Talk:The Great Controversy (book)

Seventh-day Adventist Church Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Seventh-day Adventist Church, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Seventh-day Adventist Church 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.Seventh-day Adventist ChurchWikipedia:WikiProject Seventh-day Adventist ChurchTemplate:WikiProject Seventh-day Adventist ChurchSeventh-day Adventist Church articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

To-do list:
edit history watch purge Expand "Glacier View Controversy" section, to include more background, history, theological issues, and details of the Glacier View meeting itself Add to "Adventist Responses to Criticisms" section, ideally with material from Adventist scholars etc.

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Women writers Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers 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.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Daily pageviews of this article

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 2 sections are present.

Notability[edit]

A "Notability" tag has been inserted at the top of this article. In reading the requirements to meet the notability standard, it is self-evident that this book does meet that standard.

Here is the relevant part of the Wikipedia "Notability" page on books: "

This page in a nutshell: A book is presumed notable, and to generally merit an article, if it verifiably meets through reliable sources, one or more of the following criteria:

1. The book has been the subject of two or more non-trivial published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself. This can include published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, other books, television documentaries, bestseller lists, and reviews. This excludes media re-prints of press releases, flap copy, or other publications where the author, its publisher, agent, or other self-interested parties advertise or speak about the book.

2. The book has won a major literary award.

3. The book has been considered by reliable sources to have made a significant contribution to a notable or significant motion picture, or other art form, or event or political or religious movement.

4. The book is, or has been, the subject of instruction at two or more schools, colleges, universities or post-graduate programs in any particular country.

5. The book's author is so historically significant that any of the author's written works may be considered notable. This does not simply mean that the book's author is notable by Wikipedia's standards; rather, the book's author is of exceptional significance and the author's life and body of written work would be a common subject of academic study. "

It appears to me that The Great Controversy book meets not just one, but all 5 of these criteria. In the article itself it references how important this book is to the Seventh-day Adventist Church, and the millions of books that have been printed and subsequent mentioning of in news reports etc.

Is there a consensus that this "notability" tag could be removed? Earlysda (talk) 01:10, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Earlysda: I guess the article has only two sources independent of the SDA fan club. This means you have work to do in order to demonstrate it's notable. tgeorgescu (talk) 01:31, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"For Seventh-day Adventists, the GCT is the core concept that brings coherence to all biblical subjects."

Note: "GCT" means "Great Controversy Theme".

reference: https://www.ministrymagazine.org/archive/2000/12/the-great-controversy-theme

"Great controversy: What to do with religious books sent to Chicagoans"

reference: https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/breaking/ct-religious-book-mailed-chicago-met-0322-20160323-story.html

At 0:02 in the video it states: "The Seventh-day Adventist Church plans to share 200,000,000 copies worldwide".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sq_oxuFeOdY

"Fox 29 news reporting on The Great Controversy by Ellen G. White"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ko3scit55x0

Ellen White listed as one of the most famous authors in America.

https://www.famousauthors.org/ellen-g-white

Ellen White listed in top 100 most signficant Americans of all time by the Smithsonian article: "Meet the 100 Most Significant Americans of All Time"

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smithsonianmag/meet-100-most-significant-americans-all-time-180953341/

This book is mentioned in Encyclopedia.com article titled: "WHITE, Ellen Gould (Harmon)"

https://www.encyclopedia.com/arts/news-wires-white-papers-and-books/white-ellen-gould-harmon

This book is mentioned and quoted on BBC website titled: "Religions Seventh-day Adventists"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/christianity/subdivisions/seventhdayadventist_1.shtml

This book's title used in seminary studies at Seventh-day Adventist operated Andrews University: "The Chiastic Structure of Revelation 12:1-15:4: The Great Controversy Vision"

https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/auss/vol38/iss2/7/

On Wikipedia website titled: "Seventh-day Adventist theology" it states: "In a 1985 questionnaire, the percentage of North American Adventist lecturers who nominated various beliefs as contributions they believed Adventists had made to contemporary theology are:"... Great Controversy 18%" reference: "Bull, Malcolm; Lockhart, Keith (October 1987). "The Intellectual World of Adventist Theologians"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seventh-day_Adventist_theology

Is there a consensus now that this book meets the notability standard? Earlysda (talk) 02:43, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you don't have to convince me. I say neither nay nor yeah to its WP:N. tgeorgescu (talk) 04:20, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Plagiarism re White is a red herring[edit]

The issue regarding Ellen White's writings is not plagiarism. Ramik gave a legal opinion on that relating to 19th century practice. The issue is her unacknowledged and denied dependence on the writings of others and the impact of this on her authority and alleged inspiration. This has long been established by numerous scholars—Adventist and otherwise. For example, the church-commissioned study by Fred Veltman concluded in his 2,561-page report (1988) that White's unacknowledged use of materials by others in The Desire of Ages impacted every type of writing in the book—historical, theological, exegetical, devotional. Historians and literary scholars have reached similar conclusions regarding her other books, including The Great Controversy (GC). The 2010 CUNY PhD dissertation, "The Thief of Paradise: Milton and Seventh-day Adventism" by Milton scholar Ian Bickford, convincingly demonstrates that White took her cosmic conflict ideas, including fictional, extra-biblical details, from Milton and denied that she did so. Even her title, GC—used on her books from 1858 to 1911, came without acknowledgement from a volume by H.L. Hastings, The Great Controversy between God and Man, published in January 1858 and reviewed by her husband James White just months before he published her book with her GC title. This is what needs to be included in the article; not the red herring issue of plagiarism.Wctrenchard (talk) 22:06, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Plagiarism was a big scandal, and journals such as Spectrum fully describe the controversy. That she used "literary borrowing" was acknowledged publicly by the SDA Church, so her plagiarism is not even disputed by those in the know. E.g. she had a trial about the book Sketches from the Life of Paul and she lost the trial. She was publicly called during her life "a literary thief" by US newspapers. tgeorgescu (talk) 22:31, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't dispute what you have said, only that plagiarism is not an issue for contemporary scholars of White, including myself. I know and work with them all. However, in the wake of her massive borrowing—and it is massive in term of ideas and content sequencing—and denials, her authority and inspiration are legitimately under serious reconsideration. Plagiarism is indeed a red herring, especially if one thinks that absolving her of plagiarism rehabilitates her authority and inspiration. That would be naivete of the highest order!Wctrenchard (talk) 00:00, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]