Talk:Oral Roberts

message: From Votes for Deletion
*Oral Roberts: (fictional talk between Antonio friend of ghosts Martin and Oral Roberts): Your article needs much work, at least, if not deletion, brother Roberts. If you have a computer in Heaven, you, or at least another wikipedian still in Earth, needs to check this out. --Antonio friend of the dead Martin
What is that doing here? Axeman89 17:42, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Nonsense

message: A warning to all readers is that the external link "cephasministry.com" is arguably an anti-Charismatic/Pentacostal website.  Oral Roberts and other healing evangelists are respected ministers among Charismatic and non-Charismatic evangelicals alike!
: What color is the sky on your planet?  Here on Earth, Roberts is known as the clown who claimed that god was holding him hostage and would kill him if he didn't cough up eight million bucks in ransom.
:For that matter, Roberts is not a "healing" evangelist at all.  He is a "pretend to heal people so he can fleece the marks" evangelist, in the mold of Elmer Gantry.  He is a fraud, and would be a disgrace to Christianity, if he were indeed a Christian.
I beg to differ - greatly. Oral Roberts and many other well-known charismatic and pentecostal teachers (eg Benny Hinn, Rick Joyner) have been criticized quite heavily from non-Charismatic Christians. --One Salient Oversight 06:33, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Considering that all the present links are to organizations founded by Roberts, neutral or even negative assessments would be welcome to restore neutrality.
You people have no right to judge the legitamacy of Oral Roberts. Keep objectivity, ok? --Okiefromokla 15:26, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Warning 

message: While it might be nice if Oral had scrupulously credited God with raising the dead each time he talked about it, the fact seems to be that he actually did say he (Oral) raised the dead. ("I had to stop and go back in the crowd and raise the dead person so I could go ahead with the service.") It's not for us to clean up what he said so it seems doctrinally sound.  I think there's some question over whether God wanted $8 million for "sending medical missionaries to Africa" or to "pay Oral Robert's medical school for the training of physicians, ostensibly to be used as missionaries in Africa." - Nunh-huh 01:58, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: He's on videotape making these statements. If he wasn't careful about his statements regarding the facts and doctrines of Christianity—surely a defect in a minister— that should be mentioned in his article. - Nunh-huh 06:24, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

text: Well, no, I wouldn't think so, but that's rather beside the point I was addressing, which is that he said that he'd raised the dead. His son has also said that he's raised the dead. - Nunh-huh 22:09, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: By the way - the usage of the term "Liberal Media" in order to discredit historical sources is not a good thing to do. I have spent two years training in a Bible College and have been teaching and preaching from the scriptures for over ten years. It is my asertion and belief that Oral Roberts has some seriously erroneous theological teachings - one of which is the fact that he makes prophecies that don't come true and make claims that can't be verified (ie the raising of someone from the dead). One Salient Oversight 01:25, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent edits

message: Moved an anon.'s witness from article.  The scripture references may have some use to this article's group of editors.  
:Oral Roberts' cheer that "Something Good is going to happen to you." comes from Nahum 1:7 and several verses in Psalms that reveal that "The Lord is good."  3 John 2, "Beloved, I wish above all things that you would prosper and be in health even as your soul prospers."  The revelation of 3 John 2 shows that The Lord is concerned about the well-being of His creation.  In Genesis, "As long as the earth remains, there shall be seedtime and harvest." "Touch not mine anointed," means that we should pray and receive God's Word and confirm it in The Holy Bible, and that we should not criticize God's prophets.  "The Lord bless you and keep you."  "Prepare The Way" for the soon return of The Lord Jesus who is The Only Way to The Father (Our Creator) in Heaven. Thank The Lord for sending His Holy Spirit to live in those who believe.
WBardwin 10:48, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Witness 

