Talk:Melissa Scott (pastor)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Portal:Biography
 Biography Portal
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]
Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on July 31, 2006. The result of the discussion was keep.


Why does this have a POV sign and an inappropriate language sign when there is no talk page about it?

For the same reason there isn't a sign on the beach at the tideline stating "Warning: Water Nearby". The article is being constantly edited with a clear view towards disparaging Ms. Scott. Even if all the claims being made by the anonymous editors were factually correct (by no means a given) it's still not NPOV. -- Antaeus Feldspar 18:29, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

OK, I had a go at cleaning this up. Let's see how long it takes before somebody comes back and slants this back towards whatever agenda they have. As I said on the discussion for Gene Scott, I don't know who Melissa is, but this does not deserve such a negative perspective. --Cooleyez229 08:01, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Somebody please give this article a good cleaning, using verifiable sources of info!!! --Cooleyez229 04:35, 2 December 2005 (UTC)


Contents

[edit] POV check

I nominated this for a POV check. Discuss. --Cooleyez229 10:03, 3 December 2005 (UTC)


I'm not certain if I'm posting this in the right place. I am a long time staff member of the Gene Scott ministry and LAUC. In the scheme of things I have to say this article is accurate and balanced. If anything, there are some unsubstantiated favorable facts also. Reading the history of edits before and seeing what is posted about Jim Baker, Oral Roberts and other televangelists, it is as neutral as information on controversial spiritual leaders can be. Thank you, Eli and Travis.

OK, so I guess this means taking the POV-check template off, since this seems to be accurate. --Cooleyez229 06:52, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup

OK, now that we know we're neutral, can somebody assist in cleaning up, or making sure its as clean as its gonna get? --Cooleyez229 07:24, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

I recommend the name "Eugene Scott" in the first paragraph be changed to either "Dr. Gene Scott," "Dr. W. euGene Scott," or "Gene Scott." His first name was William, which he never went by so it was usually abbreviated, and he also preferred to capitalize the G in euGene rather than the initial E. It should be in the copyright of the web page, actually. "Gene" was his preferred informal address and "W. euGene" his preferred formal. This style of emphatic capitalization as well as the font changes and creative paragraphing he uses are a hallmark of his writing style; even his doctoral dissertation contains them.TurtleofXanth 06:58, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The references to Terry "Christiansen" and Steve Stone

I have just found out that the "Terry Christiansen" mentioned in the uncited last paragraph may actually be Terry Christensen, who was named in the Anthony Pellicano wiretap affair. If this is so, however, I must ask -- what does this have to do with Melissa Scott? No indication has been provided that she was part of the scandal or a beneficiary of it or even much inconvenienced by it.

I suspect that instead someone is just looking to load into this article everything they can, whether substantiated or not, whether relevant or not, that will smear mud on Melissa Scott. Would the same people have made sure that Eugene Scott's entry, when he was alive, contained information about every single person he ever employed who got themselves in trouble with the law, whether or not their legal troubles had anything to do with Eugene Scott? I very much doubt it. -- Antaeus Feldspar 15:59, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Barbie Bridges?

