User:Itsfiziks/sandbox

Third Statement by GIOSCali
I have two main concerns that will address the issues outlined by Montanabw in a previous post.

There are important, verifiable facts missing regarding the proceedings against Jung Myeong Seok. I would like to remind editors that facts do not apply to (WP:UNDUE), phrasing of the article, or the nature of the group. I would like to include the following information into the article based on the previously cited sources:

Again, these are basic facts surrounding the subject, without which the article would be incomplete.
 * 1) There were four original accusers in his case, and of those, one recanted and admitted to being bribed by Kim Do-hyun in exchange for testimony against Jung. She alleged that another accuser had also been bribed, and was convicted of perjury. With no physical evidence in the trial, the single judge presiding over the case sentenced Jung to 6 years (later extended to 10).
 * 2) The Seoul Broadcasting System in Korea was found guilty of doctoring Jung's sermons to portray him as a sex offender and was forced to pay reparations to the CGM, eventually issuing an official apology letter.
 * 3) Jung Myeong Seok was acquitted of all charges of sexual assault in 2012 by the Supreme Court of Korea in a case unrelated to the one for which he currently serves a sentence.
 * 4) Kim Do-hyun admitted to defaming and extorting the CGM and Jung by spreading scandalous accusations. There are letters and written documentation reported about in source we provided as well as other newspapers throughout Korea.

Second, an entirely separate issue: claims about the theology of the group should be rephrased to appropriately use the sources.


 * 1) For example, claiming that the belief of salvation is achieved through intercourse with the Messiah is truly (WP:Exceptional). Although there are a few sources which claim this, they are clearly stated as opinions by specific people and should be clearly conveyed as such.
 * 2) As for the primary sources mentioned by Peter Daley, the argument is not that these sources should not be used, but that they must be used correctly. I do not object to the use of primary material--in fact I think it is wholly necessary. My only constraint is that the (WP:NOR) is followed and that phrases not be (WP:CHERRYPICK) to support only one viewpoint.

If it would help, the articles can be translated for the purposes of this discussion and place on my sandbox for review. The core issue still needs to be addressed: claims about the theology being so polarized, it would seem difficult to integrate the two. Perhaps as John Carter suggested, the best way to structure the article would be from a historical perspective.

As for the potential issue with (WP:CRUSH), perhaps offering some background information will help. As I mentioned on the talk page, I am a theology student studying modern Christianity, particularly in East Asia. What caught my attention about the CGM was that while Jung was convicted of these crimes, he was only serving a ten year sentence. After some research, I found the article had some gaps in information. This became the basis for these discussions.