message: I think the article should include the 1987 incident in which Oral Roberts said that God would "call him home" unless a certain sum was raised.  This is surely one of the most memorable and referenced events in the history of the Oral Roberts ministry.
:I'd say it warrants a separate article.  It was unheard of for a well-known preacher to claim that God is a terrorist, and that he was being held for ransom.  If Roberts ever had any credibility at all, he blew it to pieces with that little stunt.
::It must be included in this article if Wikipedia is to have any sense of objective encyclopaedic knowledge. Jimmy Swaggart did not claim God would kill him if he didn't raise fourteen million dollars, nor did Benny Hinn, nor did any other television evangelist. Creating a separate article would be a propagandist move intended to deprive students material which is directly pertinent to understanding who this person was.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.13.30.104 (talk) 16:19, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Calling him home 

message: The recent edits to this article have turned it from an account of Mr Roberts into an attempt to preach to the majority of our readers who are not christians. Therefore I have tagged the article as not having a neutral point of view any more.
This tag can be lifted, but that should only be done when the text no longer reads like an advertisement for Mr Roberts and his businesses and instead starts to look like an entry in an encyclopedia.
If anyone editing here has any questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page and I'll be happy to help out. Thanks. ➨ ❝REDVERS❞ 19:38, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The edits refered to were copied wholesale from the Oral Roberts homepage and have been removed. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 19:49, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I withdraw the NPOV objection on that basis. Much thanks for lokking into this! ➨ ❝REDVERS❞ 19:50, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 

message: I see the article has been marked for cleanup.  Could someone elaborate on what needs to be cleaned up?  It's not a great article but a little direction would help.  The reasons should be listed on the Wikipedia:Cleanup page and here on the talk page.  --Beirne 11:55, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No clue, I'm removing the tag. fataltourist 22:53, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup? 

message: Unless I missed it, the article does not answer the question of who he received the much joked-about nickname "Oral"? It seems like an obvious point this article should cover. Peter G Werner 18:09, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is his real name, surely? David L Rattigan 07:58, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: His first name at birth was Granville, according to the article. "Oral" is a nickname he picked up later, and later seemingly adopted as his legal name. Anyway, the story of how he picked up that name is certainly called for in this article. Peter G Werner 16:49, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin of the nickname "Oral"? 

message: A recent edit suggests that Ronald Robert committed suicide because he was a homosexual.  The citation is alternet.org.  It is not at all obvious to me that this is a reliable source and I tend to think that this gossip and speculation should be removed.  Comments? Phiwum 01:17, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: AlterNet is a WP:RS. Arbustoo 21:26, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is AlterNet a reliable source? 

message: The original article had a gross inaccuracy, and I corrected it.  The original article said his two surviving children were Richard and Rebecca.  Richard is still around, of course, but it is Oral and Evelyn's other daughter, Roberta Potts, who is still alive.  Rebecca Nash is the one who died in a plane crash years ago. (You can find the information at the official Oral Roberts webpage if you're interested.)  Contributors to Wikipedia need to be a lot more careful and not make egregious errors like this one.--Susan Nunes, April 15, 2007
:What order were his children born in? Lkjhgfdsa 0 (talk) 18:09, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Children 

message: Thank you for contributing this article to the wiki. As you are aware, many people from all sorts of backgrounds and beliefs come to wikipedia for the facts, hopefully free of opinion and bias. You have a good start in this article but I would like to point out a few things which need attention. Improving this article to be more neutral and based in fact will improve the credibility of your cause. Please consider my notes.
-Explain significance of Cherokee link to Christianity and/or Oklahoma history as you had mentioned, with a citation if needed.
-A citation would be a good idea with regards to the number of books he has supposedly written
-The term 'Healing Crusade' should be re-considered. Is it the actual name he used when referring to these journeys? If not, the term is a bit biased and certainly not common knowledge. I would consider using quotations to reflect that this is indeed the proper term used by Oral, explain the origin of the term, or replace it with something less sensational.
-Please consider citing this article more thoroughly, especially around statements of fact, such as referring to '...thousands of people[..] in the healing line', links to the supposed testimony of doctors, the honor code associated with his school, etc.
-City of Faith is a title, rather than a commonly used term if I am reading this correctly, you may consier annotating it as such. Again, to people who are not of your faith, nonchalantly referring to something as a City of Faith seems sensational unless there was a commonly understood term by that name with an already implied definition.
-A citation on the claim of largest medical facility of its kind and dates of operation would add veracity to your article.
A good article with lots of good work, I hope a few of these suggestions can make it even better! When writing articles, thinking of everyone's point of view makes for a better read, and makes you look good in the process!
Regards. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Defiance167 (talk • contribs) 18:42, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality and citation 

