Talk:Howard Ahmanson Jr.

This article should be expanded
Clearly Howard Ahmanson, Jr is no ordinary man because he has wealth and an extraordinary agenda which he is funding. Related articles about:
 * Discovery Institute
 * Teach the Controversy
 * Phillip E. Johnson
 * Darwin on Trial
 * and probably several other topics all on Wikipedia need to be brought under a central umbrella to show what is going on here. MPLX/MH 18:05, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Talking about money, there is interesting controversy surrounding the funding of the Discovery Institute - see below. Ian Pitchford 13:39, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

'''From Genesis To Dominion Fat-Cat Theocrat Funds Creationism Crusade by Steve Benen Americans United for Separation of Church and State from: Church & State, July/August 2000''' Link to article

Question about the above
Instead of the quotation of an entire article, shouldn't the above be just a link? RJCraig 08:19, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

It is linked below. Pasting an entire article into a discussion page is poor form, but so is editing another's contribution. Still, I'd not object if someone else were to excise it.Bustter 10:36, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Reference for Tourette's
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,6903,1431557,00.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by SandyGeorgia (talk • contribs) 01:12, February 20, 2006 (UTC)

Neutral POV
The article uses fundamentalist outside the technical sense. Ahmanson is an Episcopalian, after all.


 * yes, that has been rectified. the bio could be beefed up. all info in the article not directly cited in the text comes from the external links. these have been arranged with the more hostile critics moved the the bottom. POV in these sources could be explicitly noted.
 * you can be a fundamentalist in the technical sense of agreeing with "the 5 fundamentals" and be episcopalian! See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_fundamentals#Doctrine
 * Note the mention of Anglican/Church of (England in) Ireland priest John Nelson Darby and his essential part (founder of dispensationalism) in the formation of Christian Fundamentalism. Of course Darby eventually ceased to be a priest and member of any church in the Anglican communion, but the point is that fundamentalist theology has always been something that has appeared among all kinds of Protestants. NAd Catholics and others for that matter, if we are just talking about the 5Fs. That stuff is basic, historic Christian doctrine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.94.8.139 (talk • contribs)
 * The Ahmansons are relatively recent converts to a splinter/segment of Anglicanism that was formed (partly through their efforts) in reaction to acceptance of LGBT clergy (etc.) in the ECUSA. As Theonomists (an offshoot of Calvinism) they are probably postmillenialists, unlike Darby. Some Theonomists/Reconstructionists gave up their Reformed/Calvinist ties starting in the 1980s and became Episcopalian for reasons having to do with their movement's internal politics. This is discussed in the recent academic study of Reconstruction by McVicar, where Howard Ahmanson is mentioned several times. There may be related material in Julie Ingersoll's book, Building God's Kingdom (Oxford UP, 2015)

"Certainly they oppose hatred and gay-bashing."

These words, said of the ex-gay movement, are faulty logic and not NPOV. Since these people view any practicing gay as slated for eternal punishment, they can't be viewed as free of these negatives. The redemption of ex-gays is no different from the redemption of any sinner -- murderer, thief or rapist. To define a sexual preference as a sin is certainly "bashing" in itself.Bustter 21:07, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism
Removal of cited text, particularly with a deceptive edit summary marked "minor", is vandalism-- I have restored the cited text after I missed the deletion because of the deceptive edit summary. Sandy Georgia (Talk) 13:49, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Promotional
Entire article needs to be rewritten large portions are clearly written (badly) by Ahmanson or his organization. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.194.63.101 (talk) 23:09, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Howard Ahmanson Jr.. 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/20110711000124/http://fieldstead.com/who-we-are.html to http://fieldstead.com/who-we-are.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060531105603/http://reason.com/9811/col.olson.shtml to http://www.reason.com/9811/col.olson.shtml
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061008075351/http://www.edow.org/follow/part1.html to http://www.edow.org/follow/part1.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060324114126/http://www.ocregister.com/ocr/2004/08/10/sections/news/news/article_197272.php to http://www.ocregister.com/ocr/2004/08/10/sections/news/news/article_197272.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060614141957/http://wjc.bestsemester.com/overview.asp to http://wjc.bestsemester.com/overview.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081117221849/https://www.hrc.org/news/11542.htm to http://www.hrc.org/news/11542.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) 00:37, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Latest Updates
Hello All,

I just wanted to inform that I have added an image of Howard to the knowledge panel that is legitimate and authorized by the author of the image, Ash Thayer.

