Talk:Kip McKean/Archive 1

Archive 1

Good work!

I have absolutely no interest in getting dragged into the multiple controversies that appear to swirl around this subject. Just let me say that this new version does indeed appear to conform much more closely to WP:NPOV, as well as to general Wikipedia standards for biography. I appreciate your taking the initiative. Pleather 17:43, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

"LA Letter"

This link [1] to an open letter by the Los Angeles ICOC makes various statements about the subject's relation to the church which seem significant enough to include here. Could someone more familiar with the matter add something to cover the dispute? -Will Beback 22:20, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

This is to Will Beback the poster of that link. I clicked on your link and it goes to the Los Angeles International Churches of Christ website but it does not go to any letter. I get an error message when I click your link. Qewr4231 (talk) 07:28, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Good Work?

I do not understand how you have the right to remove a biography which was painstakenly written by people who know McKean and interviewed him. When Mr. McKean saw this on Wikipedia, he was determined to influence his biography. He is still living. The utter removal of this detailed bio without discussion is vandalism. The individual who removed it has the right to their opinion, but we are talking about someone's public representation in a very public place. Good Work? I do not understand how this is good work. Good work would be to take the detailed material and rework it, not destroy it entirely. This article is still a stub. Jeremy Ciaramella 23:22, 15 September 2006 (UTC) (Please sign your posts, Jeffery! Thank you.) Pleather 18:56, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

• My name is Jeremy. Jeremy Ciaramella 23:22, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

I have the right to remove that text since it violates copyright, and we are not allowed to have copyrighted text without the correct permissions (you can read about it on Wikipedia:Copyright. This is definitely not vandalism (read WP:VAND for more info). Simply stating that you have the right to reproduce it here is not enough (everyone can say that). The work is not lost, because you can still get it on the site is was originally published, and from the history of the article on wikipedia (like here[2]). If you or anyone else are willing to put it back in a thoroughly rewritten form, or if you can make sure that you get the permission (following Wikipedia standards) to publish the previous version, then there is no problem. For the moment though, the text is a violation of Wikipedia policies. For the record, check out WP:OR, WP:V, WP:NPOV and Wikipedia:Autobiography, to make certain that even the rewritten text is acceptable according to all Wikipedia policies. People writing or influencing their own biography is usually a bad idea, and all texts on Wikipedia should be based on reliable, verifiable, external sources (external to Wikipedia, but also external (i.e. neutral) to the subject of the article). Fram 19:07, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

It might be useful to take note of the following passage from WP:AUTO: "Note that anything you submit can be edited by others. Several autobiographical articles have been a source of dismay to their original authors after a period of editing by the community, and in at least four instances have been listed for deletion by their original authors. In some cases the article is kept even if the original author requests otherwise. People are generally unable to determine whether they are themselves encyclopedic." Trying to be helpful here. --Pleather 19:29, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

• I've contacted permissions@wikipedia.org. I did read Wikipedia:Copyright and made the email request. I strongly disagree with your perspective on someone's biography being uninfluenced by them while they are living, or if it's Wikipedia's POV so be it. Mr. McKean was not the original author, but has labored to contribute significant facts to us (contributors to this article) regarding his life. We expected the material to be edited - not totally tossed out. We thought the community would refine the document here, as oppposed to throw our entire document out as unusable. There are many usable facts and elements to this persons life that make the bio much more interesting than the sparse material that is there now. Your note from WP:AUTO says "edited" - a swathing delete of over 95% of it seems a contradiction, and is sorely disappointing. As far as copyvio - I still don't get your point there. The source of the bio facts were Mr. McKean. How is our work a copyvio? We owned the source material ourselves that we drew from, as well as did our own interviewing with Mr. McKean. Who do you think owns the copyright to this material? It is not KipMcKean.com. That site has taken our content and republished it against our wishes and in a context contrary to our beliefs. Jeremy Ciaramella 23:22, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Jeremy, technically you aren't allowed to post anything that comes from original research. Thus, your owning of the source material you drew from, and your own interviewing of Mr. McKean, while an example of diligent work and commendable scholarship, is absoutely not appropriate as a foundation for contributions to this article. --Apostlemep12 15:53, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Apostlemep12 - where do the current facts come from in this article now? His children, his birthday, his family...did someone take someone else's word for it then? I see one of these facts referenced to an external source - no others about his early life and upbringing, his resignation and so on. They mention "family matters" and so on his resignation - that's not referenced. Also stating that Mr. Mckean is a "contraversial member of the Church of Christ" is a misnomer. Also - the three "neutral" links are not neutral at all, they are directly contradict his beliefs and what he stands for as an individual...these errors are not helpful in giving an accurate representation of Mr. Mckean. It is entirely appropriate to list these links however, it is the heading that they are put under.Jeremy Ciaramella 07:45, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Kip Mckean is a controversial figure. Many former members of Kip Mckean's organization believe Kip Mckean to be a cult leader. As a former member of the International Churches of Christ I can tell you that people are kept in secret about Kip Mckean's life and past. Only his part in founding the International Churches of Christ is mentioned. It's hard to tell if anything that Kip Mckean says about his own life is true or false. Most members never get to meet Kip Mckean and only see him in pictures, videos, and books. Qewr4231 (talk) 07:31, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Information on Kip Mckean

I posted information about Kip Mckean's daughter Olivia Mckean to the Kip Mckean page. I think this is impartial, relevant material about kip Mckean. Qewr4231 (talk) 23:28, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Just the facts ma'am. Just the facts Qewr4231 (talk) 23:33, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

That's all well and good, but those facts need to be backed up by a reliable source. rickross.com is not reliable enough to cite facts about the actions and words of a third party. You will need to find a reputable news source for this information. Kevin (talk) 23:36, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

