User talk:Angrygirl

Important Note
HopeChrist is a cult devotee who cannot or does not wish to realize the brainwashing he/she has received from LSM. It is not much different from Jehovah witnesses or Mormons; all of them think that by their boot-licking faith God will make them into little gods. It is really striking how such a twisted belief is such a good source of cults! − Third-party observer who has no prior contact with either Angrygirl or HopeChrist

Message from HopeChrist
Dear User:Angrygirl,

I have respectfully reverted your recent edits on the "Living Stream Ministry" page (Please see the reasons on the "History" page.). Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia. Please respect this fact and help Wikipedia in an positive way, instead of writing or inserting your hostility on it. Also, discuss any such points (which are controversial and unsourced, or untagged) which according to you is important to put in an article, on its talk page. Do not rely upon the blogs and unstable websites for your sourcing, or your content might be deleted or reverted. Please only quote neutral and trustworthy sites. Let us all be good-faith editors and improve Wikipedia together. For testing, please use the "Sandbox." Thanks and happy editing. HopeChrist (talk) 23:26, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

PS: If you have any questions, discuss it on the article's talk page or reply me on my talk page or just reply it here on your talk page. Thanks.

Second Note
Dear User:Angrygirl,

1. This is the second time I have reverted your edits on the "Living Stream Ministry" article and your comment, "Replaced information that was deleted to keep the article on this "church" unbiased" is not true as the word "unbiased" seems unknown by looking at your edits.

2. Wikipedia is an online, user-created, user-centered encyclopedia, but nevertheless there are administrators here and those who do control, monitor, and look into the "edit-wars", "vandalism", "propaganda editing", "ill (not a good-faith) editing", and so on and so on. So, you are free to write whatever you wish, even without collaborating with other editors, as long as there is not a big issue between you and (an)other editor(s). But, please remember, you might get blocked!

3. I have no personal issues with you, or with the "Living Stream Ministry" article. So please contribute toward this article positively by discussing the contents which are controversial and biased on the article's talk page or else I might have to report you to the administrators.

Thanks, HopeChrist (talk) 02:19, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Living Stream Ministry
I see that you have been part of an edit war at the article Living Stream Ministry, where you and another user have been reverting the same content back and forth in and out of the article. This is useless because any user can use the history at any time to go back to an older version. Please read Edit war to understand why it is ultimately a pointless exercise, and the problems that can come from engaging in it.

If you go back to the article, you will see at the top a tab titled "discussion". If you click on it, you will go to the article's talk page, which is intended to be used to discuss the changes and reach an agreement with the other editor on the article. Please use it. The goal is to reach agreement, not merely to temporarily win by brute force - and definitely not to persist in edit warring until one or both of you are blocked from further editing. GRBerry 21:39, 9 June 2008 (UTC)


 * The link to the SCOTUS has the history of the case. The SCOTUS ruling was about whether or not the case would be heard.  It had nothing to do with whether or not it is a cult.jonathon (talk) 21:04, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Living Stream's Talk Page
Dear User:Angrygirl,

I have provided "five facts" with as many links as I could for now, to support my reverting of your biased edits. I wish that you'll spend some time going through some of those links and cross checking your content and then deciding for your own that whether what you are doing is a good faith edit or not?

Secondly, I am again utilizing this opportunity to let you know that I have no personal issues with you or the Living Stream Ministry. All I wish is that facts will be presented, preserved, and accessible for all and to all.

I hope that soon some understanding will develop between us and you'll be willing to step out in faith and will learn the facts. I also hope that you will step out in faith to discuss the issues which is so badly eating you. I wish you a great future at wikipedia. Thanks. HopeChrist (talk) 01:21, 10 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Just for your knowledge, your recent reversion, with the completely off-topic edit summary, removed sourced information without discussion. Such edits are an explicit violation of one of wikipedia's policies, WP:VANDALISM. Continued violation of that policy can and often does result in editor's being blocked. If you wish to question the inclusion of information, please use the talk page. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 21:17, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Replaced information about Harvest House lawsuit
At least one of the links you added, is nothing more than an add for a domain. That destroys any credibility that you might have had.jonathon (talk) 22:40, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

(The above user clearly does not understand the internet, and spelt "ad" wrongly. When a website is removed from a web-hosting platform, often it redirects to an ad for that same platform. Without further information about the original contents of that website, it does not imply anything about credibility of people who had linked to that website earlier. Links get broken on the internet; do not anyhow assume that people intentionally linked to ads unless there is clear evidence. − a passerby to this talk-page)

Peace!
May the Lord grant you peace of mind and love in heart. May the Lord be merciful. May you speak out something "atleast" besides your edits. My dear friend you need Christ. Please believe! HopeChrist (talk) 05:45, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

