Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Christianity/Noticeboard

WikiProject Christianity Articles Categories Deletion Guide Newsletter Portal Projects Main pageShowcaseAssessmentPlanMembersNoticeboard Peer review Requests

---

Lyon College Article Improvements

Hi, my name is Keli and I'm an employee of Lyon College. When I started working for the college last year, I saw this article was missing information and was flagged about the need for additional citations. I've been working on a new draft to improve the page and add the necessary citations.

You can see my entire post with details about my draft here, on the Lyon College talk page.

I've requested editor assistance at WikiProject Universities and WikiProject Arkansas but have not yet received a response. Since the college is affiliated with the Christian religion, I hope someone at this WikiProject will have an interest in working on the article to make fair changes. You can find my full draft here. Can someone please take a look and offer any feedback, or if you agree that it significantly improves the article, copy my version over?

Since I am employed by the college and here in that official capacity, I will only post on designated talk pages and I will not directly edit the Lyon College article or related articles where I may have a conflict of interest. Please do not hesitate to leave me a message if you have questions or feedback. Thanks! LyonCollegeKeli (talk) 22:07, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

 Done by User:Danielklotz. TSventon (talk) 13:01, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Sovereignty of God in Christianity

Can some editors cleanup this article? It was determined at AfD that this is a significant topic, but this article needs a lot of work. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 00:40, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

List of suppressed parishes in the Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany

Hi, would anyone be interested in improving this article by adding more sources?, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 18:17, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Request for comments on the Turin Shroud

Some users do not want to include a reliable source published last year in an Oxford journal, showing that the issue of the carbon dating of the shroud of Turin is not at all settled. I have introduced a Request for comments on the talk page. Thank you. Frezase (talk) 19:29, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Don't get your hopes too high, they know damn well they haven't refuted the Medieval age of the shroud, they just moved it some decades away. Tgeorgescu (talk) 19:35, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

This user does not even try to explain why the Oxford article should not be included!... The question is not "should we move the age some decades away" but "are the results still valid?" as well explained in Phys.org. The researchers "claimed that the raw data from the 1988 tests showed that the test samples were heterogeneous, invalidating the results." see here. Frezase (talk) 20:02, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

WP:EXTRAORDINARY. Also reading scientific papers requires WP:COMPETENCE, sometimes quote mining can be quite misleading: their statistical analysis does not match the claims they made. Tgeorgescu (talk) 20:22, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

(Self-deleted a slightly earlier comment as I want to change). Frezase, I believe it is tendentious to say that this study invalidates the medieval dating of the shroud. It's also far too long. If this paper is to be mentioned at all, it should be along the lines that "a 2019 analysis of the raw data confirmed a medieval origin while questioning the exact range of dates"Achar Sva (talk) 00:01, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Yup, a dating between the Great Schism and Martin Luther is consistent with their statistics. Wikipedia is not against religious belief, it is against the misuse of science. Tgeorgescu (talk) 14:57, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Still 0 reason not to mention the study in the article, and no reason to rely on the dubious reinterpretation of non specialized users, self professed atheists. According to real experts, published in respected peer reviewed journal, this study casts "serious doubts on the reliability of the 1988 dating of the Turin Shroud". Bruni et al., Radiation Physics and Chemistry, 2020 Frezase (talk) 18:52, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

First, the authors have an axe to grind against the Medieval origin. It would be ludicrous to deny that, their POV is known for decades. Second, their statistics do not refute a post-Great Schism origin of the shroud. Third, we have WP:RULES like WP:FRINGE and WP:EXTRAORDINARY, we do not render everything that is published with peer-review, especially for fringe topics. Fourth, if people want to believe, why do they need scientific proof? Science can only refute their religious beliefs, it can never prove those. E.g. the shroud does not have half non-human DNA in its human genome (were it preserved). Fifth, musings about atheist editors fail WP:NPA. Tgeorgescu (talk) 19:21, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

St. Francis of Assisi in Andean mythology

During discussions of Coropuna, the question was raised about whether the content currently in that article that refers to St. Francis of Assisi is accurate. Does anyone editing this page have the expertise to judge? Please reply at Talk:Coropuna if possible. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:36, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

Hello, Please note that Religious text, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of Today's articles for improvement. The article was scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Today's articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing! Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:05, 10 February 2020 (UTC) on behalf of the TAFI team

Discussion at Bart D. Ehrman

There is currently a discussion at the above article that may be relevant to the subject of this project. Interested editors are invited to join the discussion here. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:50, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Abune Mathias#Requested move 21 February 2020

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Abune Mathias#Requested move 21 February 2020. Elizium23 (talk) 05:32, 25 February 2020 (UTC)Template:Z48

Infobox merge proposal

There is a suggestion to merge the templates for the "clergy" and "Christian leader" infoboxes. To know more or take part, go to Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2020_March_19#Template:Infobox_clergy. --Andreas Philopater (talk) 23:55, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

"Father" (and different languages) as honorific - relevant article rename request

Please see: Talk:Baba (honorific). PPEMES (talk) 16:41, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Template for Christianophobia is missing

Why is there a template on Islamophobia but not one for Christianophobia or even the persecution of Christians? According to Open Doors, Christians are the most persecuted religion in the world. Am I a missing something or is that the double standard it looks like? Gun Powder Ma (talk) 10:02, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

1) That source is extremely biased; 2) where does it say that?; 3) it lists countries like North Korea and China, where every religion is persecuted, and Mexico, which is majority Catholic, Russia, where the Russian Orthodox Church is essentially an arm of the state, and Ethiopia, where the Ethiopian Orthodox Church is dominant. It's clear they're talking specifically about Evangelical Christianity and the problems this missionary organization sees for its converts to Evangelicalism.

Furthermore, the fact that it lists "Islamic oppression" for a number of countries - as though there were a single "Islam" that was deciding to oppress people who convert from Islam to Christianity, is a sign of Islamophobia itself. For Myanmar, which is majority Buddhist, India, which is majority Hindu, and Sri Lanka, which is which is majority Buddhist, it doesn't list "Buddhist oppression" or "Hindu oppression", it lists "Religious nationalism". Is this what a double standard looks like?--Ermenrich (talk) 14:39, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for confirming my suspicions. Are you suggesting that oppression of Christians does not exist on earth? Gun Powder Ma (talk) 14:47, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

I'm saying it isn't the most persecuted religion on earth and there is no such thing as "Christianophobe" that competes with Islamophobia. Please take your desire to wp:RIGHTGREATWRONGS and WP:SOAPBOXING elsewhere.--Ermenrich (talk) 18:43, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

@Gun Powder Ma: Did you read or understand what Ermenrich wrote? Instead of addressing the valid points that Ermenrich provided, you went into an evangelical persecution shell motif. Let me summarize Ermenrich's statement: the places where Christians are persecuted are either places where all religious groups are persecuted or are places that are where one group of Christians are persecuting another group, and in the cases from the source you provided that other group is evangelicals. So to answer your question, Ermenrich made it clear that Christians are being persecuted, but it's not the same as Islamophobia which is primarily carried out by another religious group. Do you understand the difference? Yes, there are locations where Christians are persecuted by Muslims, but that isn't called Christianophobia, it's called religious persecution. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:05, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

@Walter Görlitz: I fully understand what is going on here... Gun Powder Ma (talk) 23:13, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

@Gun Powder Ma: Then please explain what your understanding of what is going on here, recognizing that all of the members of this project make a profession of faith in Christ. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:54, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Walter Görlitz, all of the members of this project make a profession of faith in Christ. {{citation needed}} Elizium23 (talk) 06:58, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

@Elizium23: Check the user pages of the editors who commented here. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:25, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Walter Görlitz, no, that's not what you said. You led us to believe that by signing the member roll of this project, editors are required to make some profession of faith, or they are not project members. That's false. Elizium23 (talk) 18:34, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

That's not what I meant when I wrote it, I meant that they have made one. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:52, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

I wouldn't be opposed to a template on the persecution of Christians, since there are plenty of historically demonstrable examples and it could be helpful to have a navbox or sidebar for that. I agree with Walter and Elizium23 re: Christianophobia. If you can show some peer-reviewed scholarship on this, or some academic books, or something similar, than sure, but what you've provided here is basically evangelical propaganda. I won't reveal what my own beliefs are because that isn't relevant for here. This project doesn't require a particular belief from anybody - anyone who is interested in editing Christianity articles based on reliable independent sources, and is willing to abide by Wikipedia consensus, is welcome here.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 14:36, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Deletion review for Gospel Music Association

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Gospel Music Association. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Toa Nidhiki05 13:30, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Now once again at AfD.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 02:44, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Potential CoI at a church page

Mosaic church had some problems. I thought I fixed them, but a WP:SPA has been reverting many of the changes. I have now opened a discussion on the article's talk page Talk:Mosaic (church)#Layout order but expect the editor will return to restore the article to the previous state. Could someone please check that I'm not applying an odd layout to the article and check to see if my opinion about the short sections is problematic? Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:44, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

I would very much like an outside opinion there soon. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:29, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedian Prayer

Do we think we should add a prayer for Wikipedians? SpinnerLaserz (talk) 06:44, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea. @Jzsj: want to compose one for us?

"The other" Father Z composed a prayer before connecting to the Internet:

A prayer before logging onto the internet:

Almighty and eternal God, who created us in Thine image and bade us to seek after all that is good, true and beautiful, especially in the divine person of Thine Only-begotten Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, grant, we beseech Thee, that, through the intercession of Saint Isidore, Bishop and Doctor, during our journeys through the internet we will direct our hands and eyes only to that which is pleasing to Thee and treat with charity and patience all those souls whom we encounter. Through Christ our Lord. Amen. Elizium23 (talk) 06:50, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

This is a fine prayer, I see no need for another. Also, in the spirit of Pope Francis it doesn't take a cleric to compose a prayer. Jzsj (talk) 06:55, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

I simply viewed it as a shortcut to obtaining ecclesastical approval for it. Thanks. Elizium23 (talk) 07:13, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

New Userbox

Hi everyone! I created a new userbox with the Greek work "gnosis" as the icon, use this code, {{User WikiProject Christianity2}}, if anyone is interested here's the page: Template:User WikiProject Christianity2 DivineReality (talk) 18:25, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

γνῶσιςThis user is a participant in
WikiProject Christianity.

RfC which may be of interest

An RfC on whether it is appropriate to use the disputed 2011 census in the lede of Religion in Albania may be of interest to project participants. [1]. Khirurg (talk) 00:06, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Islam and Christianity

I complained about this article at Wikipedia. Not that the information was wrong. I argued that these were two different stand-alone topics. The beginner of this article/topic/nonsense is a Muslim who has an agenda. That agenda is to muddy the waters between both religions. The only thing they have in common is that both are religions. The response was that I was kicked out of the discussions because my view was unpopular with the originators.

So the article is still there, and I do not care at all if Wikipedia goes broke. The "information" of Wikipedia is "maintained" by the general population, and the general population has trouble with intelligence and the truth.

What is popular is not always truth and what is truth is not always popular. At Wikipedia, it is paramount to be popular — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.118.161.59 (talk) 23:31, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

This was left on my talk page and I'm not sure why. The article is Christianity and Islam. Perhaps someone can respond. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:14, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

I don't understand the need for this article, but I take a neutral stance: if you want it deleted, begin a deletion request. Tgeorgescu (talk) 02:18, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

The user who started it, User:Stevertigo, doesn't actually seem to be a Muslim, though he may have had certain biases, as does every editor (read up on Journalistic objectivity for example). It's basically a page for comparative religion. Whether or not it should be deleted, rather than simply revised and improved, is up for debate. Nowadays with the globalization of humanity one could argue that comparative religion in order to understand and coexist peacefully is an important endeavor. I will certainly agree that the article could be improved, though just about every article about religion on Wikipedia could be improved. For a reference, take a look at the original article which is very different from its current form: https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Christianity_and_Islam&oldid=692619 DivineReality (talk) 22:31, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

The article seems to be a valid encyclopedic topic at the intersection of Christianity and other religions and Islam and other religions.

I cannot trace what complaint the editor is referring to. There was a recent edit request by Captdeys (talk · contribs) which was initially declined but was then accepted after he provided citations, so I don't think that's the issue. I suspect the complaint is about a different article, but all we have to go on is his heading "Islam and Christianity". – Fayenatic London 09:00, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Sacred Heart of Jesus Fire

This draft seems like an interesting subject. Not sure if it's covered under another name? Seems worth including but needs.some work. FloridaArmy (talk) 02:07, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

interesting edit series

The all-female band BarlowGirl is on my watchlist and I saw an anon remove what looked to be an off-topic sentence and one of the page maintainers (who I assume added it) restored the content. I have had unpleasant interactions with the editor but would like an extra set of eyes on the edit to see if my intuition is correct or not. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:21, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

As an uninvolved editor, I think the removal is correct, because the removed part is off-topic. JohnThorne (talk) 00:23, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. Another editor thought the same and stepped-in after I posted. It seems resolved. I'm glad that 1) I could trust my intuition, 2) that I avoided confrontation over the issue, and 3) the issue resolved itself amicably. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:41, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Assistance with Christianity and colonialism

Christianity and colonialism has become the focus of a multiple-IP address user that has been making disruptive edits on other articles to promote the Christianity and colonialism article.

There isn't an edit war going on and it's hard to say there's even a "dispute" as the user has only responded once to my comments on the Talk page. The user continues to add uncited material to Christianity and colonialism and out-of-context links to Christianity and colonialism on other pages.

The article itself struggles with WP:UNSOURCED (many sections with few, if any citations), WP:NPOV, and WP:Out of scope (eg, equating post-colonial foreign missionary activity with colonialism, conflating imperialism with colonialism).

I am not sure what the correct protocol is at this point. Would love advice.

GottaShowMe (talk) 16:06, 25 April 2020 (UTC)