The Rick A Ross Institure is a reliable source. All of the references on the Kip Mckean page go to International Churches of Christ websites:

1. ^ "Kip McKean.org » Biography of Kip McKean". http://www.kipmckean.org/. Retrieved 2008-09-02.
2. ^ tolc.org A Christian community falters - Loss of leader, governing body hurts group formed in Boston, by Farah Stockman, Boston Globe, 17 May 2003.
3. ^ Short history of the ICOC
4. ^ Smallest groups that current affiliated with Kip McKean and the "Portland movement"
5. ^ Kip McKean Starts The International Christian Churches
6. ^ "Portland Breaks with McKean. Extends the Hand of Fellowship to the ICOC". ICOC Hot News. http://www.icochotnews.com/?q=node/632. Retrieved 2008-08-29.

Those websites that I listed here are from the Kip Mckean page. These links are not neutral; they are all biased towards Kip Mckean and therefor the facts are questionable. If whoever wrote the page on Kip Mckean is allowed to use International Churches of Christ websites; which are definitely NOT reputable news sources; then the Rick A Ross institute is just fine as a source. The Rick A Ross institute is a far more reputable news source than the International Churches of Christ owned websites. Qewr4231 (talk) 08:58, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I think it's important to also mention kip's family. Kip's daughter left her father's church and is married and living in Belgium. Kip's Daughter and Kip do not keep in contact with one another. Qewr4231 (talk) 23:33, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Links

I add some links run by ex members of the ICC/ICOC and by unbiased groups that collect information on groups. This way the links present more of an unbiased stance. With only links going to Kip Mckean's church the article isn't being neutral; it's a pro-Kip Mckean stance. Wikipedia is for informational purposes only; not to get people to join an organization. Qewr4231 (talk) 08:10, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Nor is Wikipedia a link farm. I have stripped out all but his "official" website. – ukexpat (talk) 13:59, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Nor is Wikipedia pro Kip Mckean or anti Kip Mckean. Wikipedia is neutral. Kip Mckean's personal website includes a lot of propaganda and biased information. It is important for Wikipedia to portray all the facts; not just the facts that make Kip Mckean look good. Kip Mckean and his followers are an aggressive, get-in-your-face, angry bunch that are very competitive. Wikipedia's article on Kip Mckean needs to remain neutral. 99.165.93.117 (talk) 01:15, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but we don't make an article neutral by having equal numbers of links to sites with opposing views. WP:EL calls for a link to official sites, and other sites under a very limited set of criteria. Kevin (talk) 01:45, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

I agree that the Wikipedia page on Kip Mckean is biased. The Wikipedia page on Kip Mckean contains mostly pro Kip Mckean based information. The page is full of Kip Mckean's propaganda and Mckean's biased information. All facts pertaining to Kip Mckean's life should be on Kip Mckean's Wikipedia page; not just the facts that make Kip Mckean look good. This article needs to be neutral not pro Kip Mckean. ICOC official websites are nothing but ICOC propaganda. I agree with the above post in which is stated: "Kip Mckean and his followers are an aggressive, get-in-your-face, angry bunch that are very competitive." Qewr4231 (talk) 07:25, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Controversy section needs to be added

This Kip McKean article needs a controversy subsection. He was forced to resign from the Parent church ICOC, and many published articles accusing his Church 'City of Angels' as a cult. Leaving this out is not doing justice. College Watch (talk) 21:37, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

I agree that more needs to be mentioned about Kip Mckean post ICOC. The ICOC has been splintered into two separate movements: One that continues what Kip Mckean started but repackaged in a new way and one that Kip Mckean currently leads. Qewr4231 (talk) 23:47, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Where are the facts?

The section "From Gainesville to the Boston Church of Christ" has no mention of Kip Mckean being expelled from the mainline Churches of Christ. Qewr4231 (talk) 02:39, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Links

Some of the reference links are dead links Qewr4231 (talk) 15:59, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Why does this charlatan even have a wiki entry

He is no one famous and having an entry for him violates about half a dozen of the wikipedia policies of what constitutes notable people. Plus, it is strongly biased in favor of him so obviously written by his cult followers. This is ludicrous. This page should be deleted or at the least expanded to include some true information about him. There are many sources that independently of each other, state that he is a deranged cult leader who has been exploiting peoples' weaknesses and shortcomings for his own personal gain and shameless ego. Last I looked his kids go/went to high end private schools while he is preaching the word of god and charity to his followers so they keep pouring more money into his pockets. You want to put such a worthless individual on the page, at least be true about him. CarrieBee (talk) 20:45, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

I agree with you. Qewr4231 (talk) 20:01, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

File:Kipmckean123preaches.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Kipmckean123preaches.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 13:14, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

I support the deletionQewr4231 (talk) 20:11, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

File:Kip McKean preaching.jpeg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Kip McKean preaching.jpeg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 23:41, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

I support the deletionQewr4231 (talk) 20:11, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Charles H. "Chuck" Lucas

I'm concerned about the material we've added about Charles H. "Chuck" Lucas. It appears to be based solely on one book: Rick Bauer, Toxic Christianity, Freedom House Ministries, Bowie, MD, 1996. The book does not have an ISBN, unlike most books published in the US. and I can't find anything about the Freedom House Ministries of Bowie, MD. Because the charges are so serious and the source is so poor, I'm going to revert the material for now. Let's see if we can't find more and better sources before restoring it.   Will Beback  talk  07:43, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

The following US Federal Censuses:

1920 Federal Census Series: T625 Roll: 420 Page: 30 (Hartford, Adams County, Indiana) Thomas J. (number 4) with wife Clara and son Gorman

1910 Federal Census Series: T624 Roll: 338 Page: 29 (Hartford, Adams County, Indiana) same as above, but with father John W. (number 3) too etc.

these are traced back like so, as well —Preceding unsigned comment added by FEastman (talk • contribs) 15:40, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

I found this on Amazon: Toxic Christianity: The International Church of Christ/Boston Movement Cult Paperback – January 1, 1994. Product Details Paperback Publisher: Freedom House Ministries (1994) Language: English ASIN: B0006RKGLA

http://www.amazon.com/Toxic-Christianity-International-Church-Movement/dp/B0006RKGLA

Qewr4231 (talk) 20:08, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

International Church of Christ/ICOC in the News www.cultsoncampus.com, 30 July 2001 [cached] Responding to the International Churches of Christ/Boston Movement by Rick Bauer, former Evangelist (1975-1991) Rick is a former Evangelist and teacher for the International Churches of Christ/Boston Church of Christ and a fifteen-year member of the Discipling Movement.In this, he gives his reasons for leaving the ICOC, and tells why he came to oppose the group he spent so many years helping build. RightCyberUp: Kip McKean, a Cult Leader Profile (ICC, ICOC) www.rightcyberup.org, 10 Sept 2010 [cached] Former Boston Church of Christ leader Rick Bauer writes of McKean disgracing a senior leader in meetings: ... (14) Rick Bauer, Toxic Christianity: The International Churches of Christ/Boston Movement Cult , Freedom House Ministries, Bowie, MD, 1994. "Toxic Christianity," or God's modern-day movement? www.rickross.com, 20 Nov 2010 [cached] Rick Bauer, a 15-year member of ICOC, turned his experiences into a book called Toxic Christianity (1994). He presents compelling evidence that some ICOC disciplers have revealed "sins and other embarrassing information" to leaders who use the information "for the purposes of controlling the behaviors of members. http://www.zoominfo.com/p/Rick-Bauer/2788243

Qewr4231 (talk) 20:15, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Claimed descent from Signer of the Declaration of Independence Thomas McKean

Since no Thomas Wayne McKean, which is also the name of the father of the subject of this article, appears in the index of the published Thomas McKean genealogies, I decided to research the claim. I do not know how to cite and include the materials that disprove Kip McKean's claim, but I will write what I can here so that, I hope, someone better familiar with Wikipedia can cite them correctly in the article.

Kip's McKean's paternal ancestry
1. Thomas Wayne McKean II (aka Kip) born 1953 Adams County, Indiana
2. Thomas Wayne McKean (U.S. Navy Read Admiral and physician) born 1928 Adams County, Indiana
3. Gorman F. McKean (physician) born 28 Aug. 1904, died 8 Jan. 1988 Longwood Florida (wife Elmira Staley)
4. Thomas Jeremiah McKean (physician) born April 1873, died 15 Sep. 1947 (wife Clara Yake)
5. John W. McKean born 17 Feb. 1843 in, died 21 Oct. 1928 (wife Lydia Stalter)
6. Thomas (Gerard or Jeremiah) McKean (physician) (wife Mary Hendricks)
7. Thomas Gerard McKean (minister, immigrant from Ireland)

Below are the sources which I hope someone who is Wikipedia savvy will cite and add to the article to refute McKean's claim. So far, I have only cited a so-so web page that lists the descendants of the Declaration Signer Thomas McKean.

Thomas Wayne McKean, Sr. (number 2 above) http://www.fhfoundation.com/SHARES/board.html

Literary source, page 202, describes the family of Thomas McKean of Dublin, Ireland through a descendant of his who came to the United States, Thomas Gerard McKean (number 7 above) http://books.google.com/books?id=6TU2AAAAMAAJ&pg=PA202&lpg=PA202&dq=thomas+mckean+%22mary+hendricks%22&source=bl&ots=186LuUYG3Z&sig=rgrKXyqMgV0yKWDOJLTq6I0YlRE&hl=en&ei=WK29TKmbPJT0tgPev63IDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBYQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=thomas%20mckean%20%22mary%20hendricks%22&f=false

Well-cited Rootweb source follows the descent of John W. (number 5) above, from Thomas (number 6), the additional citations on this page are important because they refer to the indexes of actual records held by the state archives http://wc.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?op=GET&db=mpearce&id=I21870

Published death notice of Thomas Jeremiah McKean (number 4) in JAMA Volume 135, Number 13 (published 29 Nov. 1947) giving date of death, location, medical school information http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/reprint/135/13/863.pdf

More information of Dr. Thomas J. McKean (number 4) http://ajph.aphapublications.org/cgi/reprint/22/10/1121.pdf

And same http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1529439/pdf/amjphnation00995-0111.pdf

Gorman McKean's mother-in-law's obituary (Mrs. George Staley) shows his wife was Elmira Staley and may be matched with the Rootsweb http://www.kinexxions.com/obits/obits-s3.htm

It should be noted that Kip Mckean makes up biographical information on himself when he talks about his own life. A lot of the stuff Kip Mckean claims is true is simply untrue. I know this because I know Kip Mckean and I was a leader in the ICOC and have since left the pyramid scheme organization. Qewr4231 (talk) 08:57, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Qewr4231, if you know him and you were a leader than pt that information out there so others who were with you can validate your claim. Ronald C Harding 08:40, 26 September 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ronaldcharding (talk • contribs)

It must be said

It must be said that Kip Mckean is a cult leader. Kip Mckean was banished from the mainline Churches of Christ for his cult-like thinking. Kip Mckean started a cult called the International Churches of Christ in Boston. Together with Al & Gloria Baird, Bob & Pat Gempel, and his wife Elena Mckean they embarked down a road of craziness and insanity. In 2005-ish the leaders at the top got tired of sharing the monies so Kip Mckean left and formed his own movement. At this time the ICOC is fractured into 2 or 3 different movements which are all pyramid schemes intended to make the leaders at the top rich. Boy the devil is loving this.Qewr4231 (talk) 18:12, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

This is a talk page for technical issues. There's plenty of bashing sites to say all of the things you want to say. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ronaldcharding (talk • contribs) 19:37, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Rewrite

I've rewritten this article to make it conform to the idea of a simple biography. Topics such as the controversial nature of Kip's teachings, controversy surrounding ICOC practices, and of recent events within the ICOC seem best suited to remain at the article on the ICOC.