This page doesn't explain why it redirects from "Barbie Bridges." Puddleglum 17:33, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Allegedly, Melissa Scott had a former career in adult entertainment under the name of "Barbie Bridges". Those who swear up and down that this is the absolute truth have been unable to present anything even approaching a reliable source to back up the allegation, and accordingly it cannot go in the article per WP:BLP. -- Antaeus Feldspar 02:54, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
Nonsense. Her past in the adult movie industry as an actress, producer and co-owner of Barbie Bridges Entertainment is well-documented by both business filings and court papers. But despite documented evidence to the contrary, she has publicly denied her past. - Joe The Editor 00:57, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
Then the only part of what I said above that I have to modify in any way is changing the "unable" to "unwilling". I have looked for anything which meets Wikipedia's standards of verifiability and reliable sourcing to substantiate these allegations and I have found nothing. No one else has come forward with anything more reliable than posts from Web forums, and those are of course not reliable sources. So if you have actual sources, please bring them forward. -- Antaeus Feldspar 01:27, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
If you've been unable to find sources then it is because you have been unwilling to look. Corporate business filings are available online. Court filings are available online. Spend a couple of bucks to access the records and do your homework. And just to set your mind at ease, I have no intention of adding or deleting a single word in this article. I just wish you'd be honest and accurate in the construction of this article. - Joe The Editor 01:40, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
Hmmmmmm, let me attempt a translation of that. "Since I want to allege that Melissa Scott is actually a former porn star, something she denies, clearly the burden of proof is upon me to actually substantiate my claim. However, either I don't have the sources I claim to have or they don't actually support what they claim they support or perhaps I myself have not even checked these so-called sources. Therefore, I will improperly attempt to shift the burden of proof onto someone else, accusing them of falling down on the job for not finding support for my allegations." Yeah, I think that's pretty much the gist of what you're saying. -- Antaeus Feldspar 02:04, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
I never used the phrase "star". Don't fault me for your inability to do research. - Joe The Editor 03:09, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
I don't. I fault you for yours. What part of "the burden of proof is upon you" do you not comprehend? -- Antaeus Feldspar 03:41, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
Still refusing to go and look for yourself. You'll spend hours defending an error but not ten minutes researching your facts. Yep, that's Wikipedia.- Joe The Editor 07:01, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
Oh, cut the malarkey. If it took "ten minutes" to find a verifiable reliable source for this claim of yours then you would have taken that ten minutes and produced that source. Do you do this at your bank, too? "Well, even though you have a clearly posted sign stating that I need to provide positive ID in order to make a withdrawal, it would take you ten minutes in order to verify that I am who I claim to be. Oh, but instead you want to spend hours and hours not letting me making a withdrawal without ID, just to cover up your lousy customer service." Guess what, if your bank has to spend hours refusing your unreasonable request because you spend hours making that unreasonable request, they are not the ones demonstrating inadequacy. -- Antaeus Feldspar 22:17, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
I have told you the information is in business filings and court documents. I have told you to spend a couple of bucks to check them out for yourself. I have told you that you can do it online. Why will you not you look for yourself? Do you not know where to find California business filings? Do you not know where to retrieve court documents? Do you not know how to do background searches? If you need help in doing those things then I will help you. However, I will not be the one to rewrite this article. If you simply fear what a few minutes of actual research will reveal then I cannot help you. - Joe The Editor 00:02, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
Congratulations! With your asinine "OMG you FEAR the mighty TRUTH that I bring!!!!" act, you have successfully exhausted what patience with you I had left! What's your prize? Getting ignored. Have a nice life. -- Antaeus Feldspar 01:19, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
IIn other words, you are not interested in truth even when it offered to you on a silver platter. You're only interested in doing a PR job for a church with a questionable background and absolutely no future. I offered the documentation to you and you turned it down. - Joe The Editor 03:13, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
Just produce this evidence and get on with it, quit bitching. Melissa Scott has never publicy denied her past, but she has refused to let anyone depict her as "perfection personified" or as this alleged material would try and suggest. She has apparently comes to terms with her mistakes and claims to be a new creation in process through her faith. She refuses to be judged by what any of us think that a preacher "should be". What the hell do you or I know what this woman should or should not be? Been in her position lately? If you have, then please enlighen us.
But even if what you claim is indeed fact, then even better!! The headline should read "Adult Model has life changing experience with Jesus Christ and follows after Him" Humm... that sounds vaguely familiar, people living corrupt lives and turning in a differnt direction after encountering a ressurected Christ?!? I wonder if Paul ever mentioned the subject?(cough, cough) Produce the alleged facts, it changes nothing.-Kurios555
She has publicly denied her past in the adult movie industry. If she would acknowledge her past, it would indeed make for a tremendous testimony. - Joe The Editor 21:36, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
The only substantiation I have so far found that she had denied anything about being involved in the adult entertainment business is found on the same web forums where the allegations are also found against her. I would not consider that to be reliable evidence of what she actually said. On the other side of the coin, she publicly stated one Sunday service while I was watching by stream that "Whatever you think I am, I'm worse," thereby short-circuiting the entire debate of her "worthiness" to pastor a church.TurtleofXanth 07:20, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
