Jordanooo

Welcome!

Hello, Jordanooo, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Bielle (talk) 04:35, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Changes to New Creation Church

I have reverted the changes you made to the article because they do not conform to Wikipedia's policies on neutral point of view. It is difficult for a newcomer to know how to approach topics at the start. Please put a message on my talk page here if, after reading the policy page, you still are uncertain about what to do. Welcome! Bielle (talk) 04:39, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

November 2009

Please do not delete content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to New Creation Church, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Smartse (talk) 00:19, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Joseph Prince

Hello, Jordanooo. You have new messages at Bielle's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I have gone back to re-check the reversions I made made yesterday on the text you added to the article, as promised. The statements made about Mr Prince are all backed by sources and are not, in the main, negative, though they sometimes have a tone of surprise. It is the sources from which Wikipedia must draw its material that established this tone.

Because you are new to Wikipedia, I have cut out two examples to explain more fully. All the other reversions are very similar. Please remember that not being positive is not the same thing as being negative.

First Example

Original Text:

There have been criticisms about the quantum of salary paid by the church to its senor pastor Joseph Prince.

This is a statement of fact attributed to the Sunday Times, a reliable source in Wikipedia terms. It is balanced by Mr Prince’s own statements about his salary; no commentary has been added that is not present, in both cases, in the source.

Your Text:

For some reason, their has been complaints about Pastor Prince's income, but regardless of that, Pastor Prince has been honest and transparent about his well-deserved income.

This is a statement, full of commentary that is dismissive of the complaints, and is, as far as I can see, original research. If you have a source saying that Mr Prince has been “honest and transparent” or even that the complaints have no basis, or that his salary is “well deserved” please add them to the discussions on the talk page. Wikipedia reports what he has been reported as saying, and what others have been reported as saying about him, in as factual and unqualified a way as possible. Wikipedia also does not say that Mr Prince doesn't possess those attributes you list. We leave judgements to the reader.

Second Example

Original Text:

They are said to live in a classy condominium in a prime residential district and drive an expensive continental car.

This is a statement taken from the article noted as its source. If you have a source that establishes either that this is false or that it is not in any way unusual for a pastor to live in such a place and manner, then, once again, please provide the source and add it to the discussions on the talk page.

Your Text:

They are said to live in a classy condominium in a prime residential district and drive an expensive continental car, which really, is nobody's business. People never seem to care if drug dealers drive Bentley's and Escalades, but for some reason people think that is wrong for men of God to have nice things, when according to the word of God, they should be blessed. (1 Cor. 9)

This is all personal opinion. (I am sure you aren’t really suggesting that Mr Prince should be compared in any way to a drug dealer.) It has become the business of others because of the sources that reported on his lifestyle. Your opinion, or mine, about where he lives, what he drives and what he earns, is of no significance to Wikipedia.

I hope this has been useful. Please feel free to ask me questions on my talk page. Another contact who would be helpful for you in this matter is Tanlipkee. Bielle (talk) 04:51, 13 November 2009 (UTC)