Talk:Roman Catholic Diocese of Providence

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Catholicism Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism, which collaborates on articles related to the Roman Catholic Church. To participate, edit this article or visit the project page for details.
Stub	This article has been rated as stub-Class on the Project's quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the Project's importance scale.

	This article is part of WikiProject Rhode Island, a WikiProject related to the state of Rhode Island.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale.

This article has been heavily edited in the last few days and now includes some contents which are in clear violation of the NPOV standards. -- 200.104.58.231 16:38, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

ROBERT SAYS: I did in fact remove that comment b/c the person that tagged it later apologized to me b/c it flagged up on their radar b/c the words religion and sex (for sexual abuse) appeared here on "Religious" themed content and that person thought it was vandalism and that person made a hasty judgment by flagging it.

IT DESERVES TO COME OFF B/C THE ARTICLE IS NOT IN FACT IN CLEAR VIOLATION OF THE NPOV and never was... This is factual history and not meant to slander the institution this record is important to keep and remember so that all may learn from it.

SO THAT IS MY GOOD REASON Why do you need to add it back now? Can we agree now that it can be removed and that this page can be cleaned up?

I have restored the above comment by 200.104.58.231 which was removed by Robjc123 on 28 March 2007. Please do not blank Wikipedia article talk pages unless you've got a real good reason. - Racemose 07:25, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Improvements Needed

As the article currently stands, the second paragraph is not fully sourced and is not written in an encyclopedic style. I'll try improving and maybe expanding this article if I have some time. - Racemose 07:25, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

ROBERT SAYS: POV STANDARDS: quoted here: "Talking with other contributors is a great way to find out why there is a dispute over an article's neutrality. Ideas and POV's can be shared and ultimately the disputed fact or point can be fixed if it is incorrect or, when dealing with a controversial issue, various legitimate sources can be cited in the article." Please cite for me a source that says what I have added is not true and factual...

ROBERT SAYS: I have cited the facts and left any bias comments out. I am therefore again removing the tag.

This IS in fact a simple part of history for this diocese. This is not a PR page for the Diocese. It is not all roses in their history so stop messing up the page please.

Historians commonly cite many sources in books because there are and will always be disputes over history. Contributors on Wikipedia can do the same thing, thus giving readers a broad spectrum of POVs and opinions.

ROBERT SAYS: I anxiously await your improvements. This IS part of this disocese's history and it is important that it be noted and recorded. It is factual and true history of the Diocese of Providence. As for my Nuetrality I have to take issue with you tagging it simply because it's and unfavorable but true history of this diocese. I also take issue with you deleting it for it not being in a proper style vs simply fixing the style. You certainly had time to note why you took it out but can't offer any suggestions on writing it better?

These issues shouldn't be covered up that is what is great about Wikipedia is that a lot of truth can be published here.  The TIME magazine article offers great credibility to this history.

The second paragraph was very poorly written, and certainly is not suitable in its current form. I have pulled it here for the moment, because I doubt that it is salvagable. However, it may be useful to add in its place a section on the sexual abuse crisis/controversies under a sub-heading. -B-May 07:35, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

ROBERT SAYS to BRIAN THOMAS MAY -It's appalling that you are Brian Thomas May are a seminarian for the Roman Catholic Diocese of Boise, that you completely erased the factual history I had written. I understand the edit if some of the article seemed biased but it seems you are employed to erase this true history rather than help keep it neutral in it's presentation. I have to contest that you erasing this history being in your position is more in question than my being neutral or not. This history was covered by TIME magazine and is factual. It is infamous history that the Diocese made all on it's own and it needs to be noted here.

ROBERT SAYS: I'll review myself and see if I can write it better - I certainly don't think it's so bad that it's not suitable and I don't see any suggestion from you to include this history in a form that IS acceptable. I'd rather see the history of this there with a bad form than to not see it at all.

The text that I removed read: In 2002 The Diocese of Providence Rhode Island made headlines for fighting the longest and hardest of any diocese in the United States (over ten years) against victims of Sexual Abuse. After 10 years of hard and questionable tactics to quash and deny victims any accountability the Diocese finally settled with 38 of its many victims for a reported sum of 13 million dollars. Time Magazine did a full story on the assets of the Diocese such as Mansions and houses valued in the millions of dollars. They have not revealed how many settlements were concealed in the past with victims of sexual abuse and they also have never turned over any of their own internal records which could shed light on how inept they were at stopping this problem and could also reveal potential criminal coverups. See link below for TIME Magazine Article.