Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Jehovah's Witnesses: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Comments regarding template and project: new members ~ wikipedia users ~ not crux
Line 44: Line 44:


*Well, for the statement made:''Which articles do the rest of you think are of the greatest importance to help someone new to the church gain a better understanding of it?'', is simply disapproved for anyone that is studying as a Jehovah's Witness, because the Governing Body discourages the use of other websites, for they can be apostate websites. They normally to direct someone to the [[http://watchtower.org/e/jt/index.htm JW website]] or the book ''Jehovah's Witnesses — Proclaimers of God's Kingdom'' (1993), witch gives the history of JWs.
*Well, for the statement made:''Which articles do the rest of you think are of the greatest importance to help someone new to the church gain a better understanding of it?'', is simply disapproved for anyone that is studying as a Jehovah's Witness, because the Governing Body discourages the use of other websites, for they can be apostate websites. They normally to direct someone to the [[http://watchtower.org/e/jt/index.htm JW website]] or the book ''Jehovah's Witnesses — Proclaimers of God's Kingdom'' (1993), witch gives the history of JWs.
:I agree on this point, and note the insinuation that "someone new" would feel decieved and still consider themselves a new member, enough so that they would seek out other sources of info other than fellow members. Careful John, you are insinuating a new member would find contradictions to the JW teachings here, yet they would have to be referenced to JWs literature. To base the format perspective on (the use by) "new member"'s use is to suggest you can unconvert them. I'm all for cleaning things up, and back tracking I'll have a look at what you are refering to next. [[User:GabrielVelasquez|GabrielVelasquez]] ([[User talk:GabrielVelasquez|talk]]) 20:33, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
:I agree on this point, and note the insinuation that "someone new" would feel decieved and still consider themselves a new member, enough so that they would seek out other sources of info other than fellow members. Careful John, you are insinuating a new member would find contradictions to the JW teachings here, yet they would have to be referenced to JWs literature. To base the format perspective on (the use by) "new member"'s use is to suggest you can unconvert them. I'm all for cleaning things up, and back tracking I'll have a look at what you are refering to next. ...pardon my tangent commnets, I'm finding the stuff below a lot of wikibabble as I have the flu. [[User:GabrielVelasquez|GabrielVelasquez]] ([[User talk:GabrielVelasquez|talk]]) 20:33, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
*Also I think that the template is not bad, but could be better expanded under ''Publications'', and add more weekly/monthly publications, such as the kingdom ministry, and many of the more important publications such as the ''[[What Does the Bible Really Teach?]]'' (2005) [http://www.jw.org/index.html?option=QrYQZRQVNlBBX&selLang=E&selPub=bh Online audiobook] which is important for preaching. The article [[Cross or stake as gibbet on which Jesus died]] is more important also, and should be added in the template under Beliefs & practices, with a a small list of some of the beliefs. But, I don't see how an article, List of Jehovah's Witnesses, would help the project. [[User:Bugboy52.40|Buɡboy52.4]] ([[User talk:Bugboy52.40|talk]]) 16:11, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
*Also I think that the template is not bad, but could be better expanded under ''Publications'', and add more weekly/monthly publications, such as the kingdom ministry, and many of the more important publications such as the ''[[What Does the Bible Really Teach?]]'' (2005) [http://www.jw.org/index.html?option=QrYQZRQVNlBBX&selLang=E&selPub=bh Online audiobook] which is important for preaching. The article [[Cross or stake as gibbet on which Jesus died]] is more important also, and should be added in the template under Beliefs & practices, with a a small list of some of the beliefs. But, I don't see how an article, List of Jehovah's Witnesses, would help the project. [[User:Bugboy52.40|Buɡboy52.4]] ([[User talk:Bugboy52.40|talk]]) 16:11, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
:::The translation of greek STAUROS (stake) to the Latin CRUX (cross) is a major contention for JWs and I am glad someone made a point of creating an article, which I haven't checked yet, but I am sure I can find plenty of LEXICON support online. [[User:GabrielVelasquez|GabrielVelasquez]] ([[User talk:GabrielVelasquez|talk]]) 20:33, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
:::The translation of greek STAUROS (stake) to the Latin CRUX (cross) is a major contention for JWs and I am glad someone made a point of creating an article, which I haven't checked yet, but I am sure I can find plenty of LEXICON support online. [[User:GabrielVelasquez|GabrielVelasquez]] ([[User talk:GabrielVelasquez|talk]]) 20:33, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:57, 11 April 2009