A screenful of useful links
The following welcome message has a screenful of useful links. Over time, you may refer to more and more of them. For now, I have one very specific request. First, please demonstrate that you are reading these messages and have figured out how to use a talk page by posting to either this page or Talk:Living Stream Ministry. If you don't start communicating with other editors, you will never be able to reach agreement with them. GRBerry 17:43, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Living Stream Ministry
Please stop your disruptive editing. If your vandalism continues, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. John Carter (talk) 22:56, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

You are definitely NOT afraid
Hello User:Angrygirl,

I think I know you a little bit now, You are definitely not afraid of getting blocked (including with your other IPs - User talk:76.180.185.99 and User talk:74.78.56.45). However, for the sake of civility, please don't be so arrogant and heartless. We all know that you're very bold. But, why AREN'T you interested in discussing or talking with other editors on Wikipedia? What's the problem in that for you? Are you afraid that you know you don't have anything valid to say to justify your reckless actions on the "Living Stream Ministry" page? Also, I know that you won't reply; but then, what real problem(s) do you have with the "Living Stream Ministry" article?

Further, you've wasted a lot of my time; but then, All I wish is that you should discuss your changes, be a good-faith editor, and contribute to the whole Wiki community in a positive way. Please come out of that "cult-info" website, as that website has made you like this (to some extent atleast). Look to the world outside. It's better and really beautiful! Thanks. HopeChrist (talk) 23:06, 23 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Edited my Unchristian and angry remarks! I am sorry for that. HopeChrist (talk) 05:07, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

June 2008
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Living Stream Ministry, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you believe there has been a mistake and would like to report a false positive, please report it here and then remove this warning from your talk page. If your edit was not vandalism, please feel free to make your edit again after reporting it. The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Living Stream Ministry was changed by Angrygirl (u) (t) making a minor change adding "!!!" on 2008-06-26T02:27:27+00:00. Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 02:27, 26 June 2008 (UTC)


 * You should also be aware that the article is now fully protected, meaning only administrators can edit it. However, it certainly would be possible to request that changes be made to the article on the article's talk page. Such changes can then be made by an administrator, if they meet with the consensus of the editors involved. I would very much suggest that you propose any changes you wish to make there. Also, I believe you may well wish to read the following pages: WP:CIVILITY and WP:NPA. It seems rather obvious to me, particularly regarding your most recent comments on the article's talk page, that you have less than extensive familiarity with them. You should note that violation of those guidelines can also be just cause for someone being blocked, and I urge you to conduct yourself more in line with them in the future. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 16:34, 26 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Feel free to do whatever you wish. However, you should make yourself aware of wikipedia's policies and guidelines regarding assuming good faith and verifiability. And I very strongly resent, and can probably demonstrate from other content elsewhere, that you are making a very serious mistake in saying that I am a member of any such church or organization. Such unwarranted accusations cannot help your own cause, particularly as your history indicates that your only interest in wikipedia based on your edit history seems to be to add the claim, not yet specifically supported, that the court clearly and explicitly ruled that it was legal to call the publishing firm a "dangerous cult", which I believe is the phrase you used. John Carter (talk) 21:52, 26 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Regarding your comment on my talk page:
 * Please read the correct definition of Vandalism. What you did with me on the Living Stream's talk page is a simple example of "personal attacks" (WP:NPA), and "original research", (or one User's POV). Also, I do not work in the Living Stream Ministry, or for the Living Stream Ministry, and I am in anyway, Not at-All related with the Living Stream Ministry. I do not know anyone (personally) working in (or for) the Living Stream Ministry. I do not belong to the Living Stream Ministry organization, nor do I serve it. My contributions on Wikipedia expands much more than to just Living Stream's article. So far all my business with the Living Stream is that, I have bought some of their publications. I like some of the books it publishes. That is all.


 * The only problem I had with your edits was that they were a) neither Unbiased, b) nor Factual. The word "factual" means, that this "Fact" has to come from some trustworthy and reliable source (such as published books, magazines, and etc), and which in turn can be proven factual through their cross-references and sources quote.
 * And "Unbiased" means, that any independent edit should not be one sided and/or loaded with controversial, and too-negative, too-positive remarks (especially if the matter is unsourced or unquoted).


 * For example, the section on Lawsuits, in the article Living Stream Ministry points to the facts that it has been a part of a Lawsuits over the matter that some books and authors saw it's publications theologically week and that some footnotes in the Recovery Version are indeed controversial to some. However, words such as "cult" and "dangerous" is much more than just theological weakness, but it encompasses the physical and mental harm done by the group to its "members" and "society".


 * In conclusion, all I can say is that, I am not taking any side, (please read my letter to gijones on my talk page, to better understand my point here) and I do not care much for "positive" or "negative" as much as I care for tagged (or sourced) facts. This is Wikipedia, not Internet or a Trashcan! Thanks for stopping-by on my talk page. HopeChrist (talk) 23:18, 26 June 2008 (UTC)