message: This article is missing a key element, namely the influence of the Methodist tradition on his ministry and within the university ... particularly in the 1960s and 1970s.  The Roberts family were members of one or more Methodist / United Methodist congregations (First UMC and Will Rogers UMC, to name a couple) in Tulsa during that time, leaving the UMC sometime in the late 1980s.  This association was very influencial upon ORU students and graduates of the day.  Someone more knowledgeable than me can provide more detailed information.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.148.18.46 (talk) 02:04, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Methodist influences 

message: All kidding aside, according to the biography Oral Roberts: An American Life (p.26), his birth name was Granville Oral Roberts, Granville being a family name and Oral being a name made up by his cousin, who later claimed she just liked the sound and didn't think she'd even heard the word before.  Since 23 December 2008, this article has apparently stated that his name is "Granville Richard James Oral Roberts III".  I find no other source for this name at all, and it was added here by IP editor 72.204.4.71, who more recently made a similar, and more obviously spurious, change to Roberts' name. That edit was reverted immediately but the original "Richard James" edit from 23 December 2008 remained.  I have now reverted it.--Arxiloxos (talk) 01:45, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: Or is the vandalism low level enough to simply deal with it? KillerChihuahua?!?Advice 22:16, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Time to semi-protect? 

message: Considering his importance in the field of televangelism, it is incredible that there are so few images of this man, let alone free ones. Burpelson AFB (talk) 04:11, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: In the early 1940's, Mr. Roberts conducted tent revivals/healing meetings in and around Tulsa, Oklahoma, often accompanied by evangelist Steve Pringle and Church of the Nazarene preacher Jo Ella Oliver.  
(Miss Oliver later became Jo Ella Herron, my mother.)
Thanks,
Rick Herron  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rickh1977 (talk • contribs) 13:57, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestion for additional article information 

message: This talk page is meant for improving the article (with reliable/verifiable sources), it's not a forum for personal views on the topic. Hence, comments here about Roberts are almost worthless unless they either cite new sources, or cite sources already in the article along with thoughts on how to deal with those sources. Moreover, the policy on living persons applies to Roberts' living family members and there is also a long standing consensus that BLP tends to apply to en.Wikipedia articles about the lately deceased. Otherwise unpublished recollections from folks who knew Roberts are original research and can't be put in the article. Either way, verifiable published sources must be cited. Gwen Gale (talk) 16:33, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: BLP only applies to all living people; where is this supposed consensus that it applies to the recently dead? Lkjhgfdsa 0 (talk) 18:09, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please keep in mind 

message: What kind of name is Oral? Is it short for something?
99.53.169.167 (talk) 17:20, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Name

message: so what was he up to between 1941 and 1945? Consicering he would have been 23 when Pearl Harbor was bombed he would have been just the right age to participate in WWII. Anybody know how he spent those years?66.134.170.155 (talk) 13:11, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  War years 

message: Is it worth mentioning this? 
"Only one organ made to bring forth life—it's the male organ. It's not in lesbianism for the tongue of a female goes into the vagina of another female. It's not in the male where the male organ goes into the part of the, of the body where the, the waste matter comes out of the body, the poison, and he penetrates that part of the body in homosexuality. It's not to be put into the mouth of the man, or the mouth of the man or the woman on the male organ! It is the male organ penetrating the vagina of the woman—the male and the female!..."
: Certainly not.  It is not notable in the least. Phiwum (talk) 04:28, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: As weird as the quote is, the idea of an evangelical preacher preaching sex only in the context of heterosexual marriage is not noteworthy.  It happens all the time. --Beirne (talk) 21:19, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

