Kerry, I am sure I speak for all of the editors working on the emerging church article when I say we value your input. Personally I would like every emergent blogger and his or her relatives all listed in the article but Wikipedia will not tolerate such a thing. Its policies regarding web directories and spamming put us in danger of losing the whole list. Please note the entry I just put on the EC discussion page. I've pasted it here for your convenience.
The list of names has become notoriously way too long and we are in danger of having an administrator delete the entire thing, considering it advertising and a web directory. Both lists now stand at 22 names.I propose that any names added to either list must come at the expense of one already on it. Below I've pasted a relevant satire from my userpage:
About the
Spamming in the Emerging Church Movement Article
To those who are interested, I am not responsible for the spamming and advertising on the emerging church "prominent figures" list. It just became impossible to fight after awhile. I think there are still two or three emergent blogs in the world that are not promoted there. Once they get on the list I am thinking about adding my cat. He is as noteable as some of the "prominent figures" already on the list. See the entry below that I've already prepared for him:
I do hope you continue to contribute though.
Will3935
19:06, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Dear Will
Responding to your editing about spamming - it seems to me that there is an American bias to this - that Steve Collins, Ian Mobsby, Pete Rollins have all played a very big part in the Emerging Church which incidently existed before Emergent. Why can we not have these names - Ian Mobsby for example has been writing stuff since 1988 - Yes you give far too much focus and a very large group to the States. This is unjust, and does not reflect the real world of the emerging church.
Can we not take some of the American names off who are less key - and add some of the UK ones that are more key given a global perspective - and that not everything is dictated by an America bias
Kerry, I am sure I speak for all of the editors working on the emerging church article when I say we value your input. Personally I would like every emergent blogger and his or her relatives all listed in the article but Wikipedia will not tolerate such a thing. Its policies regarding web directories and spamming put us in danger of losing the whole list. Please note the entry I just put on the EC discussion page. I've pasted it here for your convenience.
The list of names has become notoriously way too long and we are in danger of having an administrator delete the entire thing, considering it advertising and a web directory. Both lists now stand at 22 names.I propose that any names added to either list must come at the expense of one already on it. Below I've pasted a relevant satire from my userpage:
About the
Spamming in the Emerging Church Movement Article
To those who are interested, I am not responsible for the spamming and advertising on the emerging church "prominent figures" list. It just became impossible to fight after awhile. I think there are still two or three emergent blogs in the world that are not promoted there. Once they get on the list I am thinking about adding my cat. He is as noteable as some of the "prominent figures" already on the list. See the entry below that I've already prepared for him:
I do hope you continue to contribute though.
Will3935
19:06, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Dear Will
Responding to your editing about spamming - it seems to me that there is an American bias to this - that Steve Collins, Ian Mobsby, Pete Rollins have all played a very big part in the Emerging Church which incidently existed before Emergent. Why can we not have these names - Ian Mobsby for example has been writing stuff since 1988 - Yes you give far too much focus and a very large group to the States. This is unjust, and does not reflect the real world of the emerging church.
Can we not take some of the American names off who are less key - and add some of the UK ones that are more key given a global perspective - and that not everything is dictated by an America bias