Talk:The Way International

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Way International article.
This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Article policies
Peer review This is a controversial topic, which may be under dispute.
Please read this talk page and discuss substantial changes here before making them.
Make sure you supply full citations when adding information to highly controversial articles.

Archived talk 1 Archived talk 2 Archived talk 3 Archived talk 4

Contents

[edit] Note

Please place new items at the bottom of the page. Lsjzl 16:24, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Structure of the article

There's a couple of things that I think would make it more readable: (Stanley already started this by putting subtitles in the Beliefs and Practices section)

Eliminate the subtitle "controversial teachings" and subtitle each subsection. One reason is that the doctrine in that section isn't any more "controversial" than the other stuff and I wonder if we're putting a pejorative label on it by using the term "controversial".

There's also some duplication that can be cleaned up as well; for example, I think that the Way's teaching on the Trinity (or lack of the same) is covered in three different places.

Also, where do we want to the section on L Craig Martindale? Right now it's plopped into the middle of "Beliefs and Practices" - any suggestions?

None of this should cause any argument, but I thought I'd throw it out if anyone else wanted to help clean things up a bit.Ten of Swords 16:04, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wierwille's Own Words

This section will be for links to recordings of Wierwille's teachings and webpages with excerpts from his books.

Before 68.191.109.199 adds more and more here perhaps these should be discussed for why they are being included. They have longer load times so I only listened to the 1st one and know what it says. The mp3.s should have a point to the article and why they out of other recordings are being placed up here. Merci. Lsjzl 16:24, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Totally unnecesary IMHO. Ten of Swords 18:51, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
I'm going to let his section go until there's more discussion or I can find some better links. I thought a section where people could hear the man speak for himself would definitely enhance the article. Stanleygoodspeed777 05:13, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Kindly refresh your reading on NPOV and Wikipedia article standards. It's important to do this from time to time. (I do.) Pushing the article into an advertisement is still not allowed, no matter the motivation.Pete Snowball 19:06, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Victor Paul Wierwille's Own Words

The article is really shaping up well. I've added a V.P. Wierwille section again to generate interest in posting his actual words and teachings. Nothing gets to the heart and substance of the Way like the founding president's own words.

Is "letting the man speak for himself" NPOV? Or is this just an excuse to insert a teaching into the article? Frankly I don't see where cramming in as much Way doctrine as possible is what this article should be about. And Stanley, aren't you the guy who said that what the current leadership is teaching is most important? If someone wants in-depth Wierwille teachings, let him go to a TWI fellowship, or one of the offshoot groups that still use his teachings. I'm yanking the section. Ten of Swords 15:34, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

I moved a new section on this same topic and combined it with this one. Unsigned again. Who are you? Ten of Swords 23:34, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cutting down

(you can help!) 1. To start trimming this long page down I removed the semi-complete list of published works. This already exists under another page and was simply linked to. Lsjzl 21:45, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

2. Removed this:

"The following year, the one-year Word Over the World (WOW) missionary program was replaced by the four-month "Way Disciples" outreach program. Way Disciple outreach group 1 left after the Rock of Ages in September of 1995 and returned to New Knoxville on December 16. The second group followed the next January. Current groups are sent from the annual Anniversary meeting in October on six month assignments."

From the ROA section. Not really required as is on the Rock of Ages Festival page. But one thing that is missing from this article is a way to link it to the Way Disciple program wikisheet.. maybe another heading? (Though we are trying to cut down the overall size of this doc if necessary..) Lsjzl 21:53, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

"*Belizean BRC Bookstore" link was removed - why an Ebay bookstore should be linked to is beyond me. Lsjzl 16:18, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
"*The Christian Critic's Movie Parables - http://www.christiancritic.com/" was removed. Yes his bio says he is a current member and that his reviews get mentioned in Rotten Tomatoes and IMDB etc. But I doubt on his own he would be notable nor really does it help this article. I am tempted to say the same thing for the cortright pages on the 4 crucified and Mark and Avoid links. Lsjzl 13:34, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] USMC

(It should be noted that Wierwille lacked any experience, background, or interaction with the USMC, and thus based any claims about them on their media image and third-hand reports at best.) .. was removed for discussion.