text: I agree. It is an important view on his stance, and although his stance on homosexuality as a evangelical preacher is nothing of note, his stance on recreational sex positions is not something that is often discussed in the grounds of evangelical churches- speaking from experience.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.120.239.199 (talk) 22:46, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sex sermon 

message: I am somewhat surprised that this article contains no paragraph about all the criticism Oral Roberts has faced throughout the years. There have been several scandals surrounding his person and his activities and many of his religious views have been heavily criticized by Christians and non-Christians alike. At the very least I would think that some of those points should be reflected in the article. -- Hadoriel (talk) 11:10, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Cite sources. Gwen Gale (talk) 12:03, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Today's obituary in the Guardian newspaper certainly sets out more detail on scandals and criticism than we currently have in this article. Will try and add something in shortly. Contaldo80 (talk) 12:40, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  @Gwen Gale: The reason I didn't cite any sources is the same reason for why I didn't make the changes myself: I'm no expert on Oral Roberts and I don't really want to become one. If I can add something relevant to a Wiki article I do that, but in this case I think there are others more qualified than I am. Nevertheless. reading through the different obituaries and looking at the history of Oral Roberts University I can't help but notice that Roberts seems to have had quite a lot of critics and was involved in several rather large controversies so I was kinda surprised that this currently isn't really mentioned in this article. Which is why I made my post above on the discussion page.  Hadoriel (talk) 19:47, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

text: Based on the count of lines, the article consists of about 40% controversy and criticism. Obankston (talk) 10:23, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Controversy wontedly comes with fame. Gwen Gale (talk) 20:18, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism 

message: I see the statement that Oral's impact was 2nd to Billy Graham's.  I had removed this because while it was said by an expert, it is a subjective opinion.  Even the expert is hedging, saying that it will take the long run to see the impact.  There is no easy way to quantify this kind of impact, so this is really just an opinion, no more valid than if someone said Oral was the 2nd worst televangelist. It is good for the article to describe Oral's impact, but this statement doesn't mean much.  --Beirne (talk) 18:03, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I let stand your deletion summarized "The Place for Miracles is Richard's show, not Oral's". Your right, it is Richard's show, not Oral's, my mistake. The solution is that this needs to be a paragraph outlining a history of Oral's television ministry, ending with a statement like "Today, his son Richard continues the ministry with a daily program,...". Maybe I'll add that paragraph someday. Obankston (talk) 18:37, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, but what about the subjective claim that Oral's impact was 2nd to Billy Graham's?  --Beirne (talk) 22:43, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

text: To be more specific, noted expert on religion Richard Dawkins called Oral a "Well-heeled, tax-exempt charlatan".  Now I don't believe that should be in the article (I really don't), but the opinion of Oral's impact is just as subjective.  --Beirne (talk) 23:05, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

text: Yes, but ranking the top three in the Olympics is an objective measurement.  This is the subjective view of one theologian.  I waited a couple of days for a reply and when there wasn't one I figured I could delete the line.  Plus you had a chance to give a reply to my first message and instead you talked about Richard's show. If no one is going to discuss the issue I have to assume no one cares.  Also, the fact that people let the line stand doesn't mean anything.  I've seen lots of errors and other material that weren't up to Wikipedia standards left in articles without anyone doing anything about it. --Beirne (talk) 04:27, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I lean in favor of including the expert's statement, but including attribution or other text (such as "according to one authority").  It's an important assertion and helps put Roberts in context.  I would not oppose including Dawkins's statement either, with attribution, given Dawkins's importance as a religious skeptic. I tend to think, however, that these kind of statements are better placed in the detailed discussion of his career rather than in the lede.--Arxiloxos (talk) 06:41, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I could live with the kind of qualification you suggest for the 2nd in impact.  Saying something like "according to one authority" would be more accurate than the original form, which sounded like a confirmed fact.  --Beirne (talk) 06:50, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

