Talk:Jimmy Akin

Qualified for a biography in Wikipedia?

Out of curiousity: Akin seems to be a writer of a Q&A column for an obscure religious website. He also writes a self-promoting blog. Does that qualify him for a biography in Wikipedia? John Nelson 76.168.197.87 (talk) 01:59, 22 March 2011 (UTC) --76.168.197.87 (talk) 01:59, 22 March 2011 (UTC) I removed this:

"Jimmy is known for his precision, faithfulness to the teaching of the Church, gentleness, and humor."

That's clear POV - if it's a quote then it needs to be sourced, otherwise it shouldn't be there at all. (Nor should an equivalent negative sentence, of course.) 86.132.143.27 23:09, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Notability

Folks, the man is notable. Whether you agree or disagree with him, he is a notable lay apologist. SophoclesOedipusRots (talk) 00:48, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Academic Qualifications?

I'm curious what (if any) educational credentials Mr. Akin has. If not, it's not a problem since he's known as a lay apologist, I was just curious (and if he does have some relevant degree, it would be an important piece of info to put on his page). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.166.23.91 (talk) 18:22, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Apologist?

Calling him a Catholic "apologist" seems a bit POV, but I'm not familiar with this guy. Would less loaded terms like columnist, commentator, etc be more appropriate? -- Hongooi 10:46, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

He is the Director of Apologetics at Catholic Answers, and his blog has won the "Best Apologetics Blog" award. It seems to be an apt description to me. -- Cat Whisperer 12:12, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Is the objection to the term "apologist" that it is negative or positive? Because Catholic generally use the term to mean merely a person who makes an argument for their faith, and the word does not have the connotation of "apology" for wrongdoing. If the objection is that the term is too positive, I don't believe it is, as Mr. Akin would seem to me to fit the definition of an apologist, whether one agrees with him or not.

I've researched the guy - this page seems to be an all-out POV.

Fair use rationale for Image:JimmyAkin.jpg

Image:JimmyAkin.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:06, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Weasel Words

I removed the Weasel Words tag. If you want to replace it, name your objections specifically. Tank520 03 May 09

Charges of self-flagellation

This first of all, seems utterly trivial compared to several books he has wrote and his daily appearances on Catholic Answers Live. That being said, the wording is twisted up. Who made the charges? Who's self-flagellating? What is that? Why is this relevant to Akin's bio? Elizium23 (talk) 16:18, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

• I have rephrased it, noting that it was the pope who was self-flagellating. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs)}~ 16:28, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

  Editorofthewiki, Akin defended the charges? Elizium23 (talk) 16:29, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

  He defended the idea of the pope engaging in the practice. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs)}~ 16:33, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

  Editorofthewiki, how about writing it like that then? Elizium23 (talk) 16:35, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Two sources seem like the same source

I added this link [1] to Jimmy's own website as I had heard that his wedding date was wrong (1988 can be seen mentioned there, not 1991 as previously in the article). After I did so, it seems to be an electronic version of the chapter from Madrid, Patrick (2018). Surprised By Truth : 11 Converts Give the Biblical and Historical Reasons for Becoming Catholic cited elsewhere in the article. Can someone check or confirm so we can simply footnotes? >> M.P.Schneider,LC (parlemus • feci) 00:03, 6 May 2023 (UTC)