Talk:Chuck Pierce

Concerns of prior Afd
In 2015, an earlier version of this article was deleted. See Articles_for_deletion/Chuck_Pierce. Since then the subject has become much more notable with numerous RS. Hence the article has been recreated. Nowa (talk) 02:41, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Notability
@Mandarax has tagged the article for notability. Can anyone provide more detail? It seems to me that there are enough RS to support notability. Nowa (talk) 19:35, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
 * No, I did not tag the article. I have made exactly one edit to the page – correcting a spelling error.  M AN d ARAX •  XAЯA b ИA M  19:42, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Oops. My bad.  @Melcous added the tag.  Sorry about that. Nowa (talk) 23:06, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Is "Straight White American Jesus" RS?
user:Flod logic cited the podcast Straight White American Jesus (SWAJ) as a reference in a recent edit. Are podcasts in general, and SWAJ in particular, considered reliable secondary sources? Don't they fall under the heading of self-published sources? Nowa (talk) 16:55, 21 April 2024 (UTC)


 * As I understand it, Taylor made the documentary for part of his work as a Protestant scholar at the Institute for Islamic, Christian, and Jewish Studies and released it through Axis Mundi, which has been nominated for public scholarship awards. His work on the topic has been published in a number of third-party news sources (a bunch mentioned here). Looking at Identifying and using self-published works, I think that's okay? flod logic (talk) 17:16, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the explanation. I listened to the podcast preview and it seems to be about Ché Ahn and not Chuck Pierce.  I'm feeling, however that the phrase "run by the 'spiritual oligarchy'" is a bit POV and needs a better reference.  We've already mentioned that Chuck Pierce is a "founder" and "leader" of the NAR movement, but that's very different than "run by" or that he is a part of an "oligarchy". Any chance of coming up with a better reference for that particular characterization of Pierce? If this is just Matt Taylor's characterization, should we say "According to Matt Taylor..."?
 * Do we even need any additional explanation of what the NAR is in this particular article? We already have a link to the main article on the NAR. Nowa (talk) 21:39, 21 April 2024 (UTC)