This is an old revision of this page, as edited by SineBot (talk | contribs) at 22:05, 21 May 2011 (Signing comment by KayaSadao - "→Criticism section: "). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 22:05, 21 May 2011 by SineBot (talk | contribs) (Signing comment by KayaSadao - "→Criticism section: ")(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Harold Camping article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 12 months |
This article was nominated for deletion. Review prior discussions if considering re-nomination:
|
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 has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Harold Camping article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 12 months |
Archives |
This page has archives. Sections older than 360 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present. |
Vandalism in first line
Edit request for removal of vandalism in opening paragraph. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smazza (talk • contribs) 14:56, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
What is this with the Mr.?
Someone or some people keep on going onto the page and changing "Camping" to "Mr. Camping." I can't tell whether this is because the person or people doing it are trying to laud or insult him. Would whoever is doing this explain why here? In Misplaced Pages we don't refer to people in biographical articles as "Mr." or "Ms." or any such title. Jeremy J. Shapiro (talk) 04:13, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
- I'm not responsible for the edits but I think I can guess why someone might have done so. Camping's last name is also a gerund. Someone may have thought that made some sentences confusing to read. (E.g., a sentence like: "Camping has been repudiated by most mainstream Christian churches.") —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.231.252.50 (talk) 00:23, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
- I agree, viz.: - "Camping (being outdoors with some buddies in a tent under the stars) is fun", but "Camping (the president of Family Stations Inc.) is not much fun" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.44.98.224 (talk) 11:01, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
- The Catholic Church was teaching predestination more than a 1000 years before Calvinism was invented (see: St. Augustine). In any event, this conversation is irrelevant. This claim needs to be sourced, not deduced. Find a source or delete.PStrait (talk) 21:31, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
You could simply use Camping (disambiguation) instead of Camping. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.172.22.223 (talk) 15:02, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
Are We Being a Bit Unreasonable?
Certainly I understand and agree with the need to maintain certain quality standards on Misplaced Pages. But the case of Harold Camping is a rather unique one in which, if too strictly applied, the guidelines may actually reduce the factual value and accuracy of the article.
Harold Camping is a nearly 90-year-old Bible teacher. For most of those nearly 90 years, he was little-known outside of the Evangelical Christian community. He sat by his microphone every weekday evening and took phone calls from (mainly) Christians who called in with questions, usually about Bible passages or moral issues.
Practically no one outside the Christian community had any idea who Camping was until he declared the organized churches apostate in 1988, predicted that Christ would return in 1994, and again predicted that Christ will return in 2011. In fact, had Camping not made these statements, it's doubtful that there would even exist a Misplaced Pages article about him. He simply wouldn't be that important or prominent a figure as to warrant one.
The fact, however, is that he has made those statements, which are quite controversial within the Christian community, and are of considerable esoteric interest to many outside that group. But let's look at that for a moment: Harold Camping is a man whose primary reason for prominence are his own unique eschatological teachings, the product of his own exegesis of a book whose newest passages are about two thousand years old.
In consideration of the above, does it really make sense to complain about the fact that self-published sources were used? I think not. In fact, I think in this instance, self-published sources, especially those written by Camping himself, are the best and most accurate sources available. Again, this is a man whose primary basis for prominence is his own unique religious teaching, which he has explained in great detail in numerous publications -- all of which happened to be self-published.
Similarly, does it make sense to complain about the lack of third-party verifiability with regard to a religious figure whose main "claim to fame" consists of his own peculiar doctrinal teachings? What is there to verify? We're talking about religion, whose essence is faith, which by definition means that it can not be verified.
