User talk:GEORGEWATTS

Welcome!

Hello GEORGEWATTS, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your edits have not conformed to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy, and have been reverted. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.

There's a page about the NPOV policy that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! JoshuaZ 16:17, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Neutral Point of View
Your edits to Toronto Blessing express a particular point of view rather forcefully as absolute truth, in an context where they might be regarded as controversial: this goes against Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy; please read that policy before proceeding with any further edits. -- The Anome 13:02, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Points of View
We at least have two points of view A and B concerning Toronto Blessing which can be soften?

The statement, At Toronto is held that the Fruit of the Spirit, and the gentle love of the Father (the "Father Heart of God") precedes any experience. Sterling character and perfect integrity must outperform mere phenomena in every individual. Hence character is prioritized., is presented as an unfounded absolute truth which has no basis in life. It requires a rebutal as it's only an assumption or theory but not a fact?

The rebutal is Pastors John Arnott and Steve Long don't have sterling character or perfect integrity. They are both cowards. John Arnott takes no responsibility for anything but just passes the buck and Long is a proven liar - The book "Apostasy" http://victorybooks.tripod.com/apostasy.htm openly details on the web things that TACF can deny as untruthful! So if the leadership is sick and corrupt how can anything good come out of TACF? It cannot!]

The hogwash about sterling character and perfect integrity should be deleated from this dictionary because it has no basis in truth! It also shows the real weakness in the Toronto Blessing that there is no sterling character or perfect integrity amongst it leaders. I have met and dealt with John Arnot and Steve Long the king pins of the movement and they are have no position that they could defend to the public except to say what they are experiencing is of God. Their positon is if you don't like it don't participate but go elsewhere! Yes they have an intolerant indefensible position which is what I am trying to bring out!

George Watts

Please also read the Biographies of living persons policy. -- The Anome 13:12, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Warning: Wikipedia is not a vehicle for personal attacks
Please note that the NPOV and Biographies of living persons are non-negotiable core policies of Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for personal attacks. If you continue to flout these core Wikipedia policies, you are likely to be blocked from editing. If you are unsure about how to proceed, please read the policy pages first. -- The Anome 13:18, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

External linking and original research
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as those in Paul Cain, but we regretfully cannot accept original research. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thanks for your efforts, and happy editing! · j e r s y k o talk · 18:56, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that exist to attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam policies for further explanations of links that are considered appropriate. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. · j e r s y k o talk · 18:56, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Please do not post personal essays and external links on articles such as you did with Ted Haggard. I suggest you read the policies linked in your welcome message and the messages above to learn how to contribute in a positive fashion to Wikipedia. KillerChihuahua?!? 11:02, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

May 2008
Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Mike Doughney (talk) 15:31, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

November 2008
Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. However, please be aware of Wikipedia's policy that biographical information about living persons must not be libelous. Any controversial statements about a living person added to an article, or any other Wikipedia page, must include proper sources. ''Don't use blogs as sources about living figures or you will be blocked. We aren't a rumour mill for whatever piece of tattle you can find by googling the net.'' Cameron Scott (talk) 13:18, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * And now you're doing it to Toronto Blessing... please stop...Hyper3 (talk) 21:45, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Please Stop
Your edits to Toronto Blessing were appreciated. Nevertheless, Wikipedia has standards and guidelines, some of which have been listed above. Wikipedia welcomes everyone and don't take this to be rude. However, before you edit again you might want to review the guidlines and learn a little more about editing Wikipedia. Anyway even if your edits were constructive they had nothing to do with the Toronto Blessing which is about a separate revival that happened ten years before. Any information should be relevant to the article. If you have any questions or would like help understanding Wikipedia policies I'm here. Just leave me a message on my talkpage. If I don't know the answer I'd be happy to help you find someone who does. Thanks. Ltwin (talk) 01:24, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

The Inspiration Networks
Please do not add copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Mike Doughney (talk) 22:08, 25 December 2008 (UTC)