She already has a tremendous testimony!! Have you seen what pile of shit the woman is dealig with? Besides, if I was her, I sure as hell wouldn't let a judgemental world beat me over the head with what they think of me or my past. What matters about this woman is who she is NOW to this ministry and that is the direction of this article. Like it has been stated, if you've got sources, post em or move on Joe.-Kurios555
I am not sure marrying someone 40 years older than her, abandoning him on his deathbed, inheriting his corporation and systematically dismantling it qualifies as a tremendous testimony. - Joe The Editor 03:18, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
Pick any filter you like, but that's a tabloid quality ad hominim and a shitty one at that. If by "systematically dismanteling" you mean that she's forced to selling everything, including her own things just to keep the message on the air, then I agree. I don't see why she's put up with all this for as long as she has. But, maybe that's why Dr. Scott picked her to lead the ministry; anyone else would have been way long gone by now, no question. Joe, you have expressed your position so get back to the ORGINAL topic
Evidence??? The burden of proof is still upon you. -Kurios555
First let me thank Antaeus Feldspar for correcting my booboos, I am admittedly new at this. I attempted to work in something about Barbie Bridges thinking it was already a proved fact that she and Melissa Scott are the same person, and as a member of the church she pastors, with the teaching I have had from Gene Scott and Melissa about God's capacity to change lives and set people free, I did not consider it a problem, and Wiki readers are owed the whole truth. But when I did a websearch to try to find a reliably documented link between them, the only thing I found was a lot of hearsay and some photos, which only prove that BB and MS happen to look alike. Yes, I should have made sure my homework was done first. The stuff I worked in about doctrine should be reliable, I have been hearing it for over 20 years. I think at this point someone needs to figure out how to unassociate Barbie Bridges' name from being redirected to Melissa Scott. Why have the redirection if the association can't -- or won't -- be proved?--TurtleofXanth 17:48, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
To tell you the truth, it would be a relief if someone finally provided a solid, reliable source for Melissa Scott and Barbi(e) Bridges being the same person, then it would resolve the paradox where Barbie Bridges redirects to Melissa Scott on the presumption that they are the same individual but the allegation cannot be mentioned in Melissa Scott's article if we don't have some sort of reliable source. -- Antaeus Feldspar 03:55, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
Okay. I found the following page http://www.talkaboutpeople.com/group/alt.fan.gene-scott/messages/143059.html . According to this source, Melissa Pastore was the Treasurer and Director of Barbi Bridges Entertainment, Ltd. as listed in Nevada state incorporation records. The incorporation number is "#C22509-1995 (filed 12/19/1995)" and there is other information about corporations Paul Pastore is or was involved with on the page. Not sure this constitutes positive proof, might just be sophisticated slander, but I will see if I can verify it more directly and I invite others to as well.--TurtleofXanth 19:50, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
Well, if you look at the URL, you see the "alt.fan.gene-scott" -- this is just a nicer formatting of this Usenet post: http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.gene-scott/browse_thread/thread/1b2d762f509ccc0d/3663c4dc1d892e63?lnk=st&q=%22Elite+Managemenr+Formulas%22&rnum=2#3663c4dc1d892e63 I'm afraid that Usenet posts are rarely considered reliable sources for even matters that no one has yet disputed, so for a disputed topic like this, we simply couldn't take it for granted that this is the real incorporation information. -- Antaeus Feldspar 03:55, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
That's what I was afraid of. I found a link to the site that has a 2257 compliance notice for Barbie Bridges Entertainment and it reads differently. The page is http://www.impulsemediagroup.com/2257.htm . Paul Bridges is named, not Paul Pastore. This may explain why I was under the impression that Melissa Scott was born Melissa Pastore, since she sometimes talks about her Italian family and about growing up in Italy and Canada. Pastore is the only Italian name in the last names given for her in the Dr. Gene Scott article. I am beginning to entertain a notion that we've all been had by a hoaxer and a sophisticated one. It isn't too hard to Photoshop a picture these days, and even easier to copy and alter documents and then throw them up on a usenet.TurtleofXanth 04:47, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
Still have no reliable explanation for why Melissa Scott's maiden name is given as Peroff in the Dr. Gene Scott article. As for Paul Pastore, I did finally locate some 2257 compliances with "Paul Pastore" listed on the same few addresses as "Paul Bridges." None with Barbi Bridges or Melissa Pastore associated with it named as officers. Compliances get updated periodically, but I was also completely unable to verify in web archives that any compliances of BBE even exist before 2004 anywhere on the Web. Haven't heard back yet from two potential reliable sources I contacted recently about verifying A. whether Barbi(e) Bridges was actually seen at a Florida adult film awards show some years ago or B. whether Paul Pastore actually exists.TurtleofXanth 07:20, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
I had a close look in Paint at three of the images I had found at www.ahot.dk labeled Barbi Bridges. Though it is subtle, I was able to spot suspect areas around the mouth, in the hair, and on the jawline that indicated to me that the image had been brushed, perhaps to smooth over replacements of previous images. For a reference I compared them to one of my friend Mistress Alexzandra's pictures from www.alexzandra.com in the same .jpg format, and what I noticed immediately was the smoother progression and more natural blending of skin tones in her photograph as opposed to those of Barbi Bridges. I have to conclude that at the very least the Bridges images show signs of being altered and cannot be accepted as photographic evidence. This would appear to confirm my suspicions that Barbi Bridges' association with Melissa Scott is a hoax. I have already un-directed Barbie Bridges from this article.TurtleofXanth 23:16, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article Inaccuracies