I am the webmaster for kipmckean.com. If you have any questions, I'd be happy to comment. The website is NOT run or associated with Kip Mckean or the Portland Church. I was a member of Kip's church for 14 years. Through my involvement and my success in leaving the organization, I am now convinced that the church I was involved with is a cult. I run the kipmckean website in order to allow people who are trying to get information about Kip to have access to all information about him. I also spend quite a bit of time analyzing his sermons and quotes and comparing them to his teachings of the past. He currently claims he is teaching a new message. I can show that he's not changed at all. I am compelled to educate people about Kip and the ICOC. If you have further comment, let me know. Jenchambers 16:40, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

I have added a prominent link to the ICOC article as it is difficult to understand the creator without first understanding that which he created. In this case they are irrevocably intertwined and those interested should read both articles. -DCM- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.149.13.10 (talk) 19:39, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

In response to Jen Chambers I would like to say that I am also an ex member of the International Churches of Christ and consider Kip Mckean to be a cult leader. Qewr4231 (talk) 07:25, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

The site has now been re-written from extensive research and countless first hand accounts of the events surrounding Kip's life. Ronald C Harding 08:23, 26 September 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ronaldcharding (talk • contribs)

So this means you do not have a neutral point of view https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:POV and you have a conflict of interest; that is you are pro Kip Mckean. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:COI It seems that you are (1) advertising Kip Mckean's website and advertising and promoting the International Christian Churches and (2) putting down and/or criticizing Jen Chambers and her website. Qewr4231 (talk) 23:47, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

kipmckean.com

Does anyone know if this is an official website of McKean? The work is all unsigned and it's hard to tell if it is McKean or someone else writing it. -Willmcw 23:35, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

I wouldn't assume that it is him, I would look for the Portland Church of Christ's website, he is currently the leader there.

What is the source for these assertions?

• Most in the ICOC no longer consider...
• ...the church in Los Angeles does not view...

Can we get some specific links to support these? Thanks, -Willmcw 21:05, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

If we can't find sources for these assertions then they should be removed. -Willmcw 06:14, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

The persons who added content before were not McKean. The significant amount of content that I have added recently is from McKean's perspective and is much more Biographical.CdHess 15:05, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Kip Mckean's official website is http://www.kipmckean.org/ ; http://www.kipmckean.com/ is a website owned by an ex member of the International Churches of Christ. http://www.kipmckean.com/ also has input from many ex members of the International Churches of Christ from around the world. Qewr4231 (talk) 07:23, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Because of flagarant copyright and universal domain registration agreement violations kipmckean.com was taken from Jen Chambers and released to Kip and I. I am the webmaster and the one publishing his biography. I can confirm it is as of the official website Kip McKean. Her new website is appropriately called www.spiritualpornography.com. But all of it's links have been removed by bluehost

File:Spiritualpornography.png

spiritualpornography.com's links all say removed

Ronald C Harding 08:21, 26 September 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ronaldcharding (talk • contribs)

I don't understand. KipMckean.com was taken from Jen Chambers? And now she has a website called spiritualpornography.com? I emailed kipmckean.com and was told that this was a website run by an ex-member of the ICOC. This is very confusing. Let me post the same reaction that I had to Ronald Charding and Jen Chambers and kipmckean.com once I read posts by Ronald Charding:

So this means you do not have a neutral point of view https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:POV and you have a conflict of interest; that is you are pro Kip Mckean. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:COI It seems that you are (1) advertising Kip Mckean's website and advertising and promoting the International Christian Churches and (2) putting down and/or criticizing Jen Chambers and her website. I really have no idea who Jen Chambers or Ronald Charding are. Qewr4231 (talk) 23:52, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Stop With The Opinions

I'm not going to go against McKean nor for him but this talk page shouldn't include personal opinions about him (whether good or bad). The talk page should address technical problems and not personal opinions, there are otherplace for that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.226.69.64 (talk) 22:24, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

I agree with this. The article should be encyclopedic in quality. Most of the information which seems to have been put in the Kip Mckean Wikipedia article seems to have been put there by Kip Mckean himself. As someone who personally knew Kip Mckean in the past, I don't know if Kip Mckean is telling the truth about himself or if Kip Mckean is telling lies about himself. The article's bias and neutrality is severely compromised. Qewr4231 (talk) 19:40, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Qewr4231, if you want this article to be Encyclopedia in quality than stop adding your opinions and unsourced information. If all your allegations are so proper and the general view in the world is consistent with your statements then you hsould have no problem finding and adding valid sources. You question those of us who are associated with Kip and are working to allow him to have a level of influence that is acceptable, per Wikipedia standards. But the ridiculousness of your assertions make the neutrality equally as compromised. You've removed exact quotes with specific original sources and called these things false because they don't do with your agenda paint a false picture of Kip as a cult leader. It is possible to acknowledge those accusations and acknowledge Kip and our churches own view of him without putting neutrality in compromise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ronaldcharding (talk • contribs) 19:57, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Qewr4231, Ronaldcharding is absolutely right. You claim that those who are associated with Kip are automatically being biased, even though we provide our writings with references. But you yourself are a victim of bias as you see Kip only as a villian and thus you are not at all neutral. Please before you begin bashing all we write: stop, open a new tab, and write what you had to say elsewhere and not on this talk page. Stop With The Opinions! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.194.216.135 (talk) 02:57, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

