User talk:Shepherd119

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] SOTEC

I can't find email, so I'll say this: it is NOT vandalizing to tell the truth. The leadership of the Refuse QUIT. There was a member of Scum who became homeless and DIED in the same week. Refuse was bragging about how much 'good' it did back in April of 2007 while members of its church were going bankrupt. This 'church' is bragging about things that are LIES. Now, who is doing the vandalizing, Brianhe?

Thanks for trying to contact me. Generally, Wikipedians conduct exchanges on each others' talk pages like this one. Your talk page is on my watchlist, so if you reply to this, I'll see it. So I see that your edit history is rather recent and I'm assuming good faith and will reply as if you don't know some basics about Wikipedia. Basically, this is an encyclopedia which is supposed to stick to a neutral point of view and use verifiable facts. Assertions should be cited with facts from some 3rd party, i.e. we should not publish original research. Vandalism would include adding material to an article which does not follow the basic policies I've outlined above. I strongly urge you to reconsider the extremely emotional and un-referenced claims that you've been adding to Scum of the Earth Church. -- Brianhe 03:29, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

How does one get 3rd party facts about the leadership quitting? How is that extremely emotional? I wouldn't even call it emotional. It is a fact. As far as a member of Scum of the Earth dying because no one cared, it's true. The man became homeless and died and no one in the church did anything to prevent it. It is a fact. That has nothing to do with emotion.

You are a follower of Christ?

I wasn't going to contine this, since we seem to have settled on some factual, cited statements for the article. But since you asked again about my faith on my talk page, here you go. I'd rather keep that private. I don't think one must qualify oneself that way to be a WP editor on any subject, nor should it be a disqualification. This is just one reason why the objectivity rules I called out above are a good idea. Brianhe 15:22, 8 November 2007 (UTC)