text: I'd go with the first one, but any of the first three would work.  --Beirne (talk) 07:45, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

text: Done. I used the first one. Obankston (talk) 19:14, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks.  I put the reference back with it.  --Beirne (talk) 19:21, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

text: Occam's razor says that the reference one or two lines down was sufficient. But a little extra doesn't hurt. Obankston (talk) 20:02, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I was making it easier for the reader, who will not have to look for the reference two sentences ahead after another reference to find out who the one authority is.  --Beirne (talk) 20:32, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

text: Agreed. Obankston (talk) 20:53, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  2nd is subjective 

message: I added a clarification tag to the statement that Oral laid the foundation for abundant life.  It is obviously something he promoted, but I think technically Jesus laid the foundation for abundant life.  Could someone who understands this better clarify this?  --Beirne (talk) 23:52, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, technically the life and teachings of Jesus and his disciples in the Bible laid the foundations for most of Christianity, but the interpretation, teachings, use of terms, and practical application to real life have varied greatly among different groups in the last two millenia. The term Abundant Life primarily refers to a particular collection of Christian interpretations, teachings, use of terms, and practical application to real life. Oral Roberts used this term to name his The Abundant Life magazine  and organizations like the Abundant Life Prayer Group. The term Abundant Life could also be loosely described as a movement, within which organizations make the term part of their title, adherents define their personal goals, attitudes, and lifestyle, and there are leaders and followers, teachers, role models, and those who emulate them. Obankston (talk) 02:49, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

text: Regarding the use of the term abundant life in the article Oral Roberts, we could say "teachings of abundant life", but prosperity gospel is a peer term to abundant life, so we could just as easily say "laid the foundations of the prosperity gospel and abundant life teachings" or "laid the foundations of the teachings of the prosperity gospel and abundant life." By popular misconception, Oral Roberts is associated with the prosperity gospel, but in actuality he is more associated with abundant life teachings. Obankston (talk) 02:49, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd go for "laid the foundations of the prosperity gospel and abundant life teachings", or maybe "movements" instead of "teachings", assuming that there is enough on "abundant life" to call it a movement.  --Beirne (talk) 11:21, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: As described in Talk:Abundant_Life#What_kind_of_concept_is_.22abundant_life.22.3F, abundant life is mostly a concept used in other movements, not a movement itself. So I agree with "laid the foundations of the prosperity gospel and abundant life teachings." The expansion of this thought in →Ministry and university already includes the word "teachings". Obankston (talk) 15:34, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm skeptical about "abundant life" as a concept (see the discussion just linked to), but "teachings" would at least describe what kind of thing it is more accurately.  --Beirne (talk) 18:24, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

text: Do we have a consensus to make the change to the article by adding the word "teachings"? It would be an improvement from what stands now. Enough improvement to remove the  tag? Obankston (talk) 21:56, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: That's fine with me.  --Beirne (talk) 22:00, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

text: I haven't heard of "abundant life" being used in the same way as the other three concepts, but I may just not be familiar with it.  I'll say more in the discussion for the abundant life article.  --Beirne (talk) 11:25, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  abundant life? 

