Wikipedia talk:Contents/Portals/Religion and belief systems

Scope of topics here

What are "Bible," "Book of Mormon," "Creationism," "Pope," and "Saints" doing on here; those are not religions. If those are there so should be 'Apocrypha,' 'Ecumenical Archbishop,' 'Gnostic Gospels,' 'Quran.' Dchmelik (talk)

Sounds good, add them in! RichardF (talk) 12:59, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would rather take them out and add the minor religions from the religion portal--or should this section 'Religion and belief systems' really be 'Religion and belief systems and religious topics?'Dchmelik (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 10:56, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's over analyzing it. These are intended to be broad topics with simple names. You could make similar criticisms for every other section of every other Contents subpage. The point of the contents pages is to simplify how Wikipedia contents are organized. RichardF (talk) 12:08, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see what you mean. Another thing is I do not see why it has 'neo-pagan and revivalist ;' that may imply older paganism completely died out and that this is farther from revivalism than neo-paganism is, which is not the case; anyway most of it never completely died out.Dchmelik (talk) 08:56, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if there's some better subheading you have in mind, I won't object. The main point is to find one place to list every portal. RichardF (talk) 16:08, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have another subheading in mind, but I guess there are no portals for other paganisms, so it is fine for now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dchmelik (talk • contribs) 05:59, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Someone removed Sikhism and Bahá'í from Abrahamic religions, but Sri Guru Nanak studied both Hindu and Islamic scriptures, and both Hindus and Muslims became Sikhs. Bahá'í 'manifestations of God' include Krishna, Buddha, and also Sri Guru Nanak is highly regarded. All of them have Dharma named after them. Sikhism and Bahá'í are in both categories.--Dchmelik (talk) 02:07, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I heard it from a Sikh that the translation of Sri Guru Granth Sahib that has the word 'Muhammad' in it is incorrect: the original does not have that word, so I am not sure about my earlier statement about what Sri Guru Nanak studied, though he said something like 'there is no Hindu; there is no Muslim'... but the point is, the gurus were apparently not Abrahamic.--Dchmelik (talk) 02