Archive

Archives


2005 - 2006
2007 - 2008

Coordinators' working group

Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.

All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot (Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 05:44, 28 February 2009 (UTC) [reply]

Discussion regarding project organization

Any comments regarding the structure and function of Christianity related material are welcome at Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity/General Forum#Project organization. Be prepared for some rather lengthy comments, though. There is a lot of material to cover there. John Carter (talk) 17:43, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.

If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.

Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.

Thanks. — Headbomb {ταλκκοντριβς – WP Physics} 09:18, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)

Comments regarding template and project

First, I have to say that, at present, Template:Jehovah's Witnesses is, frankly, bloated. There is no good reason that the template to the main article on a subject should contain a direct link to a four-line stub, as this one does. The purpose of these templates is to help people negotiate between the main articles regarding a subject. It's hard to see how some of these articles really even qualify as that, and, given their comparatively poor quality, I can and do think that this template needs some serious trimming.
One of the things I am going to try to do with all the articles includes as "core topics" within Christianity is try to help develop navigation templates to effectively and easily link all the articles which are required for someone to get a clear, comprehensive understanding of the subject of the main article. Right now, this template and project look like one of the best early choices. Which articles do the rest of you think are of the greatest importance to help someone new to the church gain a better understanding of it? Those are the articles that templates like this one should ideally contain. These are not necessarily limited to articles specifically about the JWs, though. Nontrinitarianism, Great Awakening, Adventism, among others, are articles which are arguably very important to an understanding of the JWs, and it is reasonable that the template should link to them as well. A few other points and questions, from what is basically an outsider who knows probably less about the subject of the JWs than many others:

  • Mexico, Brazil, Philippines, Germany, Italy, Congo, United States, and maybe a few other countries are all listed as having over 150,000 members in them. That would in the eyes of most people be enough for a separate article on, for instance, Jehovah's Witnesses in Mexico. To date, I have seen no such "national" articles. Such articles could, I presume, be made based on RS material, and it would probably be in the best interests of the project to have them.
  • Which specific book(s) of the JWs, not counting the Bible itself, do you think does the best job of clearly and effectively conveying all the fundamental information regarding the JWs? Such a book or books should also be included in the template, and, arguably, seriously developed as it contains a lot of material relevant to the subject.
  • I do have a few other questions, primarily about the proposed changed navigation template. Specifically, how vital/important to the rest of you think that Cross or stake as gibbet on which Jesus died and Saint Michael are to the understanding of the Jehovah's Witnesses, and do you think these, and maybe a few other articles, should be included in the template? Also, I don't see any sort of article like List of Jehovah's Witnesses, listing most or all the individuals who have articles in wikipedia. Such a list is almost always included in these navigation templates, and is generally very important to the project.