I suggest that we consider these factors, and perhaps back off a bit. This is not your typical sort of biography. 98.14.50.29 (talk) 22:25, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
- I agree with the anon comment above. --Blue Tie (talk) 15:05, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
- I agree as well, in theory. However, let's remember that we have rules here that should be applied universially. WP:IAR as I understand it, is to be used on the rarest of occasions. Although the above comment largely gets it right, it neglects to mention the fact Camping will likely cease to be of much interest to many come May 22nd. Will he still be noteable enough for an article once May 21st has come and gone? If the answer is no, then he shouldn't be noteable enough for one now. Joefromrandb (talk) 10:45, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
- History suggests that he will remain notable for a long time to come, and that "Campingism" will continue and even thrive long after he's gone. Think of William Miller and Charles Taze Russell, for instance. PSWG1920 (talk) 04:57, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
- Depends on size of community and whether there are auxilliary "prophets" like Ellen G. White of the Adventism, and it's generally hard to esteem because that many apocalypse preachers are forgotten or almost forgotten like the Irvingites, a European independent counterpart to the Millerism. Some fools will ruin their lifes because of indiscriminately listening to garbage as being the final truth. Rursus dixit. (bork!) 08:53, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
Criticism section
I was going to weigh in on an edit in this section anyway, and noticed someone tagged it for discussion but there's no discussion on the talk page for it. So now there is one. I took out the statement about a particular heresy (that Michael the Archangel was crucified in place of Jesus) because it didn't have a good source. I don't know whether this particular heresy is even preached by Camping (he would not be the first), but because of a lack of verifiability I am taking it out. First of all the source being used to support this assertion is this article, which is an attack article from a somewhat anonymous and fringe source. But even if everything in the article is gospel truth, the article basically infers a belief about the crucifixion without giving any quotations or citations pertaining to the crucifixion. The source of the claim is supposed to be from a page in one of Camping's books, but the quotation says nothing about the crucifixion. I think it would be better to go to the original source and see what it does say and work from there. That is basically the standard we are working by on Misplaced Pages. I think too a doctrine like this is usually central to a cult and not something that is encapsulated in one statement on one page of one obscure book in the plethora produced by it. There would be more explanation of a doctrine like that, especially since it is different to what the mainstream would be familiar with. In any case, it has to go. Rifter0x0000 (talk) 14:18, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
- I left a note on the user talk page of the editor who tagged it, who mentioned a couple other phrases that prompted the placement of the NPOV tag for that discussion. Those phrases are gone now, and per their permission (as well as the changes you made), I went ahead and removed the tag. There are still tags in other sections. Kansan (talk) 01:00, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
His website (www.familyradio.com) states that 'The Bible Guarantees It', that is, Judgement Day. Elsewhere on the website, it states that Judgement Day WILL BEGIN on May 21, 2011. If none of this happens, it would seem that there are not any guarantees based on The Bible. Given this degree of confusion, how can any of this information be truly verifiable?
He made such prdications before also and later said it was calculation mistake, so what is a gurantee that this time there is no calculation or any other mistake. He will have some other reason on 22nd May 2011 when nothing happens...in that case what should be punishment for him for scaring so many people...???