message: I ask that the following sentence be deleted from the article because it does not quote any reference to substantiate what it claims. 
"Scandals persisted through the 1980s as fraudulent healing practices were exposed."  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.28.164.2 (talk) 21:55, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: There was no reference to specifically support the "Scandals" wording, so I've removed that sentence. Anyone who has a source for there being an actual scandal is free to readd that sentence with a supporting reference. — Gavia immer (talk) 22:54, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scandal 

message: Even someone not familiar with the guy can see it reads like an advertisement. The most POV bit is right at the end where it basically reads like an apologists section. This article isn't balanced, and certainly isn't NPOV. And to those who wrote earlier in the talk page such gems as.
"You people have no right to judge the legitamacy of Oral Roberts. Keep objectivity, ok?"
Objectivity is not using sites financed by this mans ministries as sources, or links.
"Your taking these quotes out of context and forgetting that these were directed at an audience who understood what he meant. Please leave the content of these articles to those who have a better understanding of the facts and doctrines of these Christian leaders, not the liberal media"
This is an encylopedia.. the whole point of it is that people reading it who don't know anything about a given subject may get an unbiased view ie NPOV, so leaving it's content to "those who have a better understanding", i.e. Fanboys who won't have a bad thing said against their chosen religious leader, is not a good idea at all.
This article isn't just a joke, it's a disgrace  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.69.7.114 (talk) 07:16, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: "Con man" is a strong claim that would require strong sources, and in any case it would have to be attributed to those specific sources.  The article already goes into considerable detail about his controversial life. --Arxiloxos (talk) 15:53, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The Cedar Rapids Gazette is a daily newspaper and a reliable source, but ultimately this is an opinion column from a local newspaper in a city without any particular connection to Roberts. I don't think it's sufficient to warrant adding an incendiary term like "con man" to a position in the lead of the article.  As noted, there is already quite a bit of content in the body of the article reporting on crticism of Roberts.  I have posted an item at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard#Oral Roberts inviting additional opinions.--Arxiloxos (talk) 14:18, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed; in addition, it would be a violation of WP:BLP to refer to him as a con man unless he were convicted of a confidence scam. Scr★pIronIV 20:09, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Note that WP:BLP probably does not apply here: see WP:BDP. Which does not mean that anything goes of course: NPOV and sourcing requirements always apply. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 11:10, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article is a joke 

message: I deleted a reference attached to a sentence in the header.  I searched for various words used *in* the sentence, in the reference and found none of them.  Please attach references to the exact sections they encase, and use *quotes* to indicate what is being exactly said.Wjhonson (talk) 16:10, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ref deleted 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Oral Roberts. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleid=20080326_222_67873
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:57, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Oral Roberts. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20110623041011/http://www.oralroberts.com:80/oralroberts/ to http://www.oralroberts.com/oralroberts/
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100917044445/http://alrcnewskitchen.com/eblast/others/091215_orea.pdf to http://www.alrcnewskitchen.com/eblast/others/091215_orea.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:43, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Oral Roberts. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20091222070102/http://static.ktul.com:80/documents/oralroberts.pdf to http://static.ktul.com/documents/oralroberts.pdf
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070510055144/http://www.ondoctrine.com:80/10robero.htm to http://www.ondoctrine.com/10robero.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:12, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Oral Roberts. 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/20110727135115/http://oabok.org/Awards/HOF-Roberts.htm to http://oabok.org/Awards/HOF-Roberts.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091218043126/http://www.ktul.com:80/news/stories/1209/687732.html to http://www.ktul.com/news/stories/1209/687732.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100729022003/http://voicesofoklahoma.com:80/index.html to http://voicesofoklahoma.com/index.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:28, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Oral Roberts. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ktul.com/news/stories/1209/687732.html
*Added  tag to http://memorial.oru.edu/
*Added archive https://archive.is/20130416012305/http://umportal.org/article.asp?id=6255 to http://umportal.org/article.asp?id=6255
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) 14:50, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Oral Roberts. 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/20091218081733/http://laist.com/2009/12/15/evangelist_dr_oral_roberts_dies_at.php to http://laist.com/2009/12/15/evangelist_dr_oral_roberts_dies_at.php
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) 08:09, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Oral Roberts. 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/20090808004339/http://centralca.cherokee.org/ to http://centralca.cherokee.org/
*Added  tag to http://www.columbiamissourian.com/stories/2009/12/16/evangelist-oral-roberts-leaves-complex-legacy/
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) 17:57, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified