Those who favour using the www.cfmmap.org site please explain how the data there is converted into a reliable fellowship congregations tally. On the site it says that "Some churches are intentionally hidden, either by request or otherwise." Also the software it uses can create errors because the "Geocoding of the address in the CFM Directory failed".
Yes, regularly updated lists of churches is a good resource but a verified and linked alternate source which has greater reliability would give vistors better information.
Recently published sources such as original Fellowship YouTube videos can be better sources if they provide more reliable information.
Finally, those clinging to the www.cfmmap.org site fail to update the retrieved date for their information. Have they really only accessed the site on 13 September 2019? Wcwarren (talk) 15:28, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
@Wcwarren: By using a statement such as “As of (date), CFM has over (number of churches rounded down to the nearest 10) we can get as close to accurate as we probably can. If there are hidden churches, the statement is still true because the number of churches is over our rounding. However, if we put a specific number, we are more than likely immediately wrong because we don’t know 1. the number of hidden churches, 2. churches that have started immediately after adding that number, or 3. churches that have closed down immediately after adding that number. There are also inherent problems with using a YouTube video. Firstly, Wikipedia considers Youtube an unreliable source. Secondly, even if we accept that the statistic provided by the video is reliable, we have the same three previous issues as with putting an exact number on the page. Lastly, if the solution is to keep updating to new YouTube videos, you have the issue of soapboxing. We can proclaim that it’s not the intention, but it doesn’t change the fact that regularly adding preaching videos looks exactly like that. Better to avoid the controversy. I would also note that you previously stated that the cfm map page represented CFM internationally (Here [1]). I appreciate that the comment was made over a decade ago and you probably don’t remember it but has that status changed? It’s constantly being updated, and pastors can access it to make changes, so it does still appear to be the main source for the organization. Regarding the access date, that reflects when the website was added to the page as a reference. It doesn’t get updated every time people access it.𝄞: JohnnyB𝄬𝅘𝅥𝅮 Sing with me𝅘𝅥𝅮12:35, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
@JohnnyBflat You provide good points for ongoing use of your favoured reference. I understand your counter-arguments against quality but diverse sources. One vital question remains unanswered: how are you obtaining a total church count from CFM Map? Also, the access date should be updated when it is used freshly by my reading of Wiki rules? Wcwarren (talk) 05:43, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
After examining CFMmap in detail it is obvious that this site does NOT report the total number of churches. It would seem that @JohnnyBflat is adding up the numbers he finds on the site to obtain a calculated estimate of minimum total church counts.
Other reliable sources that provide actual total church counts would be useful to readers. Yes, these can become quickly out of date but are more easily verified. The average reader will not go to CFMmap and analyse the site to obtain a calculated number. Wcwarren (talk) 21:15, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
@JohnnyBflat The date the actual information was specifically retrieved is expected. This is not the first date but the latest date used. WP:CITEWEB A good example is box office takings for a movie. If the income is updated then the date is updated as well. Eg Oppenheimer_(film)Wcwarren (talk) 22:24, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