I am not clear on why it should be noted? Is there some claim here to the contrary that needs to be corrected? I believe the way the article states the inspiration for the Way Corps doesn't leave any other impression. Lsjzl 22:02, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps it should be noted because The Way Corps bore little if any resemblence to The Marine Corps. The inspiration comment, in my opinion, leaves the impression that The Way Corps were trained in some fashion like The Marine Corps. Ten of Swords 02:59, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

(According to Wierwille, The Way Corps was started out of inspiration from his observations of the United States Marine Corps and their commitment to duty, their examples of valor, and their indomitable will to achieve victory in spite of the odds against them. He claimed his vision for graduates of this program was ministers who would live, speak, and teach a lifestyle of what he called "It is written".)

Pete's comment balances this statement...I pulled it, but if the consensus is to put it back...well, I'm easyTen of Swords 03:02, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Closing line of opening

Critics charge that the beliefs of the group are not consistent with orthodox Christian beliefs, and some accuse the group of being a cult.

Doesn't this say the same thing as if it is a different idea? maybe change the end to "which is one of the reasons some accuse this group of being a cult." or "which some take to mean that this group is a cult." Which is awkwardly worded but just an idea. Lsjzl 14:54, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Inconsistancy with Christian orthodoxy and cult status are related, but not universally. Some equate cults with practices and abuses, rather than beliefs, while others use beliefs as their guidelineTen of Swords 02:02, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Gotcha, so in reality it seems that the way the line is stated does ensure that both points are made. Lsjzl 04:24, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dark matter

Removed this section:

Interestingly, his theory would explain exactly what dark matter is ... it would explain where the bulk of the unseen mass in the universe is and in what form it is.

as it smacks of Original Research (in a sense)

To be honest so does other parts like the capitalization of words about lama, but anyway I recorded this here in case the author wishes to discuss. Lsjzl 22:54, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Passing of Patriarch + Firings

The following section was deleted from the main page: (It was prodded with the {fact} tag since November) and moved here for discussion. The first sentence was also removed but will be placed below with my reasonings for discussion.

"Shortly afterwards, he sent a letter to all members announcing the firings, which resulted in approximately 80%[citation needed] of the current membership to leave en masse with their local leaders. At present,some ex-TWI groups either rival or surpass TWI in current membership numbers.[citation needed]"

If we can source those 2 items then this section can go back in.


"Their presence as organizations became significant in 1989, when L. Craig Martindale fired all Way staff-including local "branch", "territory", "limb" and "region" leaders who did not swear an oath of allegiance to him."

That line was removed as well for discussion only. Are we sure he fired them? Were they all paid staff of The Way International? I am asking for clarity sake and especially because I removed the other sections. I don't have a problem with the sentence I just didn't know how to correct it. Actually wait.. I shouldn't delete it. I will re-enter that line into the article and leave it here as a reference to discuss the word 'fired'. Thanks for understanding! Lsjzl 21:39, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't know if we could get citations for this information but Martindale himself used the 80% figure when discussing the "exodus" of leadership and followers at Word in Business conferences in the 90's, although my notes show the term 4/5 (same thing math fans!)
I don't know if we'll ever know how many paid staff were fired and how many left under their own steam. Probably depends on who you talk to, but I've seen copies of a letter that Martindale sent to paid staff and clergy; lack of what he considered the proper response resulted in dismissal from the Way Corps.
The term "oath of allegience" irks me somewhat, in some peoples' minds, that's what it amounted to, but calling it that is not NPOV IMHO.
Copies of these letters could possibly be stored on the Messiah Lutheran church site, or Grease Spot Cafe. I don't know when I'll have time, but I'll check.
As far as membership numbers go, TWI doesn't consider it's followers members and doesn't release numbers, have never seen estimates of offshoot membership either. Ten of Swords 00:18, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
OK, if LCM said it then maybe it should just go back in with that as a tagline. That he said it at a conference etc? Lsjzl 13:21, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