On a shocking note, I came across an inappropriate reference that linked to a pornographic page that was completely irrelevant to the subject matter. I discovered that the intended URL was Gegrapha with a TLD ending in ".com" while the previous user indicated ".org". I have fixed this error and the particular reference is legitimate!

Thanks, Thederekjohnson (talk) 04:30, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Recent Deletion
Hello !

Wanted to quickly spark a dialogue around why you decided to pull the content about Howard's involvements in the arts? I feel like this involvement, among many others that could be highlighted, are initiatives of his that lack substantial coverage in the public eye. Could be a great thing to showcase; wanted to get your thoughts around that.

Thanks! Thederekjohnson (talk) 03:02, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I was leaving a message at your talk as you were posting here; the content was about his wife, not him. Also, there seems to be a lot of trivia in the article, and I wonder if there are BLP issues, as there is so much uncited text.  I posted at the WP:BLPN to get more attention on the article; I only follow the Tourette syndrome personal info.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  03:12, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your input and clarification on those areas. I think gaining the article some exposure via WP:BLPN could be a really good thing, considering the weight of contribution to article has been several years now and lied in a fairly partisan lens. My efforts are simply to bring it towards a standing of neautrality, and bring relevant pieces of the article to the latest stage of development (since he is still living).

Thederekjohnson (talk) 03:58, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I am unwatching now, as the need for extensive repair to this article gives me headaches just reading it. I will continue to check in periodically to make sure no POV has crept in re Tourette syndrome "sufferers", etc. Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  16:42, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Content Removal
The aim for this article, or any article on this platform, is to be undeniably clear, factual and predominantly neutral in stance. The previous state of the major sections of this article were dangerously slighted to the opposition of the subject in which the article is focused upon. Multiple instances and portions of content previously contributed within this article, that will later be definitively outlined, would be considered defamatory and slander. Defense to follow.

Within the section previously defined as ‘Financing of Christian Conservtive Movements’ there are several articles that hold a bias against the subject.


 * In the following paragraph where ties where Ahmanson is further tied to the ideals of an extremist Christianity, the integrity of the source to back the claim lies in heavy bias. In this article, he is erroneously labeled a “sugar daddy for Creationists”, an “avenging angel of the religious right” and “soul brother of the taliban”.


 * 8)https://web.archive.org/web/20060324114126/http://www.ocregister.com/ocr/2004/08/10/sections/news/news/article_197272.php


 * The original coining of the second label, “avenging angel” is a source that is used later in this same section from Salon.com, using a quote pulled from an article (that previously was written with errancies) that unfairly presents Howard’s standing on the separation of church and state.


 * 3) https://www.salon.com/2004/01/06/ahmanson/


 * The introduction for Ahmanson’s philanthropic vessel, Fieldstead & Co., sources a strongly partisan article in opposition of the subject.


 * 14) https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2005/mar/06/arts.artsnews


 * In “Social advocacy and political involvements”, the source provided to support claims around Howard’s conservative political influence is lined with heavy bias, is conspiratorial in nature, and comes from a journalist platform with questionable credibility.


 * 35) http://www.publiceye.org/magazine/v08n1/chrisre3.html

As my defense has outlined, the prior points are instances in which the guidelines and values of Wikipedia (the second pillar of Wikipedia, namely) have been breached within this article. These edits were made in a full embodiment of the spirit of wikipedia in an effort to pursue the best interests of the reader, the subject and the platform.

Thank you!

Thederekjohnson (talk) 03:53, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Content Reframe
In the section "Social advocacy & political involvement", I do not believe the fact that the Western Center for Law and Religous Freedom played a role in banning the book, One Hundred Years of Solitude from schools was a very relevant item to the subject at hand. While he is a supporter of said organization, I have added it to the list of entities that have benefitted from his support.

Kind Regards,

Thederekjohnson (talk) 03:58, 24 February 2020 (UTC)