I can provide hundreds of articles, organizations, opinions, videos, and writings from major news organizations, major Christian organizations, universities, and those who investigate cults that say that Kip Mckean is a cult leader; the cult leader that founded two cults: the ICOC and the International Christian Churches. —Qewr4231 (talk) 10:36, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

BLP concerns

Hi, in this edit I removed the statement "Being a 'discipler' also took its toll and amongst his disciples was Bob Shaheen who worked for the arms trafficker Adnan Khashoggi." as unsourced and of questionable purpose or suitability. It sounds like the contributor is trying to suggest shadiness by association. This is a BLP, so the threshold for inclusion of potentially controversial material is higher. Assuming this sort of content were appropriate for the article, and superficially I don't think it is, the content would certainly have to be sourced. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:01, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Who is Bob Shaheen or Adnan Khashoggi? What do these individuals have to do with Kip Mckean? Qewr4231 (talk) 20:19, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Qewr3231 There are links above to articles on each person, and a link to the diff in which user Gnomeoftherock linked Shaheen to Kip McKean. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:08, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

controversy mention needed

Kip McKean is principally known by a majority of people for his reputation as an authoritarian cult leader, evidenced by many comments above. The individuals Ron Harding and Jeremy Ciaramella, editors above, WORK FOR KIP and therefore their contributions CANNOT be considered objective. Although Kip is a living individual, his reputation is very widely known, and mentioning the controversy in neutral terms can not be considered libel. The article, as currently written, is a preened version, cleaned up by Kip's fanatical followers and employees (see Ron Harding and Jeremy Ciaramella above). The most recent edits to remove the Controversy section were made by user TheRedPenOfDoom, who is currently under warning on his talk page for vandalous edits to other pages. Leaving out the controversy information in this page is misleading - the controversy of his alleged cult-leader status must be mentioned to be truthful and accurate.

(Ron Harding works for Kip leading a church of his in Washington DC, and Jeremy Ciaramella works for Kip leading a church of his in Phoenix, AZ, both facts which are very quickly verifiable by a Google search.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.198.105.14 (talk) 22:18, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Information deleted from Kip McKean page - completely relevant, and accurately sourced - The following is information that has been deleted multiple times from the Kip McKean page, for supposedly not being properly sourced. Sourcing is included from a printed reference book from a reputable publisher with the ability to read it online immediately and for free. I told I was in an edit war and to bring the information here to the talk page, where my previous comments on the issue had been deleted by the same editor who originally was deleting my edits. Read up the page to see many, many comments supporting the inclusion of this information, and the illogic of including only Kip McKeans "official" information, and not any reference to any opposition viewpoints. If there is a formatting issue or something please help me to fix it so this important information can be included, or tell me how to modify it to allow inclusion, or give some reasonable reason as to why it should not be included.

Cult Controversy Kip McKean has long been embroiled in controversy and accusations by his detractors. The Encyclopedia of Cults, Sects, and New Religions included the following information: "[Kip McKean's churches have] become the subject of considerable controversy, centering mainly on the level of commitment that is expected of church members and the authority the church exercises in members' lives" and "Numerous universities around the country either restrict or bar movement activities on their campuses." The Encyclopedia of Cults, Sects, and New Religions, page 426, published in 2002, Prometheus Books, By James R. Lewis.

1) we dont do "controversy" sections, see WP:STRUCTURE and WP:Controversy sections

2) the source talks about the church not the subject of this article and is thus inappropriate for the article and for the talk page. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 00:08, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Your reasoning is that the article should not include cited information about "the church" because it is the page of "the church leader", who is known solely for being the leader of the church. If we should not have any information about the church, why don't we eliminate all of the rest of the (positive propaganda-style) information about the church that is contained here in the article? Not much sense in having it both ways.140.198.105.26 (talk) 18:21, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

• Comment: Taking into consideration the unavailability to online access to the source given by IP, I find it difficult to make a comment on above proposed possibly disputed content (I agree, its my problem if I do not have access to offline sources). But if it is exactly what IP is saying, I do not see a reason for not including it within article. Could be re-written to comply withWP:BLP? The article is about Kip McKean. It includes stuffs related to him. As there is no standalone article on Kip McKean's Churches, why it could not be included here? 2 lines? The source given talks about Kip McKean's churches not just Churches and this is why it is related. And IP, if you suspect contributors of the article not being neutral and editing in favor of the subject of the article. You can WP:Request for comments to get opinions from outside editors. Anupmehra -Let's talk! 00:24, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

And including few lines based on reliable sources would not disrupt structure of this highly positively overwhelmed article. Anupmehra -Let's talk! 00:32, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

there is an article about Kip's churches International Churches of Christ which is where the claims about the churches belong.-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 01:04, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

And yes, this article is far from good, but there is no reason to make it worse by violating BLP. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 01:06, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Ah! Thank you, It belongs to there. IP, I would request you to make/propose changes there (International Churches of Christ). Anupmehra -Let's talk! 01:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

I am staring to think that TheRedPenOfDoom is a member of the International Churches of Christ (Kip Mckean's former church) or the International Christian Churches (Kip Mckean's current church)Qewr4231 (talk) 23:04, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Found an article on a cult website about the ICC and Kip Mckean

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Let’s define some words.