I changed some of the wording and added the citation that Martindale supplied the 80& figure at WIB in '94. I also expanded a bit on what the "oath of allegience" was. Ten of Swords 23:09, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Plagiarism

1. Please put in link.

2. Proposed change (Unsure if John is an ex-member or not - I feel this change better reflects the tone of an article.) "The Messiah Lutheran Church website (by ex-member John Juedes) provides side-by-side examples of Wierwille's writings to other published works. (The if John or others say so put in a quote about how similiar or identical it is otherwise simply add the link. But either way add the link!) Lsjzl 19:13, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Juedes is not an ex-member. The link is inTen of Swords 16:50, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Anonymous editor: What is in dispute? Juedes does supply side-by-side examples from Wierwille's boks and those he is alleged to ahve plagiarized from; the Way Int'l bookstore does sell books by Bullinger; How to Enjoy the Bible by Bullinger does cover much of the same doctrinal ground as PFAL; Stiles and Leonard are mentioned by Wierwille (in The Way: Living in Love); their books aren't now and never have been available in the TWI bookstore; Jesus Christ is Not God, Jesus Christ Our Passover and Jesus Christ Our Promised Seed ARE extensively footnoted; Wierwille's earlier books are not. None of those things are under dispute. Apparently what is under dispute is whether you think that plagiarism is significant or allowable. Ten of Swords 16:42, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

"Learning involves taking what others have taught and making it your own. That is not plagiarism." I have removed this quote from the article since it is irrelevant to the discussion. Wierwille clearly went beyond learning and into plagiarism. Even if you do not agree with this Juedes clerarly alleges it and provides evidense.
I am also deleting the definition of plagiarism, which, by the way, defines what Wierwille did by publishing as his own the work of Stiles, Leonard and Bullinger. provide a link to your definition if you'd like so it won't clutter up the article.Ten of Swords 16:51, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
The remarks on Juedes' motivations are also pulled. What's a "militant" trinitarian anyway? Ten of Swords 16:57, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

If you want to debate the appropriateness of including a subsection on plagiarism charges under "Cult Allegations", discuss it here, don't debate it within the article.Ten of Swords 17:02, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Why there is a subsection on plagriarism

I included a subsection on plagiarism within the Criticism & Cult Allegations section for several reasons. One is that plagiarism is one aspect of the criticism of The Way that often crops up from both ex-Way members and never-been-Way (NBW) critics. Criticism and skepticism about a group's claims is an important part of the information package. Another reason is that it puts the whole claim of "research" in a more balanced light.

The way the subsection of the article is written is based somewhat on the input of Lsjzl, who as far as I know is an active participant in TWI. The language is NPOV and includes information that allows the reader to draw their own conclusions, such as the mention that writers that Wierwille is alleged to have plagiarized from are mentioned by him, and at least one's books were sold in the Way bookstore.

The link to Juedes' website is provided, not because he is necessarily a completely neutral or disinterested party, but because he provides handy access to side-by-side comparisons of passages in Wierwille's works that closely match passages in others' books. Providing the link is not an endorsement of John Juedes.

How about adding the following?:

Wierwille admitted (in The Way: Living in Love) that he learned from others, and that the original work was putting it all together so that it "fit". In PFAL he suggests that he came to the same conclusions as Bullinger independently. He also claimed to have dragged over 3000 volumes of theological works to the city dump, returning to the bible and using it as his workbook and only source. Ten of Swords 20:59, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Stanley - I deleted the sentence: (although Mr. Wierwille never passed off the ideas or writings of E.W. Bullinger as his own, or put forth as original to himself the ideas or words of E.W. Bullinger or any other author). because it is in dispute and reflects a non-NPOV. Wierwille certainly passed off the ideas and words of several authors as his own by the simple fact of the words "by Victor Paul Wierwille" on the cover without any attribution. And as usual, your note on the edit only mentions that you were adding a link (thanks for the link btw) and not that your were adding additional informationTen of Swords 18:23, 14 March 2007 (UTC)


Particleman and anonymous contributor 4.236.27.81 - The article is not a discussion forum where people argue their points back and forth. To some extent that's what the discussion page (where we are now) is for. The way the article in general, and the plagiarism subsection in particular, is written is an honest attempt to maintain the Wikipedia standard of Neutral Point of View (NPOV). If you will read the subsection carefully, you will see that it reports that Wierwille is alleged to have plagiarized, not that he did plagiarize. Readers are directed to a website that claims to have evidence of this and make up their own minds.

ParticleMan - not sure if you are supporting anon's contribution or not, that's why I included you in my address

[edit] Members, ex-members

Rewgarding MDVADEN's changing of "members" to "followers" - Those who The Way refers to as "followers" meet every criteria for "members": they participate in the groups classes and activities, pay tithes and subject themselves to the leadership and discipline by the group. Saying that The Way has no members is not reasonable using widely understood definitions of the word.

Changing the term "members" to "followers", and especially noting that the Way has no members is promoting The Way's POV. Ten of Swords 05:07, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to combine this section with two following sections that MDVADEN started since he is basically responding to some changes that I have made:Ten of Swords 21:39, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

This section was fine-tuned to the "encylopedic" nature of Wikipedia, with vocabulary of "followers" and "ex-followers".

Hopefully, we all want to maintain a consistency and accuracy within a topic or article.

PLEASE NOTE OTHER SUPPLEMENTAL COMMENT FOLLOWING  : - )

The "understanding" of individuals is not factual or reliable.

Tithes of any church's followers may not be payments for membership.


Mdvaden 05:58, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Supplement comment:
"Membership" may figuratively refer to groups, but becomes figurative, subjective or "fluid" in nature. It can mean something different to each person.
Purchased memberships on the other hand, are clearly understood and acknowledged - all acknowledged.
Paid memberships can be documented.
Not all followers are tithers. But all followers are followers.
Subjective definitions that are "widely understood" can just as easily be "widely misunderstood".
One solution that is practical, is listing link categories as:
Links of members (followers)
Links of ex-members (ex-followers)
That is a universal protocol accepted in our culture when figurative ideas are to be included with documented information.

Mdvaden 05:09, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I'll go along with your last change. It conveys TWI's claim that it has no members as well as the common perception and understanding of what a "member" is.

Frankly, my biggest beef was not so much with the term "followers", and if it had been in there initially, I may not have changed it. My complaint was more with what looked like yet another attempt to conform this article with the TWI POV.

The articles on The Catholic Church, Methodist Church, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Unitarian Universalist Association all use the term "members", although none utilize paid or purchased memberships, and the relevant Merriam Webster Online dictionary definition of "member" is:

  • one of the individuals composing a group
  • a person baptized or enrolled in a church

TWI followers certainly meet that broad definition.

Anyway...yada, yada, yada...I accept your solution to the disagreementTen of Swords

[edit] LINKS

For:

TEN OF SWORDS, or whoever,

I have an idea that you might like to work on, but this first:

When I discovered this category, I saw the "ex-members" links. As such, a page in my website would fit. But I never considered myself a member in the past, or an ex-member currently - hence, my first editing.

At first, I "plugged" my site's link into a links category because it was there. But after mulling-over this links thing the past day or two, I decided that my website should not even be included.

The category is "The Way International", and honestly, my website has nothing about The Way International. So I feel that it's appropriate to keep my link off the page. And I deleted my page link last night.

I can see from the discussion page history that you (Ten of Swords) edit this subject frequently. And your reasoning sounds good.

So I'm offering a suggestion that "member" or "ex-member" links be removed if they don't have anything to do with the Way International. Not removal of entire link categories; just a few that may have no substantial information on The Way.

But I'm going to keep clear of editing the links of others. And with the experience you have with this, you will probably handle it great.

I noticed the sociable nature of one of your posts listed earlier - nice. I have no idea who you are. But you can probably guess from my signature that I'm not very anonymous on the internet. In my case, there is no reason to be anonymous. Our website is one of the best known on the internet for it's type, and I never write anything on the internet that would come back to bite me.

As far as my experience with TWI, I attended fellowships from 1983 to 2005. I have no "gripe" about The Way. The fellowships for us, were not edifying anymore. I think its fine for others to keep attending if its edifying for them. So from an editing standpoint, I believe I'm about as impartial as they come.

Should you ever wish to email - feel free. With Google and a search for "M. D. Vaden", you can always find me.

Thanks,

M. D. Vaden

Mdvaden 23:47, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

You make some good points. Other than the Messiah Lutheran Link and the pictures, I haven't looked into any of the others. If the link has nothing to do with TWI, why should it be included?Ten of Swords 16:42, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I fixed the link in the ex-follower's section referring to Christian Educational Services. GreaseSpot Cafe is not Christian Educational Services (an off-shoot of TWI). Also removed the link to GreaseSpot in the off-shoots section. I'll put in a link to CES's current web site.

Rojs 18:44, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] TIN of Swords?

I don't know who Tin of Swords is, but it's not me.

Couldn't you have picked a handle that didn't look so much like mine?Ten of Swords 17:00, 8 February 2007 (UTC) But that wouldn't allow them to pretend they were you, and congratulate themself on their own cleverness...Pete Snowball 15:45, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm...I just noticed that the link to Grease Spot Cafe labelled as a link to Christian Educational Services was initially added by Stanleygoodspeed, and later put back in by Tin of Swords....hmmmTen of Swords

[edit] Splinter group links

I tried to fix some edits that were added. I was only partially successful, but rather than make 20 edits until I hit on the desired result, I left it as it is until someone competent can fix them. Consider this a request to fix it.

What I wanted to do was to convert the dead links to red links, or at the least to leave them as plain text. I left them as plain text, but with markers around them, which doesn't look right. However, it's clear they don't link to anything, and it's ridiculous to relink them back to this article if the only information about them is right there in the paragraph where the link is. That's a waste of bandwidth. (Link a sentence back to itself? Why, because you can?)

I also question a previous edit-which I left intact- claiming that STFI was formed in 2005. Does anyone have documentation for the year? I added a clarification that it was founded as CES.

I also left alone the CES link that doesn't connect to their own site, but rather to the Greasespot Cafe. I question its appropriateness, however, and want some other opinions on it.Pete Snowball 15:52, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Would someone stop linking to GreaseSpot and labeling it as Christian Educational Services? This is the second time I've removed GreaseSpot from the splinter groups section. Rojs 19:36, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Looks like it was my evil twin Tin of Swords who changed it this last timeTen of Swords 22:22, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] External links

I changed the description on the link to the Greasespot Cafe messageboards. Apparently, some current member resented that the Family Tables messageboard is noted to be restricted to current members- that is, only those currently in TWI are allowed to sign up/register for the board, and only those who have signed up (who are all current members) can read the entire board, or post in it at all. In plain English, only current members of TWI can post there. So, someone decided to attempt to fuzz this distinction by adding a note about the Greasespot Cafe's messageboard. It is technically true that the board-like almost every board online-requires posters to sign up before being allowed to post. It is misleading to claim this is worth commenting on, because it's standard operating procedure for all messageboards, along with "read the rules before posting", "don't spam the board", and "don't post explicit materials or links to them". It is worth commenting on if a board does NOT require any of those. The Greasespot Cafe does not require ANY prerequisite for signing up-and this is something it shares in common with almost every messageboard online. Anyone can decide they want to sign up, and sign up. They need not be connected with any organization of any kind.

To require membership in an organization in order to participate in a messageboard is rare and thus noteworthy. Further, to note it in the links will SAVE TIME for the readers of this article who would otherwise try to sign up for such a board. One would think that board staff of that board would say "thank you" for saving them the trouble of refusing membership to people who don't know their rules. (I don't think the person who objected is on their staff.)

I didn't delete their note on the Greasespot Cafe, but I did translate it to plain English. Now, it's unnecessary, and highlights the differences between the two boards. However, someone felt emotional enough on the subject to make a note in the first place, so I left it up, clarified. I'm only trying to be respectful of everyone's feelings, here. Pete Snowball 16:08, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

The note on GreaseSpot's forums was not needed. Standard forum practice. Rojs 19:39, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Once again, my clone, Tin of Swords, strikes!Ten of Swords 22:23, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Date of The Way's Founding

For contributor bfrank, Archived Talk 2 has a section where this is discussed. In short, no organization called "The Way" existed in 1942. Vesper Chimes/Chimes Hour Youth Caravan was begun by Wierwille in 1942 and incorporated in 1947. The Way uses 1942 to mark the beginning of their "ministry"; The Way was incorporated in 1955. This is why the article uses the wording "claims a date..." to maintain NPOV. Ten of Swords 02:25, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Way East & The Way West

The source for this information, bfrank is Karl Kahler's book The Cult That Snapped, which contains interviews with Steve Heefner and Jimmy Doop, the founders of these groups.

For whatever reason, The Way West was incorporated separately and independently from The Way International and had its own Board of Trustees. Heefner & Doop ran PFAL but the money stayed within their organization other than fees and payments for classes & books. Heefner moved to Rye New York and founded The Way East.

At some point Wierwille convinced the other two members of the board of trustees of The Way West to vote Doop out and install Wierwille in his place. Heefner resigned before the same thing happened in The Way East. Wierwille then merged these groups with The Way International. A similar independent organization in Indiana merged voluntarily. Peter Wade's affiliated, independent organization in Australia resisted merger and remained independent, eventually severing ties with The Way International.

Other areas of "outreach" like Kansas and North Carolina were "branches" of The Way International from day one and were never independent.

Long story, but that's why the article is worded the way it is, they did not initially "incorporate with Wierwille". Ten of Swords 02:40, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Martindale's "homosexual purge"

I undid the revision regarding more recent versions of "The Way of Abundance and Power". The section in which it occurs only refers to that class as part of the mention of Martindale's crusade against homosexuals, and is not primarily concerned with that class. Perhaps changes in WayAP could be mentioned in another subsection, or in the classes section.

Longley, are you a current Way member or leader? And does your revision mean that The Way no longer believes that the devil came into concretion as a woman and had lesbian sex with Eve or that it simply is no longer included in the WayAP class? Ten of Swords 16:37, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Yo Ten, I haven't taken the new class but have also not heard any teaching correcting that doctrine just that it isn't in the new Foundational. L8er Lsjzl 16:59, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks L; I got the same information from another source. If TWI had actually changed their doctrine, it would be worth mentioning IMO, but it just isn't brought up anymore.Ten of Swords

[edit] Closing of the Intro (part deux)

While The Way has always drawn a distinction between itself and "churches" and "denominations", some followers now consider The Way a church, and like mainstream churches the organization ordains clergy, performs weddings, has Sunday services, performs communion, and also offers at least one weeknight fellowship at the local level.

Originally this read The Way considers itself a church and ordains clergy, performs weddings, has Sunday services, performs communion, and also offers at least one weeknight fellowship at the local level.- it was modified slightly to its present form, but it has never set well with me, despite the efforts to make it NPOV. It just seems to set there...like a duck (LOL)- out of place. Why is it even there? To convince readers that The Way isn't a cult? Seems like another one of those debates conducted within the article. I'm going to pull it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ten of Swords (talk • contribs) 21:45, 17 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] External links to theway.org

Does the menu structure of theway.org's web site need to be duplicated here? It is standard practice for a web site to have an "about us" page and people looking for it can find it. And linking to yearly "Internet Articles" seems as redundant as the name of the link. Rojs 13:52, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you rojs; we pretty much just need the one link to theway.org. Folks can navigate their way around themselves once there. Ten of Swords 17:29, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../t/h/e/Talk%7EThe_Way_International_45e0.html"