Melissa Scott did not conduct a service at San Quentin Prison. She visited San Quentin Prison and attended a service at the Catholic Chapel there. - Joe The Editor 01:05, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

The prisoners do not operate the Holy Rosary Catholic Chapel at San Quentin Prison, which Melissa Scott visited. Father Stephen Barber, a prison chaplain and Jesuit priest, operates it under the direction of the Catholic Diocese. - Joe The Editor 08:44, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article Suggestions

I am making a suggestion that

Like her late husband, Melissa Scott preaches a message that faith is an action, based upon the belief in what God can do.

be changed to:

Like her late husband, Melissa Scott preaches the message that faith is “Action based upon Belief that is sustained by Confidence, that "Forever, O Lord, Thy word is settled in heaven."

The quote is from The ABC's of Faith by Dr. w. euGene Scott © 2003

- Joe The Editor 00:24, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tele evangelist?

Is there a better word to sescribe this lady? I am watching a broadcast on public tv right now which brought me to this. She is not evangelising which would lead me to believe she's not an evangelist. She apears to be a Lutheran pastor and a linguist expert. --69.244.153.46 01:53, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

She's not a Lutheran. Her ordination was granted by the Full Gospel Fellowship. Therefore she is Pentecostal as the Full Gospel Fellowship is a Pentecostal Denomination. - Joe The Editor 05:47, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

I nominate changing Melissa Scott (televangelist) to Melissa Scott (pastor) --kurios555

