Talk:Ahn Sahng-hong

Edited

I have done massive research on this so called "messiah" during these few days! What I have found from reliable sources was that this WMSCOG church had all the rights for this messiah's books and info. Added some details about the doctrines and his claims, and made a table to compare how this messiah's doctrines differ from previous religious bodies, and some of his quotes that he claimed. I couldn't find valid sources to support about his family so I deleted for now.Wikipedia:Verifiability I am still digging in to find the right sources to support about that information. Wikipedia:No original research If you have found some reliable sources please let me know. I edited in a way that the article wouldn't sound negative nor sound like an advertisementWikipedia:Neutral point of view Wikipedia:POV and OR from editors, sources, and fields. Since I know that his church believes in something about God the mother or heavenly mother, still searching for his claims (reliable sources) about her. Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines I still haven't got his picture that doesn't violate the copyright.

Disruptive editing

Hi. 41.78.77.178. You have blanked some information about Ahn Sahng-hong's early life without any reason. Blanking without discussion is considered as disruptive editing. I guess you edited without logging in not to be warned. Please follow the terms and policies Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nancyinthehouse (talk • contribs) 05:11, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi 71.174.33.246. You have added some information that does not have reliables sources cited. Do not make up stories since it is considered as disruptive editing. I guess you have hatred toward this person/religion. What you are doing is breaking the Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines editing articles in Wikipedia. I guess you are not logging in not to be warned. Please discuss in the talk page before you edit something. --Nancyinthehouse (talk) 22:33, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Untitled

The above is no reason to mark this article as one of questionable neutrality. I'll wait a few days to see if anyone has anything intelligible to say regarding this article's neutrality, and if not I'll unmark the article. Wyote 13:58, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

The article is in need of a lot of work. For now I've sort of changed the topic from the founder (Anhsahnghong) to the church itself; if no one beats me to it I'll create a new page for the church and refocus the article (but I don't have time to do it now, and it's not that bad... for now anyway). I haven't been able to verify the information that 212.32.99.121 put in the article, even though I'm trying to, so I'll leave it for now. I have plenty of opportunities to research this, but not so much time.... If anyone knows of any secondary sources (references) in English or Korean, I'd appreciate that information. I intend to do graduate work on Korean new religions... someday.... Wyote 14:53, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

added information

Mother's name = Zhang Gil Jah (Chang Gil Cha). Currently researching DOB, real name, marital status etc... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 124.254.82.79 (talk) 08:56, 17 March 2007 (UTC).

I moved that information to the WMSCOG's page. If you find more about her, you can add it there. Wyote 11:08, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

I was wondering, from where did you get this info. about her name? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nancyinthehouse (talk • contribs) 07:47, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

delete?

Someone has suggested that this page be deleted. I wonder why? Is it not a sufficiently notable new religious movement? It seems to be fairly well known in Korea, and reportedly is active in many countries. New Religious Movements are controversial and wikipedia might be a good place to try to put reliable NPOV information on them. Wyote 16:44, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Once again, I'm done for the night! I've created a page for the world mission society church of god and moved some of the material to that, and cleaned this one a little. I hope and assume others will do the same! I wouldn't delete this page. The WMSCOG seems to be active and increasingly well-known. It is certainly one of the new religious movements most active in proselytizing among expatriates in South Korea. I came to wikipedia searching for information about it, and this article (as it was 2 days ago) was all I found. Others, I think, will come for the same reason. Wyote 17:36, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Dispute

There seems to be dispute on the books written by Ahn Nancy deleted several books from the list despite citations there is also dispute on the name of the church he established or even which church as there are two mentioned on this page alone (I am aware of more but since I have no sources I will not bring them into this) seems to me Nancy deleted them prematurely without discussion as they are cited--192.41.96.212 (talk) 15:22, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi 192.41.96.212. I have not deleted anything prematurely. And it's not a dispute at all. As I have researched, the article itself contained unreliable sources which were evidently personal blogs, and sites which were made to oppose the church, and the article was written without a neutral point of view. The books did not have any valid ISBN nor published company so I changed to books that have ISBN and a valid publishing company. Unreliale sources rejects its Wikipedia:Verifiability and using these unreliable sources is considered as a disruptive editing Thanks. --Nancyinthehouse (talk) 16:23, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

For those who are disruptive editing without logging in. I am NOT a member of this church/messiah/religious movement. Some people previously edited this article with nonreliable sources that does not agree with Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines. So that's why I am editing in a neutral point of view without supporting, advertising, nor "creating" any information going against this article. Please do not commit any Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Thanks.--Nancyinthehouse (talk) 03:51, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

You are a liar you have NO evidence behind your claim regarding the sources the onus is on YOU --69.146.219.170 (talk) 22:43, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

"ISBNs only identify a particular edition of a book, and a reader with only an ISBN will not see the full range of versions of the book. Please do not use ISBNs alone to identify books: add a proper citation as well as the ISBN. Also note that ISBNs are not required of citations; popular citation styles like Chicago, MLA, and APA do not use ISBNs. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style, Wikipedia:Cite your sources." -- WP:ISBN --69.146.219.170 (talk) 22:53, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi 69.146.219.170 - > Please stop Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Considering someone a liar is a negative and offensive talk that violates the guidelines and policies of Wikipedia. The whole article is written in a neutral point of view, but your edit is nonneutral and contains negative personal opinions from personal blogs and sites(unreliable sources). Please be neutral. I guess you edited without signing in, not be warned for disruptive editing. As I have researched, all copyrights was owned by Melchizidek Publishing Co. LTD, and they had all valid ISBN numbers. Without ISBN numbers on it does not count as reliable sources. The sources that you have used were unvalid books that weren't published by a respected published company. For your concern, read Wikipedia:Verifiability "Other reliable sources include university-level textbooks, books published by respected publishing houses, magazines, journals, and mainstream newspapers. You may also use electronic media, subject to the same criteria." Editing without a good reason goes against the Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines. Please read the policies and guidelines before you edit an article. Without having that in mind, you might edit an article with your own opinion and create a dispute. Hope that helps.--Nancyinthehouse (talk) 07:46, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Moreoever, can you prove that your sources are considered as "popular citations"? I have researched and couldn't find any. If they are, please let me know. Thanks! --Nancyinthehouse (talk) 07:52, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

The fact is you ARE