Worldly Wise 123 (talk) 16:40, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
His prediction of the Rapture has officially failed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KayaSadao (talk • contribs) 22:04, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
Rapture and end of world
Unfortunately not enough time to clean up to satisfy the tags, but one suggestion: a stronger distinction should be made between "Rapture" and "the end of the world", which are or were used synonymously in several places. Keepcalmandcarryon (talk) 15:08, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
Errors in Haorld Camping's Signs Preceding Judgment Day
On the Family Radio webpage, in the article "Facts about May 21, 2011," Harold Camping wrote that one of the signs of the coming of Christ is the "complete disregard of the Bible in all society." Were this true, then Mr. Camping, as a member of "(all) society," would also have to disregard the Bible. His calculations for the end of the world cannot be checked, because there is no date in the Bible for the Great Flood. Mr. Camping references Thessalonians and Matthew the most as the basis for his arguments, but repeatedly states how many passages and words "can be interpreted as". The arguments by Mr. Camping do not include real problems to consider as signs, such as the recent periods of massive destructive weather and attacks by terrorism as part of the breakdown in modern morality, but are argued from the generic "born again" perspective, not without contradiction, which focuses on the establishment of Israel in 1948, rampant immorality by those who are not born again, negativity towards homosexuality, and how those who are born again are saved. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Csoderlin (talk • contribs) 01:37, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
- Maybe! If you can find an external source making this kind of criticism, it might be usable in the article, otherwise: who cares, really? Literalists maybe? Rursus dixit. (bork!) 17:39, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
Yes, literalists. They say they are being literal, that the time can be predicted. Of course it is literal. That's what "Mr." Camping has been saying all along with his timetable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.183.20.242 (talk) 18:18, 14 May 2011 (UTC) If you had read what the writer stated above, the statement about "all society" is in "Mr." Camping's own writing. What outside source is needed! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.217.242.92 (talk) 00:23, 15 May 2011 (UTC) I'm glad I'm not Mr. Camping. I would rather be focused on life, instead of death. I think there is still way too much to be done on this planet before God starts sending us messages that it is all over with. Life is so much more important than quitting out based on predictions not adequately based on the Bible. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.188.96.4 (talk) 16:54, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
He made such prdications before also and later said it was calculation mistake, so what is a gurantee that this time there is no calculation or any other mistake. He will have some other reason on 22nd May 2011 when nothing happens...in that case what should be punishment for him for scaring so many people...??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.248.183.1 (talk) 08:24, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
Of course he will discover a "mistake" in his calculations... and his followers will buy into the next date he cooks up. They guy's a crank, plain and simple, and the only reason he's gotten this much attention is because comics and snarky bloggers are having so much fun with the foolishness of the man and his followers. This page need not be more than a paragraph or two in length. 68.173.53.167 (talk) 15:03, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
Numerology plus a little arithmetic constitutes "mathematical predictions"?
Were I not anonymous, and therefore able to edit the article, I would change "mathematical predictions applied to the Bible", in the first paragraph, to "Bible-based numerology". --63.81.2.130 (talk) 07:07, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
The Royal Wedding!
Mr. Camping may be right about this Saturday or one coming up, but he did not include a very important point about the Royal Wedding and "marrying and giving in marriage," see here (the domain name was about the last one I had left over and I know it's not completely appropriate): falseintelligence.org
Missing word
Quote from article: "In 1958, Camping joined with other individuals of Christian Reformed, Bible Baptist, and Conservative Christian Presbyterian to..."
The word "background" is missing before the final "to". Please fix it. I can't since the article is locked. -- 77.187.47.3 (talk) 14:16, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
- done --Spiffy sperry (talk) 17:56, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
NPOV
Please explain how this section is NPOV and belongs into a non-sectarian encyclopedia:
However, a specific prediction of the year and month of the Lord's return is not necessarily precluded by these verses. Although it would be very much outside the Christian mainstream, a person would be Biblically compatible to say: "I predict the Lord Jesus Christ will return during the year and the month ."
-- 77.187.47.3 (talk) 14:44, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
- Clearly unencyclopaedic and WP:POV. I have removed it. --Wasell 18:11, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
1994 prediction
He was wrong Duhhhhh
- And he's wrong again. Nobody will listen to him next time, and knowing America, he's likely to be sued to smitherines by people who took him at his word and thus made financial and business decisions on the basis of not being here (or someone else not being here) on and after Sunday. Darcyj (talk) 07:49, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
Edit request from Gmanfan2005, 21 May 2011
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
we should not be promoting someone who is trying to get rich and cause world wide havoc
Gmanfan2005 (talk) 04:58, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- Can you please be specific on what you'd like changed in the article? I'm afraid I can't tell by reading your request. Sorry, ~ Matthewrbowker 05:24, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- You didn't get raptured? Bummer for you. Those pearly gates sure are shiny. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.100.60.53 (talk) 16:39, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
Deadline now passed
Since it's now 7:47 UTC 21 May 2011. it is now 7:47 PM 21 May 2011 at the International Date Line, and Camping's deadline, which predicts Armageddon at 6 PM local time, has now expired without anything happening, I think we can can now start reporting the non-event. -- Chronulator (talk) 07:47, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
Worry none, there will be *yet another* declaration of mathematical error (or possibly a special TZ where it's never past 6PM May 21st). Anyway, regional declarations of non-events are/will be reported; after 6:00 AM, May 22nd UTC (6PM at GMT-12) they could be cleaned up into a single declaration "on May 21st at 6 PM, nothing notable happened" (which will be later deleted as non-notable ;)). 89.176.109.220 (talk) 14:26, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
at what point do we add he was wrong?
so it was suppose to be 6PM local time. much of the world is past 6pm now, 9AM EST. in fact some of the world is in may 22nd. when do we edit to say his prediction was incorrect, again? Overseer19XX (talk) 13:08, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/more-news/case-of-poor-judgment/story-fn7x8me2-1226060289339Overseer19XX (talk) 13:14, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- I think we can probably nail it for good and all once it is no longer 21 May at any point in the world. I wonder what Camping is going to do for an encore? -- The Anome (talk) 14:11, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
Come on. Not that I have any sympathies with this guy's predictions, but it's just 5 p.m. even in my part of the world (Germany). California has ten more hours to go. ;) No encyclopaedic changes before that time please. (Of course, you might argue if this guy is right, nobody will be reading Misplaced Pages after 6 p.m. anyways...) --Anna (talk) 14:55, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- The answer is (1) when May 21 is over and done with around the world; and (2) when it is verified that 3% of the world's population has mysteriously disappeared today. (Camping and his staff don't count, as they might well be hiding.) ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 17:40, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- We should probably also update Unfulfilled religious predictions at that time, too. -- Chronulator (talk) 20:40, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
Too Early to Evaluate
"But, contrary to his words, nothing happened to the world in 21st May 2011."
I'm not defending Mr. Camping's predictions, but I think it's a bit premature for the above-added critique. May 21 is not over yet, so whatever our thoughts about his "knowing," it is not very journalistic nor encyclopaedic to post this unprofessional garbage until at least the next day - not to mention the fact that the paragraph containing this section is written as though nothing above it had been written; it repeats facts and gives nothing new to the article except conjecture.
BlewJ (talk) 13:21, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
I agree. It's not 6 pm Camping's time yet, at least wait until then before adding this. Even tomorrow, that paragraph will need editing for style. Internet nobody (talk) 13:31, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- It's not like it matters if we prematurely post that he was wrong since if he turned out to be right, Misplaced Pages would basically cease to exist anyway. :) TheGary (talk) 14:12, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- There seems to be a widespread misunderstanding. Rapture is not "the end of the world", it's "the beginning of the end." So the analysts need to determine if 3% of the population has suddenly gone missing. I wouldn't be surprised if Camping and his staff suddenly go missing, though. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 15:19, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- You are right. We still have five months. It may be safe to assume that Misplaced Pages is not going to be part of the Rapture, so we can go on until October 21. ;-) --Anna (talk) 15:24, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- If the Cubs have managed to win the National League pennant at that point, that will be a sure sign of the Apocalypse. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 16:28, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- You are right. We still have five months. It may be safe to assume that Misplaced Pages is not going to be part of the Rapture, so we can go on until October 21. ;-) --Anna (talk) 15:24, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- There seems to be a widespread misunderstanding. Rapture is not "the end of the world", it's "the beginning of the end." So the analysts need to determine if 3% of the population has suddenly gone missing. I wouldn't be surprised if Camping and his staff suddenly go missing, though. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 15:19, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
What about his radio stations?