“Cult” from the Latin cultus meaning a group with devotion to or worship of someone or deity usually a god. Most cults claim they are worshipping God. A Christian cult claims to worship and be devoted to Christ.

(Redacted)

http://biblebasedmindcontrolcults.wordpress.com/2013/04/11/kip-mckean-and-his-international-christian-church-is-it-a-cult/

Qewr4231 (talk) 06:07, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Qewr4231, please don't copy/paste content like this anywhere on Wikipedia. Fair use is one thing, but this content is presumed copyrighted and we can't just take someone else's entire copyrighted content and store it here. That said, I also don't understand your reason for putting it here, so if you could clarify that, it would be appreciated. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:34, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Someone redacted the article that I posted here, to make it sound pro-Kip Mckean. Perhaps it was Cyphoidbomb. Qewr4231 (talk) 23:07, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

do not make accusations about other editors without providing evidence. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 02:54, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Qewr4231 - I made no attempt to disguise my redaction--you copy/pasted content that is presumably protected by copyright. I redacted, and clearly explained my redaction in my edit summary. Your suggestion that I am pro-Mckean, is misguided. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:09, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

^^^^(arrows pointing up) The person admitted to redacting the article. Qewr4231 (talk) 22:32, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Qewr4231, Article talk pages are intended for discussing improvements to the article. If you're only here to chatter, your posts will wind up being deleted as well, per Wikipedia's talk page guidelines. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:45, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

What I am saying is this: The International Churches of Christ Wikipedia article, the International Christian Churches Wikipedia article, and the Kip Mckean Wikipedia article all have point of view and conflict of interest issues. Disciples of the ICOC and of Kip Mckean are using these pages to put a pro-ICOC and pro-Kip Mckean spin on these organizations in order to use them to make them look good. Qewr4231 (talk) 22:50, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Reverted edits by JamieBrown2011

I have reverted the bulk of these edits made by JamieBrown2011.

• In the first edit, sourced content was removed with the edit summary "nothing to do with MCKean or the TIME mag article". The content was absolutely supported by the Time reference, and serves to explain the church that he led. Since McKean is notable for leading that church, we should have a clear understanding of the church. Further, the edit removed the source that supports the remaining content in the paragraph, which harms the article.
• In the second edit, the user removed content with the explanation, "removed material that had nothing to do with McKean or his resignation". Not entirely accurate, as the content does describe what McKean did post-retirement, and transitions us into the next section, on International Christian Churches. If the problem is that it doesn't belong in the retirement section (which is debatable), then the content could be moved into the next section rather than being deleted.
• In the third edit, the user removed congregation numbers on the basis that the source didn't meet WP:RS, which I'll yield to, though data like that could also be handled with "the church claims to have a membership of NNNN congregants."
• In the fourth edit, the user removed sourced content that speaks about the fate of the ICOC's central leadership. While not about McKean himself, it's brief, and paints a picture of what happened to the church that made McKean notable. The edit also removed a reference that is used elsewhere, which harms the article. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:37, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Should the Kip Mckean article mention this tactic that Kip Mckean uses and tells his followers to use?

As a former member of the International Churches of Christ when Kip Mckean was the leader of the ICOC, Kip often told us to use the definition of the word cult when someone calls the ICOC a cult. By using the definition of the word cult, as suggested by Kip Mckean, ICOC members would supposedly be proving that all Christian churches are cults. Qewr4231 (talk) 21:16, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

It is unclear what you are proposing for inclusion. If you are suggesting that we include something that Kip McKean used to tell you when you were a member of the church, then no, as that would contravene Wikipedia's policy against original research. Content in the article must be supported by reliable sources, such as mainstream newspapers, magazines, books, and so on. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:27, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Author

@Cyphoidbomb, you have used a reference to justify authorship that is a little unclear. You state: "He has also written First Principles Study Series" Having read the link I fail to see any mention of or it's connection to the "First Principles Study Series"?

2ndly, you have inserted a sentence in another section that talks about after McKeans resignation the dissolution of the central leadership of the ICOC, I fail to see the connection to this article. Why is that in an article about McKean? What is the significance of that?JamieBrown2011 (talk) 13:44, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, the reference supporting First Principles highlights Kip McKean's name in yellow along with the title. The author uses McKean's work as a reference. It's in the footnote. But even beyond that, a quick Google search turns up several mentions of this work, so it's pretty clear that the work exists, and that McKean wrote it. The work itself, mention, mention, mention. You expressed doubt that McKean had ever written anything, and I think I have satisfactorily demonstrated that he did. It's not a controversial fact, so it doesn't require much. To address your second question, I reinstated that content because I didn't feel your edit summary provided a sufficient reason for removing the sourced content. In addition, your removal of the content left an orphaned reference, which AnomieBOT had to fix. Your edit summary stated, "This has nothing to do with McKean's personal page." It was unclear to me what you were talking about or what your specific objection was. I think it warrants mention that the central leadership was dissolved after he retired, since the section is covering the final days of McKean's involvement with the ICOC and that statement seems a reasonable end piece to the summary of the events. Oh, and I just noticed that I already explained this in a previous section. Please see Talk:Kip McKean#Reverted edits by JamieBrown2011. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:15, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

OK, fair enough, those both seem like reasonable points.JamieBrown2011 (talk) 16:34, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

References

Reliable Source

I am trying to figure out what constitutes a reliable source. Would something like this be a reliable source?

A CHURCH OF CHRIST OR CULT OF CASH Critics slam group as manipulative BY Dave Saltonstall , Daily News , Staff Writer NEW YORK DAILY NEWS Sunday, October 22, 2000, 12:00 AM http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/news/church-christ-cult-cash-critics-slam-group-manipulative-article-1.887922

Qewr4231 (talk) 21:27, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Where can I find out more information on reliable sources? Qewr4231 (talk) 21:28, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Would this be a reliable source?

