Talk:Local church

Does not meet Wikipedia standards
To be a disambiguation page, it must have more than one link in it. So far, HopeChrist has been deleting all links to anything but his religion, the Local churches. In addition, a disambiguation page is not an article; it is not the place to describe in detail what is already included in other articles. Last, a disambiguation page is not an advertisement; it is not the place to tell people all about your religion. Best wishes! Ad.minster (talk) 19:21, 18 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Dear User:Ad.minster, this page always had more than 1 link to re-direct any reader! For your knowledge and misunderstanding, I must tell you that I have never removed any links from this page. There is no advertisement and religious propagation in the disamb. page or this talk page. I would highly recommend you to re-consider your words and to check the history section for this page. Yet, the irony would be, any third person looking at the history and the previous comments can easily find out you as fake.


 * Thanks for your wishes. However, I do not take garbage (lies and irrationality) from others and if someone throws away, I do not mind it. Anyways, thanks for stopping by on the talk page! HopeChrist (talk) 18:14, 19 September 2008 (UTC)


 * As for truthfulness: above you state that you never removed any links.  Here is your earlier edit, which like all previous, had but one article being "disambiguated:"  http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Local_church&oldid=236396087.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ad.minster (talk • contribs) 15:21, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I believe, you better check it again, and look the previous history, as well. Best wishes, HopeChrist (talk) 22:04, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Edits reverted
Hi User:Adminster,

I've reverted your edits on the page Local church. I found that it was biased and lacked WP:NPOV. I would like you to first discuss those changes on the article's talk page and verify your claims.

Also, I saw into your contributions and your role on Wikipedia. It seems to me that you are a good faith editor and an active contributor on the Wikipedia, (I appreciate this very much); however, I was much surprised to see the language and overtly biased (POV)content you inserted or used in the article Local church.

I hope you'll be willing to discuss the changes first and will research some of the reliable sources and media on local churches before commenting poorly.

Yours sincerely, HopeChrist (talk) 18:39, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

PS: Please check this link regarding the local churches beliefs and attitude towards the normal Christian believers.Beliefs & Practices, FAQ


 * Hi,


 * I have tightened up the brief introductory description/remark about the article local churches after many futile attempts of vandalism, advertisement, and biased insertion on this page. So for the sake of civility, please before expanding it further or making it short, (which could result in being too little or too much about the main article) - discuss it first. This is how the Wikipedia recommends and works. Thanks. HopeChrist (talk) 17:44, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


 * The local churches are not one church or one (or 'a') organization but the many churches who follows the pattern for the church life as preached by Watchman Nee. All the churches are autonomous and are not connected to each other officially but are similar in its expression and conduction in terms of the church life and practices. So my revert is based on the wrong assumption of LC being an organization and moreover, without any discussion with any other editors of this disamb page. Thanks. HopeChrist (talk) 16:30, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Do we need this
"Their idea is that the church should not be separated into denominations and the reason that they are called the local church is that their church's gathering is dependent upon the name of the region or locality."

The above sentence is taken from the introductory comment from the main page. I am just curious that if this statement is trully required or not? Just discuss. Thanks. HopeChrist (talk) 18:34, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Better than before
As it stands now, the Local church page is much better now and with more information and NPOV in it. Thanks. HopeChrist (talk) 18:15, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. SlackerMom (talk) 21:11, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Controversial statements
Disambiguation pages are not the place for making disputed statements. Descriptions of articles should be brief, contain all necessary information, and must be limited to statements that are not controversial or disputed.

On the Local churches, Watchman Nee's affiliation is in dispute. Whether he even met Witness Lee before his life term in jail is in dispute and controversial. That the group is Christian is maintained by the group, but is disputed by critics, and is thus controversial. The group's affiliation (or more broadly, association) with Witness Lee is not in dispute. This group's affiliation with the Living Stream Ministry is necessary for a minimum identification and is a fact that is not in dispute, as the "Local churches" category pages shows.

Therefore, "local churches" should be briefly identified with Witness Lee and the Living Stream Ministry and nothing more. The reader wants to find what he is after.

Most importantly, since this group is not what most people are looking for when landing on "Local church", this specific group must be listed last. The more general articles, which are most likely what the reader is looking for, must be kept first. Best wishes, Ad.minster (talk) 15:31, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree with your arguments regarding the description, but I think I disagree about the order. Since this dab page is named "Local church", it seems that an article named "Local churches" should come before general topics, since it is nearly identical to the disambiguation term.  That is the way other dab pages are generally organized.  On what do you base your opinion that "this group is not what most people are looking for..."? SlackerMom (talk) 18:11, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Your edits look great to me! Thank you.  Ad.minster (talk) 21:19, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

"Local churches" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Local churches and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 13 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Veverve (talk) 01:09, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

"Local church body" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Local church body and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 13 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Veverve (talk) 01:09, 13 January 2022 (UTC)