User talk:Soulvision7

File copyright problem with File:File-Ted Haggard.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:File-Ted Haggard.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation.  F ASTILY  (T ALK ) 06:26, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

August 2009
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Removal of cited info, whitewashing, and intentionally misrepresenting motives, failure to cite sources when requested, etc...all inappropriate. DMacks (talk)

1. The crisis was both moral and family in that it required the entire family to leave the state of Colorado.

2. There is no evidence of an ongoing relationship only allegations brought by Pastor Brady Boyd.

3. There is controversy in timing in that it was 8 days before the documentary aired.

4. The allegations were confidential which is why New Life didn't release the information until Haas spoke up.

5. Haggard alleges publicly that he was never fired (see Larry King) Soulvision7 (talk) 18:00, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

(I numbered so I can respond correctly).
 * 1. That may be (but it's not cited as such), and it's major importance is in relation to the acts. That's why the material is notable, not just that he happened to have some moral problem. It's important to have titles reflect the major/most-notable aspect of the content.
 * 2. Boyd (Haggard's successor) publicly stated that there is evidence of a long-term relationship.
 * 3. Indeed. Even accuser stated that there were political reasons behind the timing, which my version clearly states. Feel free to add additional cited reasons, without removing exising cited reasons. But also it's cited that the accusations were ready earlier, so you must not make it seem like accuser decided to accuse merely due to movie or other political motives...can only use those to support the timing. Always have to go with cited material. If you have additional citations that support an alternative perspectives, they can be added. Disregarding one cited explanation and instead using one that casts person in poor light is not appropriate. Especially in a one's-words-against-another's, you're not allowed to make a judgement among them, but rather must include all reliably-sourced views in keeping with their importance.
 * 4. I don't see a cite for that, and without cite, can't include it. With cite, can include it but the fact that it was confidential is not the most important part of that section, so including it in title is undue weight.
 * 5. But elsewhere, news reports say (and quote him) as being fired or "removed". Again, WP editors can only report what has been reported. If you have a specific citation to where he clearly indicates he was not fired or forced out but rather chose to leave, we can go back to the "fired or stepped down" wording (again not choosing among reliably-sourced contradictory infirmation).

The pattern is the same everywhere...you're removing well-sourced material and putting in material that is poorly if at all sourced. It includes all sorts of insinuations about his accusers. It ignores whole parts of a story that make Haggard look bad, even when cited. Please take some time to read WP:BLP, WP:NPOV, and WP:RS policies. DMacks (talk) 18:59, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

I will definitely read these policies and reference them correctly from now on. Here's my dilemma. I have inside knowledge currently being a part of the New Life team. I know what happened and what is not being reported. I can't reference myself out of fear of reprisal. But there is a story that isn't being told here. While Brady says that he has evidence, he has never come forward with it even when challenged by Haggard to do so. This hasn't been reported but I know this happened. 75.173.235.130 (talk) 21:37, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia isn't the place for original content. Maybe there's some news organization you could leak your info to.Dosbears (talk) 23:58, 25 August 2009 (UTC)