Church's Practices Criticized -- Seattle Church Of Christ Too Controlling, Some Say By Lee Moriwaki, Susan Gilmore The Seattle Times (Winner of nine Pulitzer prizes) http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19930711&slug=1710557 Qewr4231 (talk) 21:33, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

The place to learn about reliable sources is linked at least three times on this talk page, and at least six times on your own talk page. It is here at Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. To see if a specific resource is considered reliable, you will need to search the archives at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard and read the discussions. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:08, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

I am looking at this definition: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources#Definition_of_a_source

It says:

"The word "source" when citing sources on Wikipedia has three related meanings:

the piece of work itself (the article, book); the creator of the work (the writer, journalist), and the publisher of the work (for example, Random House or Cambridge University Press)."

Henry Kriete and his wife Marilyn Kriete are the authors of the "Henry Kriete Letter" which brought to light many abuses in the ICOC. Would Henry Kriete and Henry Kriete's personal website be the authoritative source on the Henry Kriete letter? Why, when I tried posting Henry and Marilyn Kriete's own words from their own personal website about the Henry Kriete letter, do people say that it's not a proper source? Aren't Henry and Marilyn Kriete the authoritative source of the "Henry Kriete Letter?" After all Henry and Marilyn Kriete wrote the letter and are the authors of that letter. Qewr4231 (talk) 23:36, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Biased or Opinionated Sources WP:BIASED

"Wikipedia articles are required to present a neutral point of view. However, reliable sources are not required to be neutral, unbiased, or objective. Sometimes non-neutral sources are the best possible sources for supporting information about the different viewpoints held on a subject.

Common sources of bias include political, financial, religious, philosophical, or other beliefs. While a source may be biased, it may be reliable in the specific context. When dealing with a potentially biased source, editors should consider whether the source meets the normal requirements for reliable sources, such as editorial control and a reputation for fact-checking. Editors should also consider whether the bias makes it appropriate to use in-text attribution to the source, as in "Feminist Betty Friedan wrote that...", "According to the Marxist economist Harry Magdoff...," or "Conservative Republican presidential candidate Barry Goldwater believed that..."."

I think some of the sources that people are disregarding as unreliable may in fact be reliable as Wikipedia states on it's reliable sources page. Biased or opinionated sources are accepted by Wikipedia as long as they meet "editorial control and a reputation for fact-checking." A person can't argue that a source is not reliable simply because the source is biased or opinionated. Biased and opinionated sources are acceptable according to Wikipedia policy. It would seem that sources biased against or opinionated against the ICOC/ICC/Kip Mckean are acceptable as long as they meet "the normal requirements for reliable sources, such as editorial control and a reputation for fact-checking." Qewr4231 (talk) 23:51, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

See also WP:UNDUE and WP:FRINGE as previously noted. And this sort of "discovery" of what constitutes a reliable source is better suited for an environment like the Wikipedia Help Desk or the Wikipedia Teahouse where other editors can help you learn how to use Wikipedia per your schedule, rather than here. There are more resources available to you in these other venues than here, and we've been going in circles here for what, 2 years now? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 07:59, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

I would like to propose adding some information about Kip Mckean

Thinly disguised soapboxing --NeilN talk to me 19:56, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

The ICOC has been the subject of much criticism while Kip Mckean was its leader. The Seattle Times, a newspaper based in Seattle, Washington that has won nine Pulitzer prizes, featured an article on the Seattle Church of Christ calling the Seattle Church of Christ too controlling. Church's Practices Criticized -- Seattle Church Of Christ Too Controlling, Some Say Even the New York Daily News has reported that critics of the International Churches of Christ are calling the International Churches of Christ manipulative. A CHURCH OF CHRIST OR CULT OF CASH Critics slam group as manipulative A Lawsuit was filed against the International Church of Christ in 2005 by Jack and Kay Pelham in Nashville, Tennessee alleging that the International Church of Christ has a pattern of "widespread fraud, misrepresentation, and deceit in the solicitation of funds through coercion and false advertising." Further, the Pelham's claim that funds marked as charitable donations to the poor were diverted and used by high ranking ICOC leaders as personal income. Pelham Lawsuit Last, but not least, there are the admissions by ICOC leaders themselves: “Appearances and real issues of greed have now caused thousands to stumble and question our spirituality.” Henry Kriete Letter — Spring 2003 Henry Kriete on the greed amongst ICOC leaders “Financially over-extending the church” Toronto Apology Letter — April 9, 2003 Toronto Church of Christ Letter “Also in regard to finances we want to apologize to you for the fact that money was not always spent wisely.” Boston Apology Letter – March 16, 2003 Boston Church of Christ Apology “Not protecting the churches in San Diego and the Southwest. These churches have been incredibly sacrificial. We have sent hundreds of people as well as millions of dollars to support missions and ministries around the world. However, our churches have been hurt so that others could be built up. We have lacked people and funds for our teen, campus, singles and other ministries.” Guillermo Adame Letter – Monday, April 14, 2003 Guillermo Adame Letter “The sin was compounded by what were at times unreasonable budget increases that should have been prevented by better planning.” Los Angeles Apology Letter — Feb 28, 2003 Los Angeles Church of Christ Apology Letter “Coercive giving is practiced, wide-scale. Of course there are may sincere and generous disciples who love to give, but the fact remains, our entire scheme for collecting the contribution is not based on the heart, or about love offerings, or true concern about the spiritual impact our system of ‘getting’ has on the rank and file Christian. That is not what is most important. Accountability, intense scrutiny and follow up and man made pressures are the order of the day. When a Christian is cajoled into a ‘multiple’, tracked down for their tithe, categorized on official spreadsheets for everyone to know so that sector leaders ‘can be on top’ – all to maintain budgets that we have created, this is coercive.” Henry Kriete Letter — Spring 2003 Henry Kriete Letter Kip Mckean has now left the ICOC and started his own church called the International Christian Churches, but many people say Kip Mckean has not changed at all since his days as leader of the Interntional Churches of Christ. The evidence speaks for itself. As leader of the International Christian Churches Kip Mckean purchased a luxury condo worth $650,000. Kip Mckean owns a condo worth $650,000 According to the company that manages the luxury condos www.azzurra-delrey.com, the combination of maintenance fees and property taxes alone would be close to $3,000 per month. A former leader in Kip Mckeans International Christian Churches had the following to say: "By this method, I can responsibly estimate that Kip and Elena McKean together cost the church somewhere between $150,000 and $200,000 per year. Which, for business leaders, would not be unreasonable. And yet for the church Jesus established, completely, utterly out of line . . . While living in Los Angeles and attending the church, I managed to get by just fine while earning less than $40k a year, giving close to 25% of my income to the church, paying down thousands in student loans and saving up other thousands in my rainy day fund. (All without a penny of assistance from government, family, friends, or anyone else.)" Ex leader in the International Christian Churches Qewr4231 (talk) 09:34, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Website link

www.kipmckean.org does not exist. I think the website is www.kipmckean.com Qewr4231 (talk) 12:07, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

•  Fixed - New comments go at the bottom of the page, which is where I have moved this discussion. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 12:41, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Some of the info in the article is outdated

Perhaps the section on the ICC and Kip Mckean needs to be updated? The information about the number of churches in the ICC comes from 2015. Qewr4231 (talk) 21:09, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

You're more than welcome to look for reliable sources and bring them here. This is a volunteer project, after all. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:00, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

I was able to find something after searching. There are almost 60 locations of the ICC listed here: http://www.usd21.org/index.html The website says copyright 2016.

The Early Life and Family Section Has No References

It has no references? Qewr4231 (talk) 21:11, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

As noted above, you are welcome to find references. Complaining about the lack of references doesn't typically produce a result. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:02, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Citations

This article is marked with a disclaimer stating that this article relies mostly on primary source cites. After going through them, only 5ish of the 22 cites are from the ICC. Would you all agree to remove that marker?

I think at least half of the citations are from Kip Mckean, the ICC, or the ICOC (Kip Mckean's former movement). I can probably research the citations and prove this, but that's a lot of work and I don't want to. Qewr4231 (talk) 07:32, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

The Entry Needs More Information

The entry needs more information about Kip Mckean. It is far from complete. Qewr4231 (talk) 20:19, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Deletion Conversation

I support the deletion of the Kip Mckean wikipedia article. I just have no idea how to voice my support for deletion. Qewr4231 (talk) 01:59, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Fyi to future readers, the result of the Icc, McKean and affiliated page deletion nominations due to the utilization of solely primary sources was rejected for 2 reasons. First, the concept of presumed accuracy for non-controversial topics such as church bios and second, because Thomas is not the leader of a small, autonomous, local church. On a side note, while the page indeed lacks sources, it appears much improved. I am satisfied with it's current status for the most part. Coachbricewilliams28 (talk) 21:56, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Kip McKean Pressured Mom to Not Tell Police Her 3 Year Old Was Molested by ICOC; 9 Years Later, America's Most Wanted Helped Capture

"The Abuse and Torture of Jane Roe 8"

It does not get much worse than this.

As detailed in the court documents’ text included below, a three-year-old girl was sexually molested by her Kingdom Kids teacher while at a midweek service of the Los Angeles International Church of Christ.

Multiple ICOC leaders, including Kip McKean himself, pressured the girl’s mother (apparently a paid ICOC staff member no less) to not report the child molester to the police.

You know, because it would “hurt the church.”

As a result of Kip’s pressure, and the pressure of other powerful ICOC figures who were categorically under Kip’s influence and direction, this child molester was never reported and therefore walked free.

Since was not turned over to the police as required by law, he was free to continue to molest many, many other children, in the same ministry of the LA ICOC, in other cities in California, and later in several other states.

In fact, he became such a notorious criminal that he was actually featured on the TV show America’s Most Wanted, which helped lead to his capture.

This man, a “well-liked” member of the ICOC, was convicted of child molestation in three different states in addition to the crimes he had previously committed in California.

He abused countless victims over a period of nine years between when he molested that three-year-old at an LA ICOC midweek service and when he was ultimately caught.

Several mothers reported to ICOC leadership that this same man had molested their daughters. However, he was allowed to escape and travel to other cities and states to continue abusing.

He is now serving 40 years of hard labor, the maximum sentence in Louisiana.

And "Dr" Kip McKean, the guy who helped him avoid being turned over to the police way back at the beginning?

(Note that the court documents contain accusations of multiple instances where Kip intervened to protect sexual predators from prosecution by the police, over a period spanning decades.)

Oddly enough, Kip is a free man, up front at church every week, being paid very well to talk to people about righteousness and God.

https://www.exicc.org/2023/02/kip-mckean-pressured-mom-to-not-tell.html?fbclid=IwAR0LRJJjtHJf-IqwYdirmM3YQweH5iQUJL8Tjfk-Dzp99L7C9GAdnFkEqPU 2600:1700:4260:35D0:B078:B4AA:7152:9157 (talk) 04:49, 21 June 2023 (UTC)