Talk:Brian Tamaki

message: I don't think right wing is a suitable description for the DNZ party - in NZ this term is used on an economic basis, not a social one. Changing it to "authoritarian" porges 23:39, May 4, 2005 (UTC)
'A VERY VERY DANGEROUS MAN 'MUST BE WATCHED AND IF NESSARY ... STOPPED!!' —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.89.155.135 (talk • contribs) 18:24, 5 March 2006
:Please note the Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines:
::: '"Article talk pages should not be used by editors as platforms for their personal views."' Alan Liefting 00:31, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You are replying to a comment made more than four years ago! However, in NZ even the mainstream parties called "right wing" tend to be socially liberal, such as in support of gay rights. I think the original poster was saying that Destiny is significantly different in its social policies from parties often called "right wing" due to their economic policies, such as National and ACT, and the label is therefore not sufficiently descriptive.-gadfium 08:14, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Right wing"? 

message: As per Destiny Church this article is seriously unbalanced. I see it has a link to it's entry at cults.co.nz but has no info on it's similarities to a cult inside the article itself. I hope to ammend this, but in the meantime I am tagging it POV. Glen Stollery (My contribs) (talk) 21:01, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not biased. It's fair. SO I removed POV 203.109.184.252 04:57, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Ok, I just finished going through it.  I really think that whole criticisms section needs some real serious revision.  It just smacks of what I would want to write.  But thats not what wikipedia is about.  I moved a bunch of criticism stuff into the criticism section.  I removed some emotive language around elections.  I put some citation requests in.  Regarding existing sources, I think more are needed as some of the current ones (I have flagged one) links to a site that obviously has a clear POV.  If this hasn't been re-written, I'll go through it myself but I will tend to delete as I can't really add much.Icemotoboy 08:07, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV 

message: I just went back through again and gave it a spruce up.  I removed an irrelevant comment about a musical paraody that was on someones blog.  I removed an unreferenced comment that was inflamatory and largely irrelevant to the article.  I did a google search and referenced what I could.  I think more should be placed here ABOUT Brian Tamaki, and less about criticisms of him.  In fifty years time, people will want to know about the man not just what he stood for.  What he stood for is already covered in the Destiny Church article.Icemotoboy 04:04, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs serious cleanup 

message: It is fair to say that this article needs serious clarification and comment perhaps from Bishop Tamaki himself - your description does not fairly reflect the church vision.  Much of the material is controversial, poorly sourced and potentially libelous. 
Would recommend that you obtain accurate comments from verifiable sources.
202.154.143.49 12:09, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you give specific examples of poor sources and potentially libellous claims?  Please add the tag  to any information that needs verifying.  There is an extensive reference list from whence the information is sourced so any contested facts can be checked. Admittedly it is generally from the media so it is possibly contestable. Alan Liefting 00:26, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

text: WP Policy would discourage Tamaki from writing about himself on Wikipedia. However, I agree that the article is unbalanced, in that almost all of the content is in a "Criticism" section. Much of this information could be reorganised into other sections, with the addition of more facts. I suggest adding a Biography section and a section about his leadership of the Destiny Church. BreathingMeat 21:02, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seriously... 

message: For the record, his 'ordination' is pretty much a self fulfilling act; Is the 'titheing' that members have to do mentioned; is his use of male, black shirted thugs in their protest against the civil union bill mentioned.
The word 'charisma' - yes he has charisma, hence how he is able to con the disenfanchised. The bloke is a dangerous charlatan. 
I don't have any evidence, but isn't he related to the other (ex-gang member) Tamaki brothers, another questionable group? Ianguy 23:49, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Some of the information that you suggest should be in the article can be found in the Destiny Church, New Zealand article. Note that the use of the word "charismatic" is used in the sense of the Charismatic movement rather than Tamaki's personal charisma. Brian Tamaki does have two other brothers who are notable for driving motorbikes and tourism ventures. I am not sure if this needs incorporating into this article. Can you be more specific about what you consider to be bias? Note the you can place on of the many tags on the article to alert other editors about POV issues. As editors we cannot place our personal opinion in an article (or on talk pages). Whether Tamaki is a charlatan or not is up to the reader to decide and to this end our job is to give referenced information from authoritative sources. Alan Liefting 09:36, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Certainly needs a tidy up and unbiased info

message: The page is now much better than it was.  But it doesn't seem very balanced to me still?  Surely there must have been some good things that he has done that have been reported by the media, it would make sense to me to try and balance out some of the negative media reference with some positive ones perhaps?  Also, the reference to the cruise doesn't seem particulary encyclopedic to me. Icemotoboy 04:06, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What is good and bad is subjective.  Some would say the setting up of churches by Tamaki is good, some will say it is bad.  Similarly with his promotion of conservative "family values" and the decrying of homosexuality. I will be adding stuff on a political roadshow of his and comments from him at the National Statement on Religious Diversity (will do it after exams!!). The reference to the cruise is appropriate since it was a notable news event and some readers would want to know about it. One of the problems in writing an article on him is that we need to rely predominately on the media at this stage.  Apart from Tamaki's autobiography I don't know of any  reference in books. -- Alan Liefting talk 04:27, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thats a very good point regarding subjectivity. It appears there is a problem in that mainstream media to report on events regarding him that tend to have negative connotations to the majority of readers.  For example, if on one day Tamaki made a speech about helping the elderly, and made another speech decrying homosexuality, its plausable that the media would report the second one as it is more controversial and therefore of greater impact/interest.  Perhaps we could reference off their own site more, regarding his achievements with the church.  Each of these comments could be proceeded with "Tamaki claims Tamaki has..." or "Destiny Church claims Tamaki has...".  I guess I like to believe that even though he's pretty nasty to my segement of the population, he must do some good stuff, and that needs to be recorded on this page somewhere.  But dammed if I can find anything in the mainstream media that doesn't portray him in a negative light.  Good luck for your exams btw ;) Icemotoboy 23:26, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good job on the editing 

message: I removed the passage which said Tamaki "converted to Christianity". Unless he was a previously Muslim, or Buddhist or whatever, he couldn't "convert" to Christianity. He was brought up as a Christian.222.153.65.218 (talk) 23:59, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Bit about conversion removed

message: On this edit I added info from his autobiography. It does go against WP policy but it is better than not having this content. -- Alan Liefting- (talk) - 20:29, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Material included from Tamakis autobiography 

message: "showed no interest in church or the upbringing of the children."
This insinuates that no interest in church is somehow immoral. In an encyclopedic context I do not believe this is legible. I propose to remove this 'comment', are there any comments?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Barfnz (talk • contribs) 22:34, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: "no interest in church or the upbringing of the children" is out of the autobiography.  I have referenced it such in the article. I don't see the sentence as making a judgment on morality.  It is a statement from Tamaki on the behaviour of his father. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 07:07, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: it is not refuted that he said this but, this is wikipedia, not his autobiography. it just needs to be reworded so as to not contain such a fundamentalist overtone. it is almost as absurd as saying "eco terrorist and green party candidate". it is not hard to achieve objectivity in this edit. i have simply reworded it to "Tamaki describes his father as an alcoholic having little interest in fatherhood." his father's religous persuasion has no relevance here but alcoholism is a terrible vice and that deserves mention because it helps describe his background.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Barfnz (talk • contribs) 07:35, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weasel Words 

message: Brian Tamaki let it slip (before back-tracking)  that his income from the church is only one third to one quarter that of Telecom's CEO whose income is most commonly publicised as $7 million      Quite why he considers himself on-par with the CEO of NZ's largest company is yet another conversation altogether.  121.73.7.84 (talk) 07:57, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Money received from the Church 

message: I would like to add an edit that I hope will clarify this issue, and may also clarify the question about Tamaki’s ‘Conservative Orthodoxy’.  Please view my ‘talk’ page to view my proposed edit.  I would appreciate your comments and guidance as this will be my first non-minor edit and this is also a controversial subject.  I would also not like to down grade the quality of this page by making errors that could easily be avoided by more experienced editors.  I look forward to your feedback. William Herbert (talk) 17:37, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Question of Tamaki’s status as a cult leader 

message: Why is there no mention of the rumours surrounding his relationship with "spiritual father", Eddie Long? Teroamahai (talk) 05:54, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: To quote the article: "Destiny Church claims a close relationship with New Birth Missionary Baptist Church in Atlanta, USA, the church of Bishop Eddie Long. Tamaki cites Eddie Long as a mentor and "spiritual father". Is there something else that should be metioned? Bear in mind that Wikipedia is not a rumour mill, blog, society page etc. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 08:19, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Special relationship with Eddie Long 

message: Balance should not be confused with Neutrality. Balance itself is outside the scope of Wikipedia edits in so far as the editor has done an honest survey of the information available and impartially selected relevant data that fits the criteria for inclusion in an article.  I make this observation because several people on this talk page are mentioning the need to maintain balance on the Tamaki article.  In general Balance has its place, but not here.  Why?  Two reasons: Balance is subjective, and paradoxically, can be counter neutral.  And here’s my reasoning for this.  Firstly Balance relies on discerning Good from Bad, Positive from Negative.  As editor Alan Liefting said, deciding what is positive rests on a matter of opinion.  Perspective also has an influence.  Secondly, unlike neutrality, balance is not a criterion for an edits validity per se.  When you examine the extremes this point becomes clear.  For example take the most heinous and infamous individual known to society, the percentage of available “favorable” information on this person may be nil.  Therefore if Balance was the criterion an article could never be written on this character; if the favorable information was nil then the unfavorable information would also be nil to maintain balance.  Or take an article on a hurricane, if balance was a consideration you would need to search for the positives in the hurricane event in order to strengthen the article.  This is obviously absurd.  Balance is only relevant if an editor has purposefully manipulated the natural balance of the article.  In this case we come back to neutrality.William Herbert (talk) 12:45, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Balance

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Brian Tamaki. 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/20070421152825/http://www.familyvalues.net.nz:80/ to http://www.familyvalues.net.nz
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.readersdigest.co.nz/content/40020/
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) 08:38, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Brian Tamaki. 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/20091017210726/http://www.ubishops.ca/BaudrillardStudies/vol3_1/grimshawpf.htm to http://www.ubishops.ca/baudrillardstudies/vol3_1/grimshawpf.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110614123253/http://tvnz.co.nz/view/news_national_story_skin/451171?format=html to http://tvnz.co.nz/view/news_national_story_skin/451171?format=html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.familyvalues.net.nz/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070928110900/http://www.bsa.govt.nz/decisions/2003/2003-141__158.htm to http://www.bsa.govt.nz/decisions/2003/2003-141__158.htm
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) 15:15, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified