User talk:ClaudeReigns/Tom Short

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Corrections to Tom Short article

Smee,

Perhaps this should go to Claudereigns, but I could not find out how to contact him and I can contact you. If you can make the following changes, please do -- or if you know how to contact Claudereigns, please forward to him.

Anyway, I am Tom Short and I do have a few comments about the article concerning me. While I do not think the emphasis of the article is to represent me in a fair and accurate way (i.e. it seems as if you guys are digging and focusing on obscure things that really have little to do with my ministry and, even if they did happen, for the most part occurred 20+ years ago), I don't necessarily expect to be treated in a fair manner. Thus, being the internet age, I guess you guys can say what you want to.

However, there are several significant inaccuracies in the article that I suggest you correct. Some are relatively unimportant whereas others really are important. Here are my suggestions for change:

1. Not to be ticky tack, but I never preached in front of McKeldin Library. It was Hornbake Library. 2. I doubt I ever called listening to rock music a "serious sin." However, I did oppose it and while I don't listen to it myself, I have not preached against it in 10 plus years. 3. The Rick Whitney quote is taken seriously out of context. Rick is one of my most ardent supporters. In the article sited, he was with the group that brought me to campus. Your quote implies that he personally does not support my preaching when, in reality, he was simply pointing out that there are others who don't like what I do. The way you stated it leaves a very false impression. 4. Concerning homosexuals and blood. I don't really remember this, but I won't deny it. This was early in the AIDS era and there was a time in which the Centers for Disease Control screened out anyone who engaged in risky behavior from donating blood -- homosexuality, intravenous drugs and, yes, even Hatians (not because Hatians did "risky behavior" but they were in an unusally high risk group). This was before we had created ways to screen for blood being tainted -- more specifically, if I remember right, blood could be tainted by AIDS but might not show up as such if it had become infected in the previous six months. Anyway, those days are now long gone with so many new scientific advances in HIV detection, but please understand that I was not the only person calling for such people in high risk groups to be excluded from giving blood. This was a time in which hemophiliacs were dying because they had received tainted blood. My comments along this line were designed to say we need to protect innocent people from infected blood that could not be detected as such. I would still stand by this statement today, except that there is now no need to since we have improved out blood screening technology.

Much of the stuff above is not really that important. Do with it as you wish. But this next point contains very serious misrepresentation and factual errors: 5. Concerning my involvement at Towson State. This entire section is totally inaccurate. I NEVER led a group at Towson STate. I NEVER attended or spoke at a single New Life meeting. I was NEVER invited to a meeting with other Christian leaders there. I simply don't know where any of this is coming from and have not even heard about this until today. It is true that the New Life group at Towson was begun and led by people who had been part of our New Life group at the University of Maryland, but the Towson group was 100% autonomous and I had no imvolvement with them. Not that they would not have welcomed me to, but I simply didn't have time to go up and be involved with them. Additionally, I did preach at Towson several times (probably about five times) in 1980 - 81 (a year and a half before the group got stated up there). On one occassion, I was arrested by the police for preaching there. All charges were eventually dropped and the university apologized for their police violating my rights, but after the hassle I had with the authorities there in 1981, I simply wasn't that interested in going back to Towson and, thus, never did until about five years ago.

However, the biggest inaccuracy in this is where is states that I called women "sluts and whores and presumed every guy to be drinking and sleeping around." I really take exception to this statement. I can say with absolute certainty that I have NEVER called a girl a slut or whore. There are preachers out there who do use these names and I have consistently, since the beginning of my ministry, urged them not to use this language. I believe it to be insulting, inflammatory and very counter-productive. Thus, when your article says that I called people by these names, I know that this is very untrue. It violates a great deal of how I believe we should treat people. I know others have thought this of me because they have confused me with other campus preachers, but while others may say this, I do not. Therefore, I respectfully ask you to remove these comments about me, my involvement at Towson State with New Life and anything that would say I use this language I have not and will not use.

Again, Smee, this may not relate to you, but perhaps you know how to edit my page or contact someone who posted this. Thanks for your consideration of my concerns and your commitment to publishing the truth.

Sincerely,

Tom Short —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.160.169.228 (talk) 18:06, 7 April 2007 (UTC).

  • Mr. Short: Thank you for being accessible for this ongoing project. I have done my best to reflect your concerns about the biography page, and verification and confirmation of reliability of The Towerlight has been requested from the user who included that edit. Please note the trouble you've had with contacting me stems from the captialization of the "R" in my username. You can further contact me here. I have made notes about the extent to which I was able to incorporate your PoV and corrections at the Tom Short article discussion page here. Please note that I have worked on other biography pages and have a very hard time supporting changes to articles without published sources to verify statements. Please be sure to alert me immediately to any published sources which might be beneficial to the accurate reflection of your life and work. I have not yet obtained "5 Crucial Questions" but I look forward to summarizing or explaining that work within the framework of Wikipedia rules in the near future. Sincerely, ClaudeReigns 07:46, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
    • ClaudeReigns seems to be dealing with this in a most appropriate manner. Smee 23:50, 8 April 2007 (UTC).

