Talk:Marvin Olasky

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Arts and Entertainment / Science and Academia

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group.
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group.

Religion: Interfaith Low‑importance

	Religion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is within the scope of Interfaith work group, a work group which is currently considered to be inactive.

Christianity Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Conservatism

	Conservatism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Journalism

	Journalism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

United States: University of Texas at Austin Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Texas portal This article is supported by WikiProject Texas - University of Texas at Austin (assessed as Low-importance).

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

Edit Warring and Possible Sock Puppetry

User:Menikov and User:Greenhorn1914 (See WP:SOCK) as well as anonymous users at 65.175.205.107 (Sanbornton, NH), 74.243.188.226 (Asheville, NC), 98.94.164.108 (Mills River, NC), and 98.94.146.25 (Asheville, NC) have repeatedly applied similar edits to this article without justification or documentation, and User:Vindicacontratyrannus has repeatedly substantively reversed these edits. See WP:EW.

I have applied warnings to the talk pages of the registered users involved in this dispute: User talk: Menikov, User talk: Greenhorn1914, User talk:Vindicacontratyrannus.

Given that this is the biography of a living person (see WP:ALIVE), temporary protection of the article may be warranted until these disputes can be resolved. Or, given the relative obscurity of the article's subject, deletion or significant shortening of the article may make more sense (see WP:BIO). However, perhaps we can resolve the disputes without resorting to that. Please use this section to discuss any further substantive edits similar to these:

Here are a couple of the sticking points to get us started:

What students did Olasky alienate at The King's College? Students in general, students including student leaders, an isolated few student leaders?

Perhaps a matter of opinion, but Olasky had great support from many students, especially freshmen and sophomores he had helped to recruit.

What is the relationship between the "compassionate conservatism" envisioned by Olasky and that implemented by the Bush administration?

See Olasky columns and articles in 2001 criticizing in World magazine Bush administration implementation of compassionate conservatism --for example, July 7, 2001, http://www.worldmag.com/articles/5153.

If the current information on these subjects is inadequate or inaccurate, this is the place to explain why and document and justify proposed changes. The article seems to be written by one of the King's students who opposed Olasky, because it makes a major point of some fairly minor controversies that occurred in three years of his 40-year career, but so be it -- at least the content should be factually accurate. Greenhorn1914 (talk) 21:41, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If there are other disputes that should go on that list, put them there and sign your changes.

--Evaus (talk) 11:52, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Greenhorn: What are the factual inaccuracies, or, in the alternative, which incidents or controversies do you believe are not significant enough to merit inclusion? As I said above, I'm opening to significantly shortening the article, as it goes into more detail about the subject than is perhaps warranted given his historical/current notability. Here is the standard from WP:BIO:

"A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of multiple published secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject."

Eliminating the critical material in the "Controversies at The King's College" section would mean eliminating the material sourced from the "Gadfly." With that source gone, the bulk of the remaining material is sourced from primary sources or sources not independent of the subject, with the exception of some material from the New York Times Magazine profile and Christianity Today. Thus, if we were to remove or significantly abridge the critical information, I think we would seriously weaken the argument that the article's subject meets the notability standard. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Evaus (talk • contribs) 21:37, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV Dispute (November 2009)

Reinstated anonymous NPOV tag which was later anonymously removed . . . seems likely subject is editing his own biography. Reads like a (rather tedious) resume. See WP:BLPEDIT, WP:NPF, and WP:AUTOBIO. I'd like to take a crack at cleaning it up—any comments, suggestions, objections?

Evaus (talk) 04:59, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As it has been several months and no one's objected, I'm going to begin re-working this article.

Evaus (talk) 03:48, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think I've managed to clean up the citations and cite the unreferenced assertions, or remove the ones I couldn't document. I intend to add some material in the next few days, but if there are no objections I'll take down the NPOV tag soon.

Evaus (talk) 14:08, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Email interview as reference

On 25 December 2004 I received an email from Marvin Olasky after asking him to look at the article and suggest revisions. Some of the information he gave me I have not been able to confirm using other sources (such as his birthdate), but I have included this information anyway, and cited my email interview in the references section. I am not sure what the protocol is for problems like this. I could make available the email he sent me, but it would be difficult to prove its source. If you think changes are necessary, please let me know and, if you like, make those changes. --Spangineer ∞ 03:39, Dec 26, 2004 (UTC)

I know what you did last Christmas JoshNarins 00:48, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Zeus, Zeus, Zeus!

Why is there no mention of the bizarre "religion of Zeus" thing? That was his 15 minutes of semi-fame -- there are probably a fairly large number of people who have never heard of him except in connection to the "religion of Zeus"... AnonMoos 01:44, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please enlighten me; I've never heard that story. --Spangineer^[es] (háblame) 12:20, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was in a lot of papers at the time -- he said he opposed the McCain candidacy because it was the equivalent of the "religion of Zeus". Frankly, I wonder how many times Olasky has received mentions in "ordinary" newspapers (i.e. not the New York Times or the Washington Post, and not in a syndicated op-ed piece) which were NOT in relation to the "religion of Zeus". You could start here http://www.nationalreview.com/goldberg/goldbergprint030300.html AnonMoos 02:19, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

King's College controversy section

This edit seems completely inappropriate. gadflymag.com (a website which is no longer active) doesn't seem to be a reliable source - in any case, it's a primary source. That is, the editors may have had criticisms, but those criticisms should not be included unless they are reported by reliable third party sources. Christianity Today would qualify, but it didn't actually report on any controversy. St Anselm (talk) 22:41, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Marvin Olasky. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120617173307/http://www.tkc.edu/media/archives2.asp?id=159 to http://www.tkc.edu/media/archives2.asp?id=159

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:14, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Marvin Olasky. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://webarchive.loc.gov/all/20101107155854/http%3A//online.worldmag.com/2010/11/05/marvin%2Dolasky%2Din%2Dfull/ to http://online.worldmag.com/2010/11/05/marvin-olasky-in-full/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:01, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV dispute (April 2023)

This article seems to contain a number of statements slanted in favor of the subject, such as the following:

The magazine [World] also exposed evangelical leaders who used ghostwriters without acknowledging them, pastors who were silent about abortion, Christian counselors who preferred psychobabble to the Bible, and Washington insiders who tried to manipulate evangelicals.

Beyond the use of terminology like "exposed" to describe pastors with no outspoken stance on abortion, or the pitting against of concepts like "psychobabble" and the Bible (the implication being that Christian counselors utilize psychobabble, that the Bible is preferable to said psychobabble, or that Christian counselors should prefer the Bible to said psychobabble), the citation accompanying the above quote is World magazine itself, for which the subject served as an editor. I will be removing the above quote from the article shortly, along with the associated claim that the subject "made sure World stayed aloof from the Bush administration", which appears to be original research.

Furthermore, I see that this is not the first time that the neutrality of this article has been disputed, as an above section on this talk page (Talk:Marvin Olasky#NPOV Dispute (November 2009)) indicates. In said section, User:Evaus suggested that the subject may been editing his own page. This may be the case currently, as I see that one recent editor of the page is a User:Zengerhouse (the lead section states that the subject serves as chair of the Zenger House Foundation, and as a Zenger Prize judge). —Matthew / (talk) 01:10, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]