and have nothing to do with ULCHQ.com and do not need "Authorization" from them.
I will let you decide which Universal Life Church is acting morally and ethically.
 
Regards,
ULC Monastery
Any further abuse of this article for personal gain and/or promotion or to defame any Church will be removed and immediately noted and forwarded to the Administrators of Wikipedia.org and will be handled in an ethical and professional manner.
 
Brdennis 10:13, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Abuse and un-ethical behavior

message: Whould it be appropriate for the Church of England to be directly linked in external links on the Wiki on the Roman Catholic Church?  After all, the CofE was part of the Catholic Church at one point till it broke off and started its own Church.
Just like what is happening with the ULC and The Monastery.  The ULC still exists, just as it has, for the last 4 decades and is Headquarted in Modesto where the Founder started the very first ULC Church and where his widow is now President.  It is still the only place where records for ordination in that last 40 years are officially kept for all ULC minister. 
The Monastery broke free from the ULC, which is fine.  I can think of 2 other churches that have, namely Universal Ministries and the Progressive Universal Life Church.  But neither group profess to be the real ULC.  ULCGUY 20:12, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: dude..i totally created a article on The ULC Monastery.  PimpDaddy21 15:25, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Something to think about

message: Are ULC ministers refered to as "Rev..."? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.254.171.194 (talk • contribs) 
:As a ULC minister, I do prefer to be referred to in this manner. However some may prefer another term. ReverendG 19:13, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As a ULC minister, I don't care what I get called, as long as it can be used in polite company and isn't "late for dinner." TechBear 19:53, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: On documents I am referred to as Rev. .. with my actual degree postnomials (non-ULC), person to person I prefer my first name.ULCGUY 01:07, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Addressing a ULC minister

message: :There is a list of ministers on this page.  I do not like having the list at all, but if it must be there then it should at least only name people famous enough to have wikipedia entries.
::That is your opinion, some of the people are famous in a local region and had external links
:::Wikipedia's format does not include local emphasis for national topics.  The phrase is "non-notable."  If a radio dj or whatever happens to be a ULC member, and you think it should be on the wikipedia entry, then say why on this talk page.  And sign your comments so that they will have a date stamp.  128.208.36.40 20:32, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia's format does not exlude local celeberities either and inclusion as a wikipedia article does not denote celebrity or even famous status.  Nice try though...*shakeshead* 24.116.200.178 01:36, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Huh? Listen to the guy above.  The phrase is "non notable vanity" and if there are any on that list they should be removed.  In fact, the whole list should go because it is crass.  Do you see a list of famous Baptists or Catholics on their wiki pages? 216.63.100.81 17:26, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ministers removed 

message: * I am from England and would like to be ordained on the Internet. If I register on an American website is this legal in England. If not, does anyone know where or how I can get ordained for England.
You will be an ordained minister but may not solemnize marriages.  68.37.11.57 19:20, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ULC in England 

message: *I've added a cited: "Other than a few locations in Canada, most countries outside the United States do not recognize the Universal Life Church." Is this somewhat distinct to the ULC or is ordination by other modern, born-in-America churches also likely to be ignored in other countries?  --Ds13 22:30, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question about outside the United States 

message: Does anyone know the regions of Canada that this is legal in? 142.167.24.185 23:54, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  legality in Canada