I welcome any responses regarding this proposal to change the template, as well as any responses to any of the other questions I asked above. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 14:24, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well, for the statement made:Which articles do the rest of you think are of the greatest importance to help someone new to the church gain a better understanding of it?, is simply disapproved for anyone that is studying as a Jehovah's Witness, because the Governing Body discourages the use of other websites, for they can be apostate websites. They normally to direct someone to the [JW website] or the book Jehovah's Witnesses — Proclaimers of God's Kingdom (1993), witch gives the history of JWs.
I agree on this point, and note the insinuation that "someone new" would feel decieved and still consider themselves a new member, enough so that they would seek out other sources of info other than fellow members. Careful John, you are insinuating a new member would find contradictions to the JW teachings here, yet they would have to be referenced to JWs literature. To base the format perspective on (the use by) "new member"'s use is to suggest you can unconvert them. I'm all for cleaning things up, and back tracking I'll have a look at what you are refering to next. ...pardon my tangent commnets, I'm finding the stuff below a lot of wikibabble as I have the flu. GabrielVelasquez (talk) 20:33, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The translation of greek STAUROS (stake) to the Latin CRUX (cross) is a major contention for JWs and I am glad someone made a point of creating an article, which I haven't checked yet, but I am sure I can find plenty of LEXICON support online. GabrielVelasquez (talk) 20:33, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to think that the template is intended for uses other than those I did, which is fine. I would only say, probably in response, is that the intention is to set up a different template, like Template:Saints, which is collapsible and able to be fit across the bottom of the page. The intention is to set up, wherever possible, a template similar to that for every article in the Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity/Core topics work group core articles list. The articles to be included would be all those which are of "Top" importance to have a full, complete knowledge of the subject. The importance ratings would be used to determine the importance ratings for Christianity in general. Right now, I cannot think that all the articles included qualify as "Top" importance to achieving a full understanding of this subject.
By limiting the template to only those articles that are, we also will likely have a tendency to concentrate the content, where possible, in those articles, in effect making them the ones most worked on and improved. It's hard to believe that all those articles are essential for those purposes. While articles not included in the template might still qualify as "High" importance, not including the most pivotal of them will concentrate attention on those fewer articles which are included. That would tend to make those articles better in the long run. Remember, the average FA can take 20 minutes to read. Many people are going to limit the amount of time they spend on any subject, so combining the best information in the fewest articles is to everyone's advantage. So, for example, Theology of Jehovah's Witnesses, which doesn't yet exist, could in one article combine the requisite content of more than one other article. Also, such "Theology of" articles are standard for most major religious movements.
And I apologize for the line about the four-line stub. There is one such one a JW official, but it is not yet on the template.
Lastly, as the Category:Lists of Christians will indicate, just about every Christian WikiProject has at least one such article. It tends to be a way to easily link the names of adherents of the faith with some text included, making it a bit more substantive than just the category alone. John Carter (talk) 16:50, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi John, I am having trouble understanding what you're saying about "limiting the template to only articles that are...[of top importance]". I think navigation templates should help readers navigate across the most important articles on a topic. If we want to encourage people to improve articles, we should do that via Project templates on the Talk Pages. Is this consonant with what you meant to say? --Richard (talk) 17:33, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure entirely what you're asking there. What I meant was that, basically, we have to realize that a lot of readers are only going to devote limited time to any subject. On that basis, it is in the best interests of every group to make a quick list of the comparatively few articles it thinks are the ones which a newcomer to the subject would need to read to get a full understanding of the subject. Then, if those articles are included in that template as among the most important articles, the articles included would be counted as "Top" importance for the group according to the assessment template, and those assessments would also be carried over in some way yet to be determined to the main Christianity project itself. This way we would, in effect, also work out some of the importance assessment problems, which have been a major problem.
This is not saying that there might be other templates linking together articles of "lesser" (less than Top-importance, anyway), articles. In fact, I think I know of various countries and the like which already have such templates. But I do think the "main" template should be limited to only those articles the editors working on the subject consider to be the most important articles regarding that subject. In some cases, they will probably include at least one article not directly related to the topic itself, which indicates the prehistory or origins of the subject, like Adventism or Great Awakening, like I indicated above.
Not sure if that answers the question, though. John Carter (talk) 17:44, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I was going to disagree with your assessment that the template is "bloated" but, upon reviewing it, I think Corporations and Beth Sarim should be removed from the template. These are not likely to be important to the average reader. --Richard (talk) 17:37, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And some of the others, particularly the links to the biographies of the officials, could be replaced by a single list of those officials. John Carter (talk) 17:44, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree that the infobox is bloated. Comprehensive, yes. Some links certainly don't warrant inclusion. I'd happily delete "Government interactions", "Supreme Court cases", "Handling of child sex abuse cases", "United Nations" and, among formative influences, the articles on Wendell, Storrs and Grew. All are either (a) of low importance, (b) unlikely to be read by the casual visitor, (c) not critical to an understanding of the religion or (d) well covered in such articles as Beliefs & Practices or Controversies. I like your idea of including some links to articles including non-trinitarianism and the Great Awakening; I don't see the need for links to Cross or stake as gibbet on which Jesus died and Saint Michael; both are relatively minor beliefs in the scheme of things. Although there is no Theology of Jehovah's Witnesses article as such, material that would be covered in such an article is largely covered under Beliefs & Practices, Eschatology of Jehovah's Witnesses and, to a lesser extent, Development of Jehovah's Witnesses doctrine. Good luck with your efforts and I'll support you as time is available. LTSally (talk) 03:13, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. The suggestions for removal from "Top" importance above, and, conceivably, from the main template, strike me as good ones. And, it should be noted, even if some articles were removed from one template, that's doesn't mean another one might not be created for them.
One of the other objectives is to try to set up parallelism. In effect, it would be a more effective link for Christian theology to have a link specifically to Jehovah's Witnesses theology than to an article covering both theology and practices. I know there is a Christian eschatology template as well, but that's a less significant subject than theology in general.
And, for what it's worth, having read the bios of most of the church's leaders, much of the most relevant information on their times in office could be easily added to the main "History of" article. In fact, that is the way it's done with most of the other Christian groups. There are often separate templates to navigate between the bios of the leaders. By combining the most important information on the history in the main article, though, we present the most essential data more quickly and coherently. John Carter (talk) 13:00, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On consideration of the template with regard to both article content and importance to the subject, I agree that it is bloated, and I pretty much agree with LTSally's suggestions. The template should help readers to get the best overview of the subject. It is therefore not very helpful to point to minutia, such as 'Our Kingdom Ministry', but inclusion of broader concepts relevant to the relgion such as Adventism would be reasonable.

Including JWs and excluding redirects, there are only two 'Beliefs and practices of...' articles so I would support any change to 'Theology of...'.--Jeffro77 (talk) 01:07, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jeffro, can you explain what your last paragraph means? What are you proposing?LTSally (talk) 01:13, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There are only two articles on Wikipedia with titles beginning with 'Beliefs and practices of...', so it's a bit non-standard, and it would be more consistent to have an article about the 'Theology of' Jehovah's Witnesses instead. That said, the current title does suit content of the article better, as not all of the content is strictly theological. So I'm not sure I'm proposing anything, but I would be supportive if someone wanted a more consistent name.--Jeffro77 (talk) 01:47, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

'Former JWs' category

I have removed several entries from [[Category:Former Jehovah's Witnesses]]. Please note that for inclusion in this category, the notability of the individual should be relevant to their former-JW status. If a person's former status as a JW is what makes them notable (e.g. Franz), they belong in the category. If they are only notable for other reasons (e.g. Dwight Eisenhower, Michael Jackson), apart from which we would otherwise not know they were former JWs, they do not belong in this category. This is especially the case for individuals who were simply raised as JWs and have shown no particular interest in the religion themselves.--Jeffro77 (talk) 14:43, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your reasoning (or lack of) seems to be missing some logical steps: how is Dwight Eisenhower not notable, How is Michael Jackson not notable?? My first impression is that you are trying to clean up any shame on Jehovah's witnesses that might be highlighted, but honestly that is not an encyclopedic goal. I'll remind you that some people walk away from the Jehovah's Witness faith for no reason related directly to them/it. (1) Shame aside, remind me please how you can use the notability policy the way you are.? (2) Motives aside, Raised or Baptised seems to be the distiction you are making, and you know you don't have to be baptised to be called one of Jehovah's witnesses, just a publisher, which can even be a child. --GabrielVelasquez (talk) 20:10, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]