User talk:Wkqyxz

Doug Wilson, Christ Church, Moscow Idaho documenting an online, public reputation

"Neo-Confederates: Plagiarism As It Is" - Southern Poverty Law Center 

"Plagiarizing Slavery" 

"Is One Allowed To Disagree With Doug Wilson?" 

Southern Poverty Law Center: "Taliban On The Palouse"[ http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=376]

Nick Gier, University of Idaho Professor: "The Wilson Story"[ http://www.class.uidaho.edu/ngier/Wilson.htm]

Not On The Palouse, Not Ever[ http://www.tomandrodna.com/notonthepalouse/]

DougSplotch.com[ http://www.dougsplotch.com/judas.htm]

Attorney General for Idaho Investigates Christ Church Members[ http://www2.state.id.us/ag/newsrel/2005/nr_dec072005.htm]

Doug Wilson Related Videos On YouTube[ http://youtube.com/results?search_query=doug+wilson+Christ+Church&search=Search]

"Neo-Confederates: Idaho Pastor A Hard-Liner..."[ http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=665]

"Uncle Doug's Cabin" 

Student Pedophiles At Christ Church[ http://rc-sproul-jr.blogspot.com/2006/06/who-is-doug-wilson-to-clear-rc-sproul.html]

"Two Child Molestation Scandals Break Over Moscow's Christ Church" 

"The Sitler/Wright Story: Ongoing"[ http://emmagoldman.wordpress.com/2006/06/11/the-sitlerwight-story-ongoing/]

Labels: doug wilson Christ Church moscow idaho theology religion credenda agenda southern poverty law center new saint andrews college logos school neo confederate

Note to Wkqyxz
Wkqyxz, you are truly welcome to edit articles in a way that you believe brings more balance from the story. But please do so thoughtfully and with diligent adherence to Wikipedia policies, particularly concerning biographical information of living persons, which must not be libelous. Any controversial statements about a living person added to an article must include proper sources. As those guidelines on sources state, "Anyone can create a website or pay to have a book published, then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published books, personal websites, and blogs are largely not acceptable as sources." Unfortunately, most of the links you've been trying to add fall under that category. I've deleted them all because I don't have time to research each one of them, but I recognize most of them as blogs. It is also not constructive to add the same list of links indiscriminately to numerous Wikipedia entries. Again, be selective and thoughtful, and choose verifiable and non-slanderous sources. Review the discussion section of the various articles you want to edit, to see whether the particular ground has been covered before. If you're not sure whether an edit adheres to Wikipedia guidelines, bring it up first on the discussion page and work through it with other editors. Act in good faith and (I know this is hard!) assume good faith from others. Kyriosity 18:57, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I must agree with Kyriosity here, Wkqyxz. In addition to the policies mentioned above, you should also read the guidelines on external links. There's no inherent problem adding material that is critical (indeed, some of the links you posted already appear as footnotes to Douglas Wilson (theologian) -- which is reason enough that they should not redundantly appear in the external links section), but it must be in accord with Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Also note that "[y]ou should avoid linking to a website that you own, maintain or represent, even if the guidelines otherwise imply that it should be linked." Let me know if you have any questions about this. --Fl e x (talk/contribs) 20:12, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

It's also considered bad form to edit someone's user page. The user talk (discussion) page is the place for engaging another editor. Kyriosity 01:15, 5 September 2007 (UTC)