[Mr. Short had gone on to ignore my previous statement and attribute revisions to Smee]

Smee,

I appreciate you acting on at least some of my concerns about this article. I wish I had a way to communicate with ClaudeReigns as it appears he is the primary editor, so, once again, if you need to pass this on to him, please do (and, if there is a way I can contact him directly, please inform me).

Anyway, I got to thinking more about the homosexuals and donating blood issue -- an issue that I doubt I've talked about in almost 20 years, but which seemed to be important to be included in an article about me. This led me to go to the Red Cross web site and see if they had a history of their blood donation practices. What do you know? Their guidelines say a practicing homosexual is not eligible to donate blood even TODAY! In fact, they say you should not donate blood if you "are a male who has had sexual contact with another male, even once, since 1977." See http://www.redcross.org/services/biomed/0,1082,0_557_,00.html#hiv for documentation.

Therefore, I think in the interest of fairness and in order not to paint me as some far-out whacko (which appears to be the purpose of the article), it would be appropriate to either remove the section on the AIDS / blood / Red Cross or it would be appropriate to include in your article that the Red Cross does have a policy in effect to this day which makes practicing male homosexuals ineligible to donate blood. Thus, even way back 23 years ago, I guess I was right (and, as I said in a previous note, I was simply stating the policy of the Centers for Disease Control).

Thanks for making the above changes.

On another note: I said above that the obvious intention of this article is to paint me as a whacko. Why would I say that? I think ANYONE who would listen to me -- be it for one day or every day for the past 10 years -- would never have heard me say, even once, the things you focus on in this article. No mention of homosexuals giving tainted blood, no mention of girls as sluts and whores, no mention that "Hitler didn't go far enough," no mention of Rock and Roll music, etc. But for some reason, the author's of this article have sought to focus on this stuff.

On the other hand, why not mention the things I do talk about? My book has sold over 15,000 copies and puts into print what is the heart of my message on campuses, but there is not a single mention of the content of the book -- not even a comment on what the "5 Crucial Questions" are. I know there have been numerous newspaper article about me that focus on my real message, but somehow you have dug up articles from 20 - 27 years ago that I've never even seen or known about (and, interestingly, are not on the web and therefore I, and others, have no way of verifying their accuracy or even their existence).

No, this article is nothing but a cheap hit job. Whoever wrote it must be auditioning to do "opposition research" for some political candidates by proving they can dig up dirt on someone who is simply trying to do some good in this world.

Personally, I know before the Lord I am doing a good thing. I have no idea why the authors of this article are seeking to misrepresent me and my message. I will not judge them, but I know God will judge them as well as me. I am prepared to face the Lord and give an account of my life and ministry. I hope these authors are as well.

Sincerely,

Tom Short e-mail: tomshort@columbus.rr.com —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.160.169.228 (talk) 18:42, 8 April 2007 (UTC).

Continuing here, in the proper milieu
  • Mr Short: Kindly please abide by WP:AGF while acting within the bounds of Wikipedia rules. I understand this is a large and daunting project, and it is not always easy to find resources or answers to questions right away, and I hope you will continue to be involved. I must insist however, that no one owns the article in question. See: WP:OWN. While this article has many edits by myself, becuase my edits are small, I am by no means the only editor. You, too, are free to edit wikipedia yourself, and we would hope that you would observe some guidelines of civility while here. Probably the best way we can facilitate good communication is if you would be so kind as to create an account and develop a userpage. This is a step that helps facilitate communication with other users, who can then guide your efforts and help you get further involved. Again, I'd be happy to represent the articles in question if you'd be so kind as to cite them. To merely make mention that such exist without allowing us to include them is, in your most famous words, innuendo. So are your assertions about my aims and PoV. See also the essay WP:HONEST about bringing to bear sources which you know to exist, as well as other questions which have arisen since my vain and thankless attempts to include your unpublished PoV. Consequently, I might request that you include your responses on your website instead of in User Talk, so that we may cite these as well. Finally, do not misattribute my contributions. I did not include the Towson State article featuring Father Albright, Xanthius did; Smee did not act on your concerns about the orticle nor request an ongoing review by an outsider respected in WikiProject:Christianity nor appeal to all editors on the appropriate discussion page for edits which might balance PoV in your favor--that was me. I appeal to you to return and correct this misunderstanding, much as I returned to correct the facts of the article as you had requested. Patiently, ClaudeReigns 04:05, 9 April 2007 (UTC)