Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Media Allegations, Criminal Charges, and Conviction of Jung Myung Seok


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Withdrawn, as no longer needed. Article speedy-deleted twice. Jytdog (talk) 22:56, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Media Allegations, Criminal Charges, and Conviction of Jung Myung Seok

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This was created as a POV fork by a SPA as part of a series of edits about Providence (religious movement), a controversial religious group in which three articles were created in a user sandbox: this POV fork, here, a mostly positive "main" bio, and here on the movement, which were then copied into mainspace. The article about the group has been subject to an ANI threads about its promotional nature (which was discussed in the popular media) - see threads here and here. This is more disruption. Jytdog (talk) 17:19, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. — Sam Sailor 18:01, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of South Korea-related deletion discussions. — Sam Sailor 18:01, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:48, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Background: Providence related articles are often subject to white washing by Single Purpose Accounts. Several of these accounts are now banned.

See: Harizotoh9 (talk) 21:58, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive822
 * Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive833
 * Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive922
 * Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive817

For the article itself. Let's scan some sources. The source "http://jmsprovidence.com" is used heavily throughout the article. This is a Providence self-published website and not reliable as a source. I would request review of the other sources as well as many are in Korean, and I am not sure how to read them or analyze them. The title of the article is strange. "Media allegations" is weird to include. If he was charged and convicted, then it doesn't matter what the media alledged. Harizotoh9 (talk) 22:22, 27 February 2017 (UTC)


 * I have studied the source jmsprovidence.com. It is a CGM self published website, but it links to various news articles published by various news sources. What jmsprovidence sought to do is to translate these sources, and put them in a logical fashion for non-korean readers to understand. It also compiled hardcopy sources of some news articles (in its original scanned copy), where it is no longer available on the internet. I agree that we should not cite anything directly from commentary from jmsprovidence.com, but the article cites directly from the news sources themselves. How else would you like to provide the Korean translations? (I put them under the quotes. Feel free to verify them one by one) I verified those translations against native korean readers, as well as google translate and naver korean to english dictionary (i do know some korean myself). That is what you can do as well, find a korean friend or use google translate (although that does have errors). User:Sawol, will you be able to help verify the korean or find any korean editors who are able to? Avataron (talk) 00:20, 28 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Additionally, I included "Media allegations" into this article, because Jung actually won a lawsuit against the original 1999 media allegations, but this happened after he was convicted. So it was a possible case of Media allegations that led to him being convicted, therefore it is important to delineate the difference. Moreover, AFTER Jung was convicted, there were more media allegations against him in 2010-2012 which resulted in charges were dropped against Jung because there was no evidence. And in 2013, another set of media allegations were quashed by the Justice Minister. And in 2014, SBS made media allegations against Jung which did not result in charges. It is important to make the distinction between the process of Media allegations, charges, and conviction for these reasons. For discussion please. Avataron (talk) 00:20, 28 February 2017 (UTC)


 * It seems to me that Avataron (talk) is accurate in his/her description of the sources used. For example, although http://jmsprovidence.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/201204_Newsmaker-_Why_is_the_CGM_back_in_the_spotlight.pdf is used, the original article is scanned at http://jmsprovidence.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Newsmaker-April-2012.compressed.pdf   While many users in the en.wikipedia may not know korean, Avataron (talk) has attempted to put english translation of the cited sources., as qualified ko-en translators, will you be able to help verify the cited quotations from the Korean sources in this article? Many thanks.  Phoenix0316  (talk!) 04:30, 28 February 2017 (UTC) — Phoenix0316 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * !Vote Keep. While I acknowledge the history of edit warring, whitewashing, etc on the Providence (religious movement) page, this article presents credible sources from various points of views, provides the translations necessary for english editors to evaluate, This article presents various POVs, from a third party researcher, and gives detailed examination of the media allegations, charges and conviction of Jung Myung Seok. The Providence (religious movement) page is directed at covering about the group and its founder, and not supposed to be solely focused on the controversies surround Jung Myung Seok. Therefore, this current article warrants a page on its own.Avataron (talk) 14:04, 28 February 2017 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: Avataron (talk • contribs)  is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD.  — Avataron (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * this is an AfD. Please !vote to delete or keep and state your reason under the policies and guidelines. Jytdog (talk) 05:28, 28 February 2017 (UTC)


 * I posted the above to give context to this article. This is part of a long term pattern of behavior. There is a long history of SPA's coming in and whitewashing Providence related articles, and using questionable sources or sources tied to Providence themselves. This is within this pattern. For the article itself, I don't see the great need for it. It looks to be a POV fork with the purpose of minimizing the negative information in the Providence articles, moving it to a new article. Harizotoh9 (talk) 00:04, 1 March 2017 (UTC)


 * I agree that there is a long term pattern of behavior. However, perhaps it is time to consider that the behavior was due to the existing article has not been providing alternate perspectives of the issue, because it is predominantly negative about Providence, as you have acknowledged. It is the ironclad rule for WP:NPOV to allow all perspectives to be expressed proportionately. Therefore, this article should not be hastily classified under the white-washing attempts just because I, as the article writer, am a Near SPA. Look at the substance of the article. Look at the substance of the sources cited. Are they fair? Do they present all sides fairly? Do they discuss an issue that warrants a page on its own? That SHOULD be the guide to whether this article is kept or deleted. Avataron (talk) 00:13, 1 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Update, more disruption still. The article was marked for speedy deletion as a copyright violation by Diannaa, one of our most experienced admins with regard to copyright, and I deleted it. Avataron complained on my page about the deletion, stating that they had edited the article to remove the copyright vios, but just three minutes later, without waiting for a response, recreated the article under a slightly different name, Media Allegations, Charges, and Conviction of Jung Myung Seok. It's hard to believe that action was performed in good faith. I've tried to investigate their complaint, but it's very difficult to take stock of the changes they made to try to address the copyvio, since they were made in 13 small edits, and the "View deleted pages" functionality doesn't allow me to add them up. There's relevant discussion on the deleted Talk:Media Allegations, Criminal Charges, and Conviction of Jung Myung Seok, which admins can see. I don't know what to do about this latest version of the article, or about this user who creates so much work for others. I've blocked them for 48 hours to slow them down. Bishonen &#124; talk 14:57, 1 March 2017 (UTC).
 * It's an unusual scenario, I've never seen a similar situation, and I doubt we have a guideline or an essay about it. If it was my nomination, I'd boldly WP:BUNDLE Media Allegations, Charges, and Conviction of Jung Myung Seok in here, and take it from there., what do you think? Sam Sailor 15:08, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Yep, bundling it here makes sense. Thanks! Jytdog (talk) 18:50, 1 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Note: I've listed at the top as the recreated title. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 21:08, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

So can someone explain why we need this huger article, and this cannot be covered in the page about this person?Slatersteven (talk) 18:05, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment: The latest version was speedily deleted as an attack page (G10). StAnselm (talk) 19:02, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Since the pages are deleted, then this page can be closed. Harizotoh9 (talk) 22:53, 2 March 2017 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.