Talk:Thoughts and prayers: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 16:17, 3 September 2019

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Thoughts and prayers article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to governmental regulation of firearm ownership; the social, historical and political context of such regulation; and the people and organizations associated with these issues, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Christianity Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Disaster management Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

English Language Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject English Language, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to the English language on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.English LanguageWikipedia:WikiProject English LanguageTemplate:WikiProject English LanguageEnglish Language
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Politics: American / Gun politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by Gun politics task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Sociology Low‑importance

	Society portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Template:WPUS50

Sources

---Another Believer _(Talk) 19:58, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article says it's a frequently used US term, so I don't see why it should be expanded internationally. It defines it as mostly being used in the US.

Any thoughts on this? Evieliam (talk) 02:47, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is not exclusively a US term. In less than a minute's searching, I found it used in Australia, New Zealand, Pacific islands, South Africa, Canada, and England.--Dmol (talk) 05:25, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It’s almost exclusively a reference to things that transpired in America, even for most international references. I can understand how this might be unintuitive. Discuss-Dubious (t/c) 14:00, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No it's not used exclusively about American events. Again, a quick search shows it used about events in Australia, Ireland, France, New Zealand. United Kingdom. Definitely in widespread use outside of USA and about an international range of events. --Dmol (talk) 17:57, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Do an internet search for "thoughts and prayers" site:.ie, "Christchurch" (Earthquake) etc. This is commonly used for natural disasters all over the Anglosphere, not just the US.

Note that the term is clearly used from before 2010, and that stacking references from the last year is a violation of WP:RECENTISM. -- Callinus (talk) 04:35, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Evieliam, Dmol, Discuss-Dubious, and Callinus: I actually

Agree with Evieliam and Discuss-Dubious. Yes, it is used outside the U.S. but it is not notable outside the U.S.. I seriously think we should limit the scope of the article solely to the U.S. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 18:52, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure how you are defining "notable" for the term. Why limit to the US when clearly widespread elsewhere--Dmol (talk) 22:42, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Dmol: You may be pleased to know that the article no longer explicitly defines the term as American. Discuss-Dubious (t/c) 01:43, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with what Dubious is saying. The only reason "thoughts and prayers" is worth writing about in Wikipedia is that the usage of the expression (i.e. as a substitute for solving the problem) after mass shootings in the United States has been criticized. It's not notable outside of the gun control/countererrorism context. Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 02:47, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

StAnslem has taken it upon themself to delete large sections of the page that are very relevent and should not be removed. Bodconn (talk) 11:07, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It is notable outside the US hence quotes from Vatigan and other religious leaders, the contrast to how other legal states have legislated show grief, compassion and thought which i have no doubt was gained in some cases by meditation, prayer, contemplation and other methods of group communication irrespective of the religion followed with respect to existing statute and the actions taken for the security of the populus of that state through a democratic concensus, examples and exemplars of that process can lead to insight by removal of ignorance, so i argue that relevant reactions to disaster and mass loss of life are implict to the discussion. Hence i would like those international examples to be re-instated and augmented. Bodconn (talk) 16:17, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Video of Obama

Resolved

Given the "[not in citation given]" tag, should the video of Obama be kept? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:49, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Remove. @Another Believer: Keeping it would violate BLP. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 18:58, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What tag?

ɱ

(talk) · vbm · coi) 19:05, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done Oh, it seems this video has been long removed; not to be confused with another Obama video I put in 2 weeks ago about.

ɱ

(talk) · vbm · coi) 19:07, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

2018 YouTube headquarters shooting

Trumped Tweeted T+Ps re: 2018 YouTube headquarters shooting. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 00:58, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 41: / Line 41: @@
 StAnslem has taken it upon themself to delete large sections of the page that are very relevent and should not be removed. [[User:Bodconn|Bodconn]] ([[User talk:Bodconn|talk]]) 11:07, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
+It is notable outside the US hence quotes from Vatigan and other religious leaders, the contrast to how other legal states have legislated show grief, compassion and thought which i have no doubt was gained in some cases by meditation, prayer, contemplation and other methods of group communication irrespective of the religion followed with respect to existing statute and the actions taken for the security of the populus of that state through a democratic concensus, examples and exemplars of that process can lead to insight by removal of ignorance, so i argue that relevant reactions to disaster and mass loss of life are implict to the discussion. Hence i would like those international examples to be re-instated and augmented.  [[User:Bodconn|Bodconn]] ([[User talk:Bodconn|talk]]) 16:17, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
 == Video of Obama ==