Talk:Hyung Jin Moon

Treason and Insurrection

Hyung Jin Moon was at the Jan. 6, 2021, terrorist insurrection of the U.S. Capitol. I think this needs to be part of the article. Moon and his followers aren't just insane cultists--they're traitors. Source: https://www.dcreport.org/2021/08/04/good-way-to-die-the-moonies-and-the-jan-6-insurrection/

Self published sources?

True. A couple of the sources were by Unification Church members, mainly because they are the people most interested in Hyung Jin Nim. I don't think this makes them self-published. It would be fine to use information from a Catholic publication on the pope for instance. I think Hyung Jin's notability is established by the news reports of his nomination to the presidency of the Unification Movement. If you disagree then you could always nominate the article for deletion, but the use of UC published sources is not a problem. And if you don't like direct quotations remove some from Jonathan Wells (intelligent design advocate). Good day. :-) Steve Dufour (talk) 03:59, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

1. This is not a formal "publication" but a website of members personal testimonies and the like.
2. I have not tagged this article for notability concerns. I would however note that third-party notice of his appointment has been fairly minimal -- most probably because of the fact that such appointments seem to have little observable affect on the church itself -- which continues to be run by Sun Myung Moon.
3. As to Wells: (i) it contains a lower proportion of quotes, (ii) not all the quotes are by the topic himself & (iii) in any case WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is always a poor argument.

Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 05:31, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

On the third point, I would further point out that the Obama quote is more than a little superficial, as well as offering little-to-no information on the topic. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 06:09, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Many articles on WP have a paragraph telling about the subject's support or not for Obama. Yes, that is other stuff. But in this case it's fairly big news since the UC has traditionally supported Republicans and conservatives. Steve Dufour (talk) 08:19, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

(i) How many articles on purely religious (as opposed to political) leaders do so (and in such an insubstantial manner)? (ii) How many of them devote approximately 1/3 of the article to doing so? It's not even as though he's the leader of the American (i.e. relevant branch of the) church -- that's his sister. And its fairly inconsequential news, as virtually nobody's noticed that he exists, and there's no indication that he has any actual power. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 08:45, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

If that is how you feel I will do you a favor and nominate the article for deletion.Steve Dufour (talk) 08:48, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

As I pointed out, you were the one who raised the issue of notability. You can hardly complain that after you raised it, I gave my 2c on the subject. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 09:17, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

I happen to agree with you that most of the articles on Rev. Moon's family should be merged, until more material about them has been published. Steve Dufour (talk) 09:24, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

I would further point out that he's not expressing support for Obama's politics, just that he's an ethnic minority, making the "Although the Unification Church has been a supporter of conservative Republican politicians" bit even less relevant. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 08:50, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

The source, a Reuters news article, made the connection. Steve Dufour (talk) 08:55, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

You still haven't addressed: "(i) How many articles on purely religious (as opposed to political) leaders do so (and in such an insubstantial manner)? (ii) How many of them devote approximately 1/3 of the article to doing so? It's not even as though he's the leader of the American (i.e. relevant branch of the) church -- that's his sister." Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 09:18, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

I also think Hyung Jin Nim's opinion on President Obama is quite a bit more important than Jonathan Wells' opinion on the age of the earth. :-) Steve Dufour (talk) 08:59, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Ummm, given that Wells is a prominent creationist apologist and Hyung Jin is not a politician or a political commentator, Wells' opinion is clearly more relevant to his claim to notability. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 09:17, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

I found his opinion: "I think the earth is probably four-and-a-half billion or so years old. ... But the truth is I have not looked at the evidence. And I have become increasingly suspicious of the evidence that is presented to me and that's why at this point I would say probably it's four-and-a-half billion years old, but I haven't looked at the evidence." rather bland and uninteresting. It was also plucked from a primary source. :-) Steve Dufour (talk) 09:21, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Just checking -- is this page 'Talk:Hyung Jin Moon' or Talk:Jonathan Wells (intelligent design advocate)? You seem to be more interested in the latter than in your supposed really-important-world-leader-of-your-church. Is it perhaps that you also find him uninteresting, as a mere frontman for the real leader? Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 09:26, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, I did read Hyung Jin's book. I haven't gotten around to reading Jonathan's yet. :-) Steve Dufour (talk) 09:29, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Who are the few?

Cut from article:

However few expect this to mean any real transfer of power. Son of Moonies founder takes over as church leader, Justin McCurry, The Guardian, 26 April 2008

The "few" turns out to be one unnamed former member, who said:

"He is unlikely to transfer any actual power to his sons."

What is the policy on quoting a journalist as a source, who in turn cites an single anonymous source as representing a trend? --Uncle Ed (talk) 15:12, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

No Ed, only "one unnamed former member" who was quoted. That does not mean that they haven't got other sources, just that they didn't provide quotes from them (probably because while they agreed, they didn't do so in an interesting way). Last I checked The Guardian was a highly respected RS -- and head and shoulders above these sources ([1][2]) you have recently added to articles (hint: if a source cannot even spell "Rueters [sic]" correctly, then they shouldn't be used even as a convenience link). Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 03:57, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Conservative Republican politicians

The article says that the Unification Church has been a supporter of conservative Republican politicians.

1. Is this statement more appropriate for the Unification Church article, rather than in an article on the heir apparent?
2. Can we get a source, or is it really common knowledge? --Uncle Ed (talk) 19:50, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

The source made this point, and connection. It is no longer available to read online. Steve Dufour (talk) 19:03, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Date of birth

Removed this unsourced statement: "He was born September 26, 1979 in the United States." There's a published source that say 1969. Jokestress (talk) 01:18, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

The succession issue

I have seen contradictory reports on who was appointed the "successor", i.e., the person to take control of the entire Unification Movement upon TF's death. On the one hand we have the HSA side, saying it was obviously (or explicitly) TM. On the other hand we have statements, ceremonies - and even a video (with English subtitles?) anointing H2 as the successor. It would be good to present both sides - but without taking sides. --Uncle Ed (talk) 19:35, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hyung Jin Moon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090322013906/http://www.monitor.co.ug/artman/publish/asia/Unification_Church_pres_sees_smaller_mass_weddings_77510.shtml to http://www.monitor.co.ug/artman/publish/asia/Unification_Church_pres_sees_smaller_mass_weddings_77510.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:32, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Was it the weapons that were blessed?

The section Sanctuary Church contains this sentence: "In October 2019, members of the World Peace and Unification Sanctuary were invited to "show their willingness to defend their families, communities and nation" by bringing their semi-auto rifles to a service in which their weapons were blessed.[34]". This is a heads up that there is a discussion at Talk:Kahr Arms#Blessing "with" or "for" AR-15's about similar content in that article. I think that the articles should say the same thing, and I suggest that the discussion takes place in one place. Sjö (talk) 06:13, 29 January 2022 (UTC)