Talk:David L. Cunningham

message: A number of claims about this individuals professional history - especially filmography are not sourced, and not found in extensive google searches - except IMDB references which may have been self created by the director, and list no professional credits, save his own.
In addition, a claim that this director has "made 40 documentaries" seems quite dubious.--Boscobiscotti 17:33, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Disputed

message: hey - someone just reverted all of my edits!!!. What gives? they did a major edit change which was incorrect!
I provided a linked reference to the fact that the director raised $14,000 seed money for one of his films from contributions by Youth with a mission members. I provided a link, and page number. It appears to be a reputable citation. The reason given is that "this was disproved" but I see absolutely no discussion of this. In addition they reverted many other edits at the same time which led to greater clarity!--66.167.133.84 07:40, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that the statement of the director making "40 documentaries" should be removed. What consitutes a "documentary"? a student film? a home movie? - I can find no reference to this "fact" except on the directors own promotional website, and in fact, no listing of any credited films at all in the director's guild database. The director is in his mid-thirties - has he really been making more than one film a year since he was born?--Boscobiscotti 16:48, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

text: "David began his film career in documentaries, including one about the world's most remote country - Pitcairn Island of "Mutiny on the Bounty" fame.[citation needed]Other films took him to the deserts of Egypt and Australia, and the inner city life of teen prostitutes living on the mean streets of Hollywood.[citation needed]"
What constitutes "beginning a film career"? There is no documentation of this film, and how it was produced. Indeed in the filmography section, this was obviously produced when he was 20 years old. Was this a student film? Are student films typically included in a biography?--Boscobiscotti 16:55, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I removed the following line.
"After directing documentaries in over 40 countries,http://www.toendallwarsmovie.com/players_cunningham.html
Again, this points to a self-published website. To include a factual reference it should be something other than a self-published fact about something that, were it notable, many, many people other than the director would have mentioned.
40 countries? that's an awful lot of documentaries without any references at all. These need to not just be made, but be notable.That is, If I decide to film my foot in 40 countries, I could say I "made 40 documentaries" - Sadly, they would not be notable. This is a very exceptional claim. and the only source is a self-published website. see WP:RS#Exceptional_claims_require_exceptional_sources --Boscobiscotti 04:06, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Background

message: For all his work prior to 1998, the only source is IMDB, and it lists no information about these films, other than the fact that Cunningham directed them. Given that it's not difficult to get a film listed on IMDB and these listings look suspicious, I think we need another source. Lagringa 20:50, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I looked up a few of the latter ones randomly and they are legit. Arbusto 22:30, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Where did you find them? Lagringa 23:52, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Various sites searching through google. Arbusto 05:12, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A google search for "The Pitcairn Story: Mutineers in Paradise," for example, turns up 10 hits. All of them are based on IMDB, and none have any info beyond Cunningham's credit. Lagringa 18:11, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This video was produced, it was a documentary, a simple project to highlight the Pitcairn story, just like the title said. Independent films aren't documented as well as studio projects, hence there's little mention of it. There's no need to wonder why IMDB is the only source. Keiko234 00:15, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How do you know Keiko? I cant find anything on that either?--66.167.133.84 16:01, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

text:  I searched for "pacific mercy ships" which claims to be a TV movie, but there is no reference to it ever having been on TV - however I find this in a google search http://www.marinereach.com/about.aspx?m=main - were these "TV" movies actually ever shown on TV?? I dont think they were in the US, unless maybe as a paid promotion?? if so that should be noted.--66.167.42.147 22:25, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Here is some more information on an email address for "Mercy Ships" - from the "Domain Directory of Christian Organizations" on the internet. This is apparently a YWAM-related enterprise. If this movie was made with support from Youth With a Mission, it should be so noted. "MercyShips (YWAM) <info@mercyships.org>" --Boscobiscotti 17:24, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

text:  looked up credits for David Cunningham at the directors' guild of america website. (films he is credited with making. Though his name is present, no films are listed there. No agent is listed. I am very curious about this claim of 40 films. If these were student films, or promotional religous films - that should be noted. see
http://webcfapps.directorsguild.org/directory/search_details.cfm?DGAKey=310112
--66.167.133.84 05:02, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I suggest that the following revisions be made- claim of 40 documentaries made be removed, and all films prior to 1998 be removed - and moved to talk page, until any documentation of them can be found. responses?--Boscobiscotti 05:27, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Filmography

message: I am placing Mr. Cunningham's Filmography before the formerly titled Remembering 9/11 section, because it makes no sense to place the latter before even mentioning that Mr. Cunningham directed The Path to 9/11, nor did the title Remembering 9/11 make sense in this context, so I retitled it "Controversy: The Path to 9/11". I am also introducing Mr. Nowrasteh's article with a mention of the controversy surrounding that film, because otherwise there is no context whatsoever for his article here. I am also providing a citation for the article. Furthermore, I don't believe it's necessary to print the entire article on this page, just the section relevent to Mr. Cunningham. Please discuss here if anyone has objections or would like clarification. Bartleby007 16:22, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I read the above, then noted that nearly the entire article had been deleted and replaced. Feel free to rearrange and add information in. Please be careful about not adding in copyrighted material as well. Kukini 16:44, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remembering 9/11 

message: I moved Filmography before The Path to 9/11 section, for logic's sake. I deleted quite a bit of the The Path to 9/11 section which is not relevant to Cunningham himself (for example, large chunks about the writer Cyrus Nowrasteh, and a comment about how the miniseries was promoted in Europe) and that is already covered very extensively on The Path to 9/11 and Nowrasteh pages; I did, however, rewrite the intro to that section succinctly explaining the controversy and left sections that ARE relevant to Cunningham. And I added a long quotation from Nowrasteh's WSJ article that addresses attacks on Cunningham (someone had previously inserted the entire article, which is irrelevant except for the Cunningham paragraph).
:Hi. Please don't forget to sign your posts on talk pages. I am not sure I am in agreement with the deletion of that large section, but will leave this up to discussion among the editors here. My vote is to put it back in, as it is the first truely high profile work of Mr. Cunningham, from my vantage point. Kukini 18:01, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: After reading and indenting tht block quote, I replaced the "controversy" half of the controversy section, to allow equity in voices in said controversy. Especially when words like "hysteria" are used in defense of the choices made in the creation of the film. Kukini 18:08, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: IP User 75.5.10.158 made a number of large revisions and deletions along the above line with no discussion nor any edit summaries. I have given this editor a brief break from editing to reconsider her/his approach. Kukini 18:23, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I cleaned up the POV spike of the word "mysterious," as I didn't see it prior to now. Kukini 20:21, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relevance Edits 

message: Hi, I've tagged two citations that don't appear to be working. Addhoc 18:31, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I personally visited those sites. What do you do when the webspage is taken down and the cache dies out? Lagringa 19:12, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In this instance, the Yahoo source appears to cover the material in question. Accordingly, I would suggest the references, but not the material should be removed. Addhoc 21:31, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Can we remove the reference to Max's article? Bartleboy just wrote on the reasons why the movie was labeled untitled in the section "cleaning references" Keiko234 23:49, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wouldn't normally recommend removing a secondary reference. Could we ask Kukini's opinion? Addhoc 10:38, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

text: how can we find a citation for something that is on paper and not the internet? David did go to
USC and University of the Nations in Chile, Amsterdam, etc. Keiko234 23:49, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The existing biographies say that he has lectured at the University of the Nations and that he graduated from USC. Addhoc 10:38, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tagged citations 

message: Following comments by Keiko234, could I suggest that after the sentences based on the Yahoo article, we clarify the miniseries was entirely funded by ABC:
:"A spokesperson from ABC clarified the network provided the entire funding of $40 million for the miniseries.
Addhoc 17:02, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed clarification 

message: Could I suggest the following sentence should be removed as it does provide any meaningful further information:
By July 2005 the New York Post noted, "At the moment, ABC officials are calling the miniseries 'Untitled Commission Report' and producers refer to it as the 'Untitled History Project."
Addhoc 17:10, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal to trim a sentence 

message: This section seems to talk about Cyrus Nowrasteh as much as it does about Cunningham. This doesn't seem right, especially as it seems to want to push Nowrasteh's spoken positions (or propaganda, to many), which certainly most properly belongs in his article. This article should concentrate on Cunningham, shouldn't it? Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 22:30, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: ''The Path to 9/11'' Controversy

