Talk:Thomasine Church (Gnostic)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I've removed the dispute banner because the activity and relevance of this article seem to be fairly well established, and the dispute banner seems to have been added by people with personal agendae. Wbehun 12:37, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

I would like to dispute the neutrality and accuracy of this article. There are no independent sources to confirm this church's existence and size. Nothing is referenced, and the page has clearly been put together by an involved individual or individuals. Do not get me wrong, I am not out to get this article because I believe in something different. However, I do maintain that articles should be of a standard expected in an encyclopaedia. This article clearly does not meet those standards, so I'm asking anyone who knows more to get it up to standard. — Gareth Hughes 18:17, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

The Church seems to be very limited in its action since the resignation of its first Patriarch. It is unclear whether they've elected a new Patriarch or intend to. It's visible existence seems to be limited to one or two individuals. 146.186.156.219 19:40, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

The church isn't inactive in the least, but the website hasn't been updated since the election of the new patriarch. As for the accuracy and/or neutrality of the article, I'm open to suggestions for revisions, and it is a Wiki article--you're obviously welcome to make changes you feel are needed.

Heimskringla 21:31, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

An anonymous user just removed the dispute banner from the article. It should stay because issues about its neutrality and accuracy have not been addressed. No information about this organisation exists apart from its own website. Unless someone can write a neutral and independent article about it, the banner has to stay. If nothing gets done in about a month, I'll start the process of its deletion. — Gareth Hughes 13:57, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Still, no one has presented any facts or figures about this organisation. I have called its notability into question. If anyone thinks this organisation is notable, they should include referenced information in the article. — Gareth Hughes 14:50, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Very interesting. Now why would an Anglican priest have anything against a Gnostic group? Hmm. Very interesting. Funny thing is I actually contacted these people and have spoken with priests from the Philadelphia and Toronto area. Also it has a new patriarch, Mar Dionysius Thomas. It wasn't hard for me to track these folks down. Please forgo the Inquisition. You are not Catholic and would have been just as much a heretic as the Gnostics both ancient and modern.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.229.193.49 (talk • contribs) 15:44, 27 June 2007.

Thank you, anonymous editor, for the ad hominem — now drop the personal stuff. The thing is that there is still no evidence for this group other than its own website. If the church is not referenced by anyone apart from themselves and Wikipedia, it does not meet notability criteria. Get some references and facts either here or in the article, and we'll see if it meets the criteria. If nothing can be found, this article smacks of self-publicity of a non-notable religious group. — Gareth Hughes 22:56, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm an Atheist and i have to say that i agree that this is a highly biased page with little evidence apart from the website, its like an advert. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.141.63.147 (talk) 20:43, 8 September 2007 (UTC)