Although she is a member of the Full Gospel Fellowship, it might be erroneous to say that she is Pentecostal, because the Fellowship is a congregational polity and the church is far from being a typical example of a Pentecostal church. By a congregational polity I mean that an individual church is free to determine its own doctrine and practice. Her husband, who appointed her pastor a month before he died, said many times that he is a Paulinist, which means he took his doctrinal direction from Paul the Apostle, which is also what Martin Luther did.--TurtleofXanth 17:23, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
In their "suggested articles of faith" we find the following:
8. THE EVIDENCE OF THE BAPTISM IN THE HOLY GHOST
The Baptism of the believers in the Holy Ghost is witnessed by the physical sign of speaking with other tongues as the Spirit of God gives them utterance (Acts 2:4). The speaking in tongues in this instance, is the same in essence as the gift of tongues (1 Cor.12:4, 10,28), but different in purpose and use.
Sounds Pentecostal to me. But since these are "suggested" articles of faith I will concede your point.
As for Scott actually basing his theology on the teachings of Paul. . . well that's a discussion for another time and place. Joe The Editor 09:34, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
I believe it would be wrong to judge the doctrine of Melissa and Gene Scott based on whether or not it complies with one article of faith among 16 in the list of articles of faith given as a guide to a congregational polity. In a scan of the articles page I found the general use of the word "believer" is not as Gene Scott would likely have it read, it would be "faither" in accordance with his definition (actually a commentary's definition based on the Greek word "pisteo") of "faith." He would also have a problem with article 4b, because it smacks of works doctrines which he was opposed to. Article 6 appears to teach the Lord's Supper almost absent the most important details about what it means. Article 9's terms would need to be very carefully defined before you would have seen Scott subscribe to them; his definitions would have differed sharply from the rest of the church world's. Even Article 1, the infallibility of the Bible, was disputed by him. He always asked "Which Bible?" He never disputed the infallibility of the Word of God after proving the Resurrection, but was careful to distinguish the Bible as a container of it, and that the Word needs separation from the influence of man in the Bible as wheat needs separation from chaff. Please don't call this church Pentecostal, it is in essence Paulinist and non-denominational and its membership in FGF should be regarded as an alliance of friendship and convenience.TurtleofXanth 08:22, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Direction of this Article

Kurios has stated "What matters about this woman is who she is NOW to this ministry and that is the direction of this article."

Wikipedia is intended to be an encyclopedia, not a propaganda machine. The article should reflect fact. It is not here to feed your own desire to evangelize for your personal spiritual leader. - Joe The Editor 02:54, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you. My personal attitudes towards Melissa Scott do not have a place on the page, nor would I share them. I do a decent job of keeping my "evangelizing" off the page. But in light of your statement, I also understand that your seemingly overcritical and apparently external view of this woman can no way provide an accurate picture.
Facts are seen by how they are presented. What facts recieve prominece depend on the presenters frame of reference and intentions, ask any good defense lawyer how that works, it's called rhetoric. But don't give me the "i'm a neutral contributor" line. No one is biased, not me and certainly not you. If you don't need any counter positions to your material Joe, then why doesn't everyone just logg off and so we can let you write the entire page.
You have expressed your views of this woman and I stand behind mine. The facts should reflect this woman's role as a pastor and to this ministry. You have alleged much and prodeced little. I personally feel that she is doing the best damn job anyone could possibly do in her position and naturally my views will refelct that. That stated, I am not the sole wiriter of this page and I thought that the idea behind wikipedia was that conflicitng world views would eventually balance each other out and produce a gestalt view to the subject at hand. So, I'm here to make sure people like you don't write this entire article and sell it for truth. Becasue sadly, many people take wikipedia as the end all and be all for the definition of truth. kurios555
On Second thought, by merely participating in this discussion I have alluded that I actually care about the world's definition of Melissa Scott, which could be not be further from the truth. kurios555
Don't worry, people like you guarantee that nobody takes Wikipedia as a serious source of information. - Joe The Editor 14:52, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
  • And someone added a bunch of POV info. I'll let someone else wade through it and decide if any of its useful.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../m/e/l/Talk%7EMelissa_Scott_%28pastor%29_f0fb.html"