message: Why are we trying to put Clinton's biography in this article? A concise statement is all that is needed. Opinions belong on the blogs, this is a POV statement which is out of place here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.234.240.129 (talk • contribs) 
:Umm, a counterpoint clause is not a biography. Please stop reverting this important point. Realize that I will not stop adding it, of course, adhering to Wikipedia rules. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 18:09, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps, but it is peculiar that we're speaking about a full paragraph devoted to Nowrasteh rather than Cunningham. OK, accepting your position, I revised again to remove POV about Clinton administration responses by qualifying what they wanted removed or changed. That should be all right. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 17:19, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clinton 

message: The latest justification for removing criticism of David Loren Cunningham is that it is "offensive". There is nothing offensive about criticizing someone's politics; the 1st Amendment was placed in the Constitution for the explicit purpose of allowing us to freely criticize each others' politics. Clearly, no one likes being criticized; they may well be offended by the criticism. That does not make the criticism "offensive".
Here's more on Cunningham and Christian Reconstructionism:
"Covering Their Tracks" by David Neiwert, Orcinus, September 8, 2006.
Nareek 01:52, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, I should have replied here earlier. For the avoidance of doubt this article should fully comply with WP:BLP. Also, I would comment the legal opinions expressed by Nareek are overly simplistic. Addhoc 13:09, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

text: You misunderstand how Wikipedia works. It's not our job to determine which side in a controversy we find more persuasive; it's our job to summarize all sides in the controversy. This means the opinions on all sides of the controversy; the fact that positions are "based on opinion" does not mean that they do not belong in Wikipedia. Truth is not the criterion we use for inclusion; verifiability is. (The higher standard of avoiding libel is certainly met here; criticism of a public figure's political associations is wholly protected under the First Amendment.) Nareek 11:19, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

text: You repeatedly refuse to answer the question as to whether you have a direct personal connection to the only article that you have edited on Wikipedia. I can only assume that the answer is "yes" and act accordingly. Nareek 18:13, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Does meeting David face-to-face for the first time after the 9/11 film count? I'm more aware of the surrounding issue, not a personal acquaintance. I've done research and learned more. If the shoe was on the other foot, how would you answer the same question you've asked me? I just did the research on Wikipedia to see why your question was valid and felt it didn't need the detail you seem to require.72.234.240.129 05:00, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have to admit that your succession of evasive answers makes me skeptical of a question answered with another question rather than with a statement. Be that as it may, whether you're David Loren Cunningham, a friend of his or merely an acquaintance, you're still obligated to edit on Wikipedia like he's a stranger to you. The goal of a Wikipedia article is not to construct a rebuttal to arguments that we disagree with. The goal of a Wikipedia article is to present both or all sides of the argument fully and fairly. This is especially true when the controversy is one that attracted national attention and became a major political issue. If we don't explain the thinking that lies behind that argument--whether or not we personally believe that thinking to be wrong-headed--then we are remiss in our obligations as Wikipedians. And whether you came here with the intention of serving as an advocate for Cunningham or not, when you started editing Wikipedia you assumed those obligations. Nareek 05:17, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

text: P.S. To answer your question directly, I am not anyone mentioned in the article, I am not acquainted with anyone mentioned in the article, nor have I ever communicated with anyone mentioned in the article. Assuming that you're not mentioned in the article. Nareek 05:23, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This was the earlier answer to your question on who I was: "As for vanity articles, it refers to autobiographies and that isn't the case here [That means I'm not David]. This statement does not apply to me: "Initial author not to be an owner, employee of, or investor in the company; likewise, an article about a little-known musician or band should preferably not be by the musician, a member, or a manager, roadie, groupie, etc"72.234.240.129 04:23, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for providing clarification, your contribution to this article is appreciated. Addhoc 13:11, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Offensive" 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on David L. Cunningham. 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/20110718150413/http://www.ywamdtscentre.com/docs/Resources/Principles%20Made%20Practical.pdf to http://www.ywamdtscentre.com/docs/Resources/Principles%20Made%20Practical.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110513233938/http://www.dga.org/index2.php3?chg= to http://www.dga.org/index2.php3?chg=
*Added  tag to http://blogs.abc.com/thepathto911/
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) 04:14, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on David L. Cunningham. 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/20090122020643/http://www.cnn.com/2006/SHOWBIZ/TV/09/08/abc.movie/index.html to http://www.cnn.com/2006/SHOWBIZ/TV/09/08/abc.movie/index.html/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090829124251/http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment_tv_tvblog/2006/09/path_to_911_and.html to http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment_tv_tvblog/2006/09/path_to_911_and.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) 17:30, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified