Talk:Joseph Prince

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Need major re-write[edit]

I think this page seriously need a re-write as it contains non-neutral tones and seemingly self-promoting style of writing. Whoever wrote this article should rewrite it in a more encyclopedia-style - just the facts, without the fluff. I am inclined to remove some of those fluff.Atticuslai 09:56, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tell me what you think about this. - 218.186.9.5 07:32, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks much better. Now all we need is more content. Atticuslai 05:59, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notability[edit]

I mean no disrespect to Joseph Prince, but I have concerns about whether or not he is notable enough for a Wikipedia bio, per WP:BIO. This article needs to have information from reliable sources confirming that he is notable outside of his immediate community. I'm willing to give the article a bit more time to breathe, but if people just keep deleting the tags, then we should probably nominate it for deletion and let the community decide. --Elonka 16:07, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I support the call for deletion of this article. Atticuslai 02:18, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly what sources do you want. The guy's a pastor and not a superstar. - 222.164.89.16 10:06, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right, and if he's just a pastor, he shouldn't have an article on Wikipedia. See WP:BIO. In order to be notable enough to be "encyclopedic" there need to be reliable third-party sources which prove that the individual is "famous." Newspaper articles, magazine articles, books about him, that kind of thing. If those can't be provided, the Wikipedia article should probably be deleted, or the information should be merged into some other article. --Elonka 10:13, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can sources from things like religious conferences be sufficient? - 222.164.89.16 10:16, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Depends on the kind of source, and what kind of information it's providing... If he was a primary Guest of Honor at a major conference, that would help to establish notability, yes. If the source is just saying that he was an attendee or speaker though, then it wouldn't be as helpful. Show us what you've got? --Elonka 19:17, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
(followup) After further researching it, I stand by my opinion that Joseph Prince is not notable enough for a separate Wikipedia bio at this time. However, I do think it's worth having a paragraph about him at the New Creation Church article. I recommend merging the information from the Joseph Prince article there for now, and then the name "Joseph Prince" can be setup as a redirect to the Church article. If he becomes more individually notable in the future, meaning known outside of Singapore, it'll be easy enough to re-establish a separate article. --Elonka 21:49, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is best to merge the article with the Church's. Joseph Prince currently lacks the notability. Atticuslai 23:49, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All right, I'll see what I an do to expand his section there with information from here. 218.186.9.4 11:02, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Joseph Prince section in the New Creation Church (Singapore) article has been expanded. If anyone thinks that it is acceptable, they can add "#redirect New Creation Church (Singapore)#Senior pastor Joseph Prince" to this article.218.186.9.4 12:38, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am interested in learning more about this man. He definitely deserves a wikipedia page. He is a published author, pastors a church with more than 17,000 people. (that is far more than louis farakkan). He is a published author. And, he runs programs on television internationally. I saw him on tv, and I came here to learn more about him. I am disappointed by this site. Not notable enough? When you do a Yahoo search for Joseph, the first name that is suggested for a last name is Prince. I think there is some anti-religious bias at work. Or, people do not like his point of view and discriminate accordingly. You have sites for other notable preachers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.220.198.146 (talk) 06:38, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's amazing to me that someone can say that "Joseph Prince is not notable enough for a separate Wikipedia bio at this time". This is the mentality of 'censoring' - which is done when someone does not agree with the person they want to censor. How can one be so 'insecure' about themselves that they would want to censor someone that they don't agree with? Joseph Prince authors best selling books, travels the world speaking, pastors a church of thousands, and has endless testimonies from around the world of people who have been positively impacted by his life. Plain and simple - Joseph Prince deserves a Wikipedia page, and he will keep this one! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.24.135.145 (talk) 19:54, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem removed[edit]

One or more portions of this article duplicated other source(s). Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. 87.231.185.157 (talk) 09:36, 12 December

material was pasted in from http://admpreview.straitstimes.com:90/vgn-ext-templating/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=2f0e3114209cc110VgnVCM100000430a0a0aRCRD&vgnextchannel=016fe84edfbf8110VgnVCM100000350a0a0aRCRD

It needs to be rewritten.87.231.185.157 (talk) 09:37, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Need to update reference section[edit]

I'm new to editing. Found ref 3 (The Straits Times article) to be invalid/not live; however, I found a live link to a pdf of a Singapore Sunday Times article (http://www.tmc.org.my/documents/pjp.pdf) that covers the same topic. I do not know how to edit the reference, though.

I will figure out what to do and will later update the article as needed.

traveller1209 21:40, 28 December 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Towers1209 (talk • contribs)

Joseph Prince's name[edit]

Few points:

1) Only reliable source provided so far has been the Straits Times, which does not mention his previous name. Blogs and Forums do not carry weight here on Wikipedia. Those wishing to challenge this are welcome to read up on what the Wikipedia community considers as reliable sources first.

2) According to the quoted source, the name change was associated more to his previous occupation, rather than related to his church appointment. I have edited the text to reflect this accordingly. Below is the context and text which mentioned the name change.

Source: Joseph Prince, by the way, was a name he adopted when he was working as an IT consultant before he became a full-time pastor

Previous Edit: Prince chose to change his birth name to Joseph Prince prior to his appointment as a full-time pastor in the New Creation Church.

My Edit: Prince chose to change his birth name to Joseph Prince while in his previous occupation as an IT consultant.

My reasoning is being this whole article makes it very clear that the subject is currently a full-time pastor at the church, it is redundant to repeatedly reference to this fact. Zhanzhao (talk) 02:21, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how pertinent it is to include that he changed his name as an IT consultant. Was it a result of being an IT consultant? If not, then why not include that he changed his name when he was this age, this tall, that year, etc. Seems superfluous. Why not just his current name is not his birth name? Clamtow (talk) 09:24, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Because according to the source, the timing of the name change is associated with his previous occupation. Since the source did not speculate as to the reason for the change, the only thing we can mention is the timing, not the reason. To add or imply anything else is to introduce original research, speculation or opinion. As I see that you are apparently a new editor, I have provided some introductory material on your user page. Do go through them, as these include basic DOs and Donts in wikipedia which you should familiarise yourself with. Zhanzhao (talk) 11:00, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Association establishes pertinancy? My only suggestion is to mention that he changed his name so we can avoid implying a reason. In this case, the entry before Zhanzhao does a much better job at avoiding causality (i.e. he change his name prior to becoming a full-time pastor). Additionally, the link provided (footnote 3) leads nowhere, thus one cannot reexamine Zhanzhao's contribution. Clamtow (talk) 04:18, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The original link provided was from a long dead link, which was why I tried to be helpful and reproduced the text as it appeared in the article in my explanation above. In any case, I have switched the referencing to point to the physical, non-online origin/source of the article. You can look it up on the microfilm archives at the library if you wish to further verify it.
I also noticed that you removed Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®'s comments on the issue in one of your [edits]. Since you are a new user, I am just giving you a warning that this is not allowed here in Wikipedia. I have reinstated the edit. You can do such stuff on your own user talk page (to a certain extent), but an article talk page is "community/public property" and meant for common discussion. Every voice is valued here. Unexplained comment removal origination from other editors is a serious offense. Zhanzhao (talk) 00:13, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Thats not how talk pages work here. If you had read up on basic wikipedia policy which I did drop on your talk page, you would have realised it. Since you act in such a manner, I have to assume that you disregarded what was posted there and have to reiterate that need to be civil to other editors here.
As for keeping on topic, I have pretty much covered it on top what I feel, as did Dave in the edit you removed. Note that discussion comments are not just for you alone, but also to any other editors in the future who may have similar questions about policies. Stop "silencing" others who are trying to help. Your disrespect for another editor's valid edits would make it hard for any discussion to stay on topic.Zhanzhao (talk) 22:19, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks ZZ, I just warned him about this... so if he ever does that again, then you're to report him to ANI for sanctioning measures. Thank you and best. --Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 11:37, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There is no point to keep talking about what is his birth name. Since he is using his name 'Joseph Prince', just leave it as it is, it is pointless to keep on harping on what is his original name. Hithereee6734 (talk) 08:13, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm unclear about the new warning...Is this for deleting my own comment? ThanksClamtow (talk) 11:49, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So, does anyone know his original birth name? That is much more relevant than what his occupation was when he changed it. Birth names are common on wikipedia biographies of individuals that have changed their name (for whatever purpose). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.174.72.68 (talk) 17:18, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Many, many sources say his name was Xenonamandar Jegahusiee Singh, but someone who edits this page really does not want people to know that. 68.0.16.77 (talk)

We are looking for a reliable source for this information. The link you just provided in your edit does not appear to be a reliable source (it looks like they just copied an older version of this article). If you have a reliable source then we'll gladly add this information to the article. SQGibbon (talk) 19:25, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've added the OZY link that seemed to be from a reputable source. It's strange that such a high profile religious leader doesn't have his birth name on his Wikipedia page. Hoping some alumni of his previous schools can go on the record on his name, since his church seems reluctant to do so. NoCringe (talk) 11:29, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This link was actually before. Per SQGibbon's comment above, that link he was referring to that copied from this article, is the exact same OZY link you are re-adding in, making it a circular referencing. You can verify this by going back to the Nov 2013-ish editing history. PS: OZY stated the information for the article was taken from the NPR link at the top of the page, but the NPR source does not have that info about the subject's alleged original name. Zhanzhao (talk) 06:14, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
AH, I get what you mean now, the NPR/OZY source does seem to be based on a previous version of this page. Thanks for clarifying, and indeed, we should wait for a more direct source. Oddly enough, Jovinder Singh comes up as his birth name too when I asked around my church-going friends. The mystery continues. NoCringe (talk) 09:01, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. This has been bounced about here for years. Funny thing is, the alleged name has been floating about for a long time yet there's no definitive source for it, like some urban legend that refuses to die or even get definitively proven.... But someone getting their hands on a yearbook or even school is a fresh idea no one has mentioned before, maybe that might work, though the problem then will be showing that its the same person -_-". Zhanzhao (talk) 09:23, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Joseph Prince. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 18:16, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Joseph Prince. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 17:55, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Theology?[edit]

Would be nice to know what, if anything, Joseph is notable for theologically (ie. what are the major themes he teaches on or insights that are unique or largely promoted by him?). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.202.37.121 (talk) 10:28, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Birth name[edit]

does no one have any reliable source on Prince's birth name? and from my perspective, Xenonamandar seems more like an urban legend to be true. Dawkin Verbier (talk) 04:50, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Dawkin Verbier Mandela Effect here. It just needs a false rumour to start something and circular referencing and everyone started thinking it is so. In the early days of the article, there is only 1 source which is via a forum. Someone added to wiki and started circular referencing and it seems like Xenonamandar is his real name. Probably only the government and himself will know the truth at this point of time. Since it is personal information, until we see verified legal documents of birth name or name change, it will stay as a rumour. JASWE (talk) 02:14, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Joseph_Prince&oldid=1207862407"