Talk:Peter Popoff

message: Can anyone specify which sources there are for this info? Except maybe the refs I found were at James Randi, a critic of Peter Popoff -- TheQz 22:49, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The quotes I just submitted are directly from his infomercial. -- dpk 15:32, 14 Dec 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Randi 

message: The article states:
:Popoff can now be seen on the Travel Channel, BET, and Comedy Central
This, I think, is a little misleading. While it is true he does appear on those channels, it is in paid infomercials. The way it is worded kind of implies it's regular programming, which it is not. Should this be made clearer? Jake b 05:14, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point. It now reads "Popoff's infomercials can be seen...". — Elembis 06:19, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: TV Schedule

message: When and where did this guy born? I wasn't able to find such a simple thing in google. The purpose is, I'd like to write an article to lt:wiki --Windom 04:12, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: From his official website: He was born in East Berlin (DDR). When? Doesn't say. It says "After the war", so it was post-1945. - Pernambuco 05:45, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nevertheless the german Wikipedia Article states that he was born in Hamburg (July 2nd 1946) UltraBlonz (talk) 00:35, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

text: Well, he did make an incredible amount of money from deceiving the public. I doubt he will have any other more profitable occupation than that. And his "supernatural powers" were debunked so it would be really misleading to say he is anything else. --Hamsterlopithecus (talk) 13:47, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Basic facts 

message: :Image:IMG 0329.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 19:24, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:IMG 0329.JPG

message: I have re-added a section on the "manna" sourced to a UK regulator's dim view of it. As for the claims recently deleted, if someone watched a show of his and compared the bible reference that refers to "defiled bread" and recorded this on the basis of primary sources, it would be a violation of the OR policy that "Even if published by reliable sources, material must not be connected together in a way that constitutes original research". Therefore, there appears to be no basis for including this. The lists of the rubbish he sends out appear to be anecdotal and therefore inadmissible, but there is an Australian government source that gives a similar list. The photograph of his letter is not in violation of OR unless it is used to "illustrate or introduce unpublished ideas or arguments". Billwilson5060 (talk) 14:20, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources on manna  

message: Im culling the Early Life section, the section is way too biased to be considered useful, anyone placing any objections? Captain Superman (talk) 19:49, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Early Life section 

message: User:Nickpopoff (a user with with an obvious conflict of interest) has repeatedly added this disclaimer to the financial details section: "All of the Executives at People United For Christ Inc, including Peter Popoff's compensation is determined by an Independent Compensation Committee, and are in full compliance with all State and Federal Laws."
This disclaimer is not verifiable.  We would need a reliable third party publication to verify this.  --Daniel 14:38, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Compliance 

message: In the article is stated that randi said $4.3 million a month. I heard Randi say it was $4.3 million a YEAR http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNl52deOZro  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.114.62.72 (talk) 11:04, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I've updated it (belatedly). IRWolfie- (talk) 23:56, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Finance 

message: Is the claim about Popoff staging a burglary sufficiently sourced? This is, after all, a WP:BLP article. Muad (talk) 10:33, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Burglary staging claim 

message: While Popoff was clearly debunked by James Randi, I think some work needs to be done to bring the page in line with wp:NPOV. A couple of sources used are really questionable, irrelevant information has been inserted into the article, there are some wp:MOS issues. Also, the quotations by Fred M. Frohock and Ole Anthony are gratuitous and add little if anything to the article. The Ole Anthony quote in particular seems to be merely a way to attack Popoff without overtly violating wp:BLPSTYLE. I will be making a series of small-ish edits and posting on the talk page where it seems necessary.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blueskymorning (talk • contribs) 15:25, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plans for Article Improvement 

message: While it is true that, chronologically speaking, Popoff declared bankruptcy after Randi & Co. exposed him, the way the sentence was written implied that there was direct causation. This may not necessarily be the case, as the LA Times article shows. This is a more balanced telling using a source already included in the article. If Simon is a reputable source regarding how many creditors were at Popoff at the time (which is cited later in the section "Exposed as a fraud by James Randi"), Simon's characterization of the reasons for the bankruptcy should be included.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blueskymorning (talk • contribs) 15:37, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Causation of Bankruptcy  

