I'm William Herbert and new to Wikipedia. I'm trying to get a handle on being an Editor. I've got some material that I'd like to contribute but so far I've spent most of my time reading up on how to be an Editor and Editor best practice.
A couple of questions I'm trying to find answers to:
How do I establish good references? For example if I reference a web page and the content of that page is changed or disappears - then what happens to my reference and the Edit itself? If the reference is no longer accessible then does that mean the edit must be removed?
- No hard and fast rules, just use "reputable" sources that can be traced by others. Ropata (talk) 13:23, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
My next question relates to the first. How can I embed an audio clip? Some of my references are available online as an audio/video stream and I'd like to use these as a references, however my fear is that these url’s may disappear therefore I'd like to embed my own personal copies of these audio clips to ensure they remain valid references. The audio clips I'm referring to are recorded quotes made in settings open to the public. If an audio clip can be embedded then what are the restriction?
- Wikipedia does not allow embedding of external content. Linking to it is OK. If you have the sound files, you can try to upload them to WP but there will be copyright procedures and hoops to jump through Ropata (talk) 13:23, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Below is the basic content that I would like to add to the page on Brian Tamaki. Obviously it needs some work but I place it here so you can see what I wanting to add in my edit. Please feel free to offer comment or guidance:
My proposed edit edit
The term Cult carries certain stigma and has various meanings amongst different audiences. In this article the term Cult is best suited to definitions found within the Christian Countercult Movement because Tamaki's criticism as a cult leader generally comes from this camp. One of the better known activists in this movement is the late Dr Walter Martin, founder of the Christian Research institute. He defines a cult as such:
| “ | "A cult, then, is a group of people polarized around someone's interpretation of the Bible and is characterized by major deviations from orthodox Christianity relative to the cardinal doctrines of the Christian faith, particularly the fact that God became man in Jesus Christ". (Walter Martin, The Rise of the Cults, p. 12). | ” |
In a Close-Up TV interview[1] on the subject Tamaki denied that his church is a cult claiming that “if we are a cult then the Catholics, the Presbyterians, the Methodists, the Baptists, and the Pentecostals are all cults as well. Because we believe – we have the same actual orthodox tenants of belief.”
Richard Lewis, spokes person for Destiny, earlier in the same interview deflected the criticism by re-defining the term in a pejorative sense saying “Well a cult is umm some exclusive community out in the backdrops of nowhere, but Destiny is the opposite of that; we’re in the middle of Mt Wellington, our doors are always open, as Bishop says; we broadcast live, we’re an open book”.
It follows then that by Lewis' definition Tamaki is not a cult leader. However according to Tamaki’s own response to the question Tamaki appears to agree with defining a cult by its interpretation of the Bible and its major deviations from orthodox Christianity in respect to cardinal doctrines.
- Yet contrary to his claim to Orthodoxy Tamaki preached these following statements in May 2010 in a series entitled Activating Christ within You:[2]
- Paul (the apostle) had to believe by faith that he (Paul) was Christ. If he didn’t then the Church could not be established.
- The Church are many Christs of the one Christ.
- If I went to any church and said “you are all Christ and you are all Son’s of God”, I’d probably get kicked out…Theologians would have great difficulty with me; a lot of reverends, pastors, vicars, bishops, and Pentecostal pastors would all curl right now because they would have difficulty with this...they would say “you cannot say that”, but I have not said it…Christ has said it, so has the Father.
- Christ is Spirit, you must get out of your mind that Christ is still Jesus of Nazareth…Jesus of Nazareth did not come out of the tomb, the flesh Jesus died in the tomb.
- It is a fallacy, a false mentality; it is very bad teaching, to get believers to believe that they are anything less than the actual same Divinity and substance-of-Spirit as God… What I'm trying to tell you is that there is no difference between what is in you and what is God.
- You had divine origins…Christ has always been in you…it’s the (this) revelation that activates Christ in you.
- I am Christ.
- I cannot sin.
Why is this edit necessary? edit
It all comes down to the word Cult. The problem is threefold: (1) it is difficult for the average reader to define what a Cult actually is, (2) the term Cult is not without connotation, i.e. it’s emotive, (3) In the public forum people will continue to use the word Cult in connection with Destiny Church and Brian Tamaki; the unfortunate reality is that the term has stuck. Therefore the best thing to do in my view is to create some objectivity by anchoring down the terminology to some acceptable definition. An appeal to authority is my modus operandi.
Once the term Cult has been settled we then need to determine if Brian Tamaki fits this description (as a so called ‘Cult Leader’). This part should be fairly simple and requires only a comparison of Tamaki’s doctrine with established Christian Orthodoxy. Admittedly I haven’t done this part very well in the sense that the casual reader (one whom is not well versed in the tenets of Christian Orthodoxy) would read my edit and probably not see the dichotomy between the Doctrine of Tamaki and Christian Orthodoxy. This is because I haven’t given a comparison between the two by providing examples of violated orthodoxy. By neglecting to do this I have unfairly assumed the readers knowledge of Christian Orthodoxy.
Therefore I need to rework the edit to make this conflict clear. As a result of my revision the answer to the question “Is Brian Tamaki a Cult leader” should become obvious and indisputable due to the following logic:
Premise 1
- A Cult has been adequitly and acceptably defined as followers of a ‘Christian’ type religious doctrine that departs in some way from the set of fundamental Orthodox Christian beliefs.
Premise 2
- Tamaki teaches such cult doctrine to a group of followers
Conclusion
- Therefore Tamaki is a Cult Leader
If I adequitly establish the truth of the premises then the conclusion is valid and inescapable. This, I believe, will be helpful to the reader because Tamaki is currently in the NZ media limelight directly defending claims that he is a cult leader. Therefore the average reader would be aware of this and wanting some concrete resolution on the question.
I don't intend to rewrite the edit using logic form, but I do intend my revision to meet the following criteria:
- The question must be evident and validated as necessary by Tamaki's defences to the common claim that he is a 'Cult Leader'
- The edit must be methodical
- The premises must be established but in a form that is consistent with the flow of the article
- The conclusion must be clear but not accusative. In other words it must naturally follow from the evidence
- Avoid Synthesis of published material that advances a position.
References edit
William Herbert (talk) 17:06, 17 May 2010 (UTC)