I'd be curious to know what plans this guy has with his radio stations after May 21. It would not exactly comply with his beliefs to have anything in store to broadcast on May 22, would it? Or is he planning to carry on for the "unraptured" until October 21? Anyone happen to know (or happened to listen to his radio programs after the date has passed?). Just curious... --Anna (talk) 14:44, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
Come to think of it, he will probably have millions of new listeners on May 22, wondering about exactly this question. Have we all fallen into the trap of a gigantic advertising campaign? ;) --Anna (talk) 15:19, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- This has potential to go down in history with Evel Knievel's Snake River Canyon jump, and Geraldo Rivera's unsealing of Al Capone's vault. The difference is that Camping has done it twice now. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 17:41, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
Edit request from Oldgreycat, 21 May 2011
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The lede needs to change as it's clearly someone's opinion. I recommend returning to the original lede "...is a Christian radio broadcaster and president of Family Radio, a California-based religious broadcasting network that spans more than 150 outlets in the United States as well as a website."
Oldgreycat (talk) 14:51, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- Considering how many Christian leaders think he's full of baloney, "fringe" seems like an understatement. However, I removed it. :) ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 15:07, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
Liar and crap?
The article begins: "Harold Egbert Camping (born July 19, 1921) is a liar who says the world's going to end to make more money but is is a peice of crap."
This is neither an educated statement nor civilized. Regardless of one's opinion of the man, this looks a lot more like libel than academia and I feel has no place here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Srearnst (talk • contribs) 15:06, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- It has been taken care of. GB fan (talk) 15:09, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
Neutrality in lead section
"His followers—utterly unflagging in their loyalty and permanently brainwashed—eagerly await his new recalculation for the Rapture, as once again his predicted date has failed to produce any supernatural events whatsoever." Is it me, or is this not NPOV? ConconJondor talk 16:23, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- That's already been zapped. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 16:26, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- That said, I would be interested to know what effect the failure of his prediction has on his followers. Obviously we would need reliable sources for this. Blueboar (talk) 17:59, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
Idiot
fanatic, delirious idiot old man —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.31.156.104 (talk) 18:15, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, we got that bit. How can we add it to the article through WP:RS and WP:BLP constraints?. Pedro : Chat 20:45, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
"False Prophet"
A number of folks have added the pejorative "false prophet", which is a characterization most would agree with, and some sources have actually printed. A number of us have undone this edit. There's no way this passes NPOV. SJFriedl (talk) 18:58, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- Issue 1: The source is only a single apparent editorial.
- Issue 2: We're implying Misplaced Pages takes a side and endorses some people as "true" prophets.
So, certainly not in the form currently presented. --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 19:18, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- I agree the term "false prophet" should only be used in this article if sourced multiple times, as it means a lot more emotionally than "a prophet some of whose predictions have failed to occur", which in some form is appropriate to add, as its a more neutral statement of fact. WP cannot distinguish between true and false prophets, only between fulfilled and unfulfilled prophecies when taken literally.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 20:57, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
Offensive comments
There are currently some comments on this talk page that are more than pejorative. Most of us probably agree that this guy's teachings are pretty ridiculous. And everyone here has a right to their own personal opinion. But that is no reason to use downright insulting language here. Can we get rid of these comments in some way? --Anna (talk) 20:22, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- I've asked for page protection. In the interim, feel free to zap any comments that are purely BLP violations. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 21:10, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- I meant the talk page right here. There are comments here that, to me, seem inappropriate even for a talk page. Does the talk page get page protection too? Or is it o.k. to edit the talk page and delete other users' comments? --Anna (talk) 21:41, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- WP:BLP applies everywhere within Misplaced Pages. If the information is negative/contentious and unsourced, you can remove it from this or any page within wikipedia. GB fan (talk) 21:46, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- I meant the talk page right here. There are comments here that, to me, seem inappropriate even for a talk page. Does the talk page get page protection too? Or is it o.k. to edit the talk page and delete other users' comments? --Anna (talk) 21:41, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
- Biography articles of living people
- All unassessed articles
- B-Class biography articles
- B-Class biography (arts and entertainment) articles
- Unknown-importance biography (arts and entertainment) articles
- Arts and entertainment work group articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- B-Class Christianity articles
- Low-importance Christianity articles
- WikiProject Christianity articles