![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 29 September 2022. The result of the discussion was keep. |
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. |
![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
|
The phrasing "... Eldredge came to Christ and later to the church" doesn't sound right for an encyclopedic article. I suggest changing it to something along the lines of "... became a [born again?] Christian and later joined the [which?] church". - Mike Rosoft ( talk) 07:49, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
Please refer to Wikipedia:NPOV_dispute for the correct procedure in handling this dispute, in case you are not familiar with its provisions and recommendations.
First off, I do agree that criticism does belong in a Criticism section, so, just to be sure, I do not dispute the mere existence of the present criticism.
That said, I would like to emphasize that since a WP article is not a forum for criticism as such but strives to provide a comprehensive view of its subject, including the existence of whatever respectable criticism (i.e., criticism that exists outside the WP and is merely reported in this section of a WP article), such criticism should be referenced in a way that is, in itself, sound and dry and that does refrain from extending or challenging the viewpoint of the criticism in itself.
To point out where I feel that this standard isn't met by the current state of the criticism section:
-- 217.229.1.227 ( talk) 05:09, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
"Although he does not promote criminality, Eldredge has also received criticism for use made of his book Wild at Heart by the "pseudo-evangelical cult" and Mexican criminal cartel La Familia Michoacana.[5][6][7]"
When I reached this concluding sentence on the entry for John Eldredge, I was immediately struck by its ludicrous nature. First, there's nothing in this book or any of his other books that could justify this criticism. Second, one may as well blame Chevrolet for the use of a Chevy Suburban as a getaway car in a bank heist.
I looked at the references provided. The first was to a blog called Thump and Whip. It provided a couple more links, one of which (elchucotimes) just went to a generic page with no content, the other (JulyDogs) was another blog that was so similar that the content in Thump and Whip had to have been copied, pasted, and slightly redacted from it or both from other sources. From this blog I followed a link to the El Milenio article. After reading this, in Spanish, it was evident that both blogs contained redacted versions of it in English (though both Thump and Whip and JulyDogs also repackaged information written elsewhere about John Eldredge). The other citations that mentioned John Eldredge in connection with La Familia Michoacana, 6 and 7, by George Grayson at the Foreign Policy Research Institute and by Michael Isikoff at The Daily Beast, respectively, were derived from the El Milenio article. George Grayson specifically mentioned it. Michael Isikoff did not provide any citations but the content of his remarks was such that he had read the El Milenio article or the redactions of it mentioned above. For example, "muscular Christianity" appears in Isikoff's, Thump and Whip's, and JulyDogs versions.
In the El Milenio article ( http://www.msemanal.com/node/613), it is alleged that "sources" within the federal intelligence network said that Eldredge's Wild at Heart figured prominently in the recruitment and training of leaders in La Familia Michoacana. The author of the article says that Wild at Heart is mentioned 4 times in the intelligence memos on the group. The author states that pamphlets are distributed by the thousands to train folks to The Family way. But the author never provides an example of any of those pamphlets that shows any quotes from or references to Wild at Heart. The author also mentions that La Familia Michoacan draws on connections from local Catholic priests and a variety of other religions:
“Aunque tienen nexos con algunos sacerdotes católicos, sus principales creencias se encuentran (sic) entre otras religiones, principalmente en las denominadas cristiana y evangélica, las cuales les sirven para el reclutamiento y adoctrinamiento de nuevos integrantes de la organización delictiva”, se anota en el documento."
In addition to this, the author in El Milenio says that Mexican self-help authors Carlos Cuauthémoc Sánchez and Miguel Ángel Cornejo have given motivational courses in Morelia under the patronage of The Family:
"...escritores mexicanos de superación personal Carlos Cuauthémoc Sánchez y Miguel Ángel Cornejo han impartido cursos de motivación en Morelia bajo el patrocinio de La Familia."
So, given that the author in El Milenio cites a variety of religions and self-help teachers as sources of motivation for the training of leaders in La Familia Michoacana, two of which were said to have actually given motivational talks sponsored by La Familia Michocana, it's very strange that the article should so prominently focus on John Eldredge, including a large photo of him and his book. Perhaps it's because he's American, evangelical, and famous on both sides of the border.
Bottom line: All three citations are uncritically derived from a single source, an article in El Milenio ( http://www.msemanal.com/node/613), not even listed in the Wikipedia entry, in which the author quotes unnamed sources in a Mexican federal intelligence service alleging that the leader of La Familia Michoacana really likes Wild at Heart.
Aruanan ( talk) 13:19, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on John Eldredge. 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:
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:57, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
At first glance, the article appears to be well-referenced, although strangely PR-sounding in tone. The reason seems to be that 11 of the 18 current reference links are to the same episode of one audio recording the subject did from his own organization.
As structured, this article tilts heavily to PR for the subject and needs to be revised. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steveworld ( talk • contribs) 10:56, 9 November 2017 (UTC)