message: Essentially the entire page is about how Popoff is a fake healer and the lede already talks about James Randi's exposure of Popoff. There's no reason to include this quote, especially considering that "egregious" is a normative judgment and it is not all clear why Frohock's opinion should be definitive as it relates to the dichotomy of fake healers. From what I can gather, Frohock is a political scientist, not an expert on evangelical religion or fake healers.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blueskymorning (talk • contribs) 18:20, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: You have over-reduced Frohock. He has several books on this subject. While his opinion may not be "definitive" it is definitely representative. --Daffydavid (talk) 20:37, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Daffydavid, I see your point, upon more careful review I see that he has more knowledge on the subject than I originally realized. I appreciate you pointing this out to me. However, even if the quote has validity, I still don't think it belongs in the lede. Because, let's face it, the whole article is about how he's a fake healer, and the more important aspect, namely Randi's exposure, is already described there, so the Frohock quote seems redundant. I feel like it should be, at least, repositioned elsewhere. Looking forward to your thoughts. -Blueskymorning(talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 19:36, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello again, Blueskymorning. The quote is an accurate summary of the academic consensus on Popoff. As such, I think it fits well in the lede. Lede's are supposed to summarize the body of the article. Although it was the most prominent, Randi was not the only one to expose his controversial behavior, and Randi is far from the only person to express the sentiment that he is a 'fake healer'. This is explained in the article, so having it summarized in the lede is appropriate. Grayfell (talk) 21:31, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Frohock Quote in Lede 

message: This article says that he had a TV show "in the early 80s." This is not acceptable for a Wikipedia article. I need an exact year, and I want a day and month. Is that so difficult?
Doubledragons (talk) 15:45, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, since you haven't added the information yourself, then I guess it is so difficult. Try asking nicely next time. If we knew that information, we would add it. Grayfell (talk) 06:28, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't edit Wikipedia articles anymore since people require a degree of quality from me that they don't seem to require from others, such as whoever created and edited this article. By the way, it was 1982. I Googled it. As for nice, they're never nice about it. That part made me laugh at loud. I'm sure they're quite nice as they try to get my IP address banned for "vandalizing" pages with facts. lol
http://www.benzinga.com/pressreleases/13/09/e3931356/peter-popoff-ministries-visits-philadelphia-with-message-of-hope-and-fa
You're welcome, by the way.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doubledragons (talk • contribs) 04:45, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

text: A press-release issued on Benzinga ain't a WP:RS, so no thanks. Grayfell (talk) 21:45, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  When, exactly, did his self-titled TV show start? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Peter Popoff. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110310070021/http://peterpopoff.org:80/ministry-history to http://peterpopoff.org/ministry-history
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:02, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Peter Popoff. 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/20121110063847/http://www.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/story.html?id=c646f380-3796-41a6-821d-5e29c54e0b98 to http://www.canada.com/nanaimodailynews/story.html?id=c646f380-3796-41a6-821d-5e29c54e0b98
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100701124916/http://www.ofcom.org.uk:80/tv/obb/prog_cb/obb117/ to http://www.ofcom.org.uk/tv/obb/prog_cb/obb117/
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.peterpopoff.org/tv.php
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) 06:22, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Due to persistent vandalism CaptainPedge | Talk</sup>  23:13, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: @CaptainPedge: Here's the thing. Right now, I see good edits and bad edits coming in from the IP editors. So, protecting the article could be doing as much harm as good. If the vandalism were to pick up, that would change things, but for now, I don't think protection is warranted. —C.Fred (talk) 23:59, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi protection requested 

message: I changed this to "discredited" to bring the lede more into an NPOV tone. There is ample explanation in later sentences and the rest of the article about the nature of his activities. Putting "fraudulent' in the lede of a BLP is not in keeping with our strict NPOV policy for them. Open to discussion on it but reverts should be avoided as BLP is not subject to 3RR.  WGFinley (talk) 21:54, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Fraudulent" Faith Healer 

message: In the 1989 Chevy Chase movie "Fletch Lives" there is a "faith healer" character named Jimmy Lee Farnsworth who runs the fictitious Farnsworth Television Ministry.  Farnsworth is monitored by employees during his telecasts and is fed information on the people in the audience via a wireless system.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.122.50.93 (talk) 18:24, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Popular Culture 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Peter Popoff. 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/20080915062044/http://www.kidk.com/news/local/11041621.html to http://www.kidk.com/news/local/11041621.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071012024926/http://www.komotv.com/news/10404072.html to http://www.komotv.com/news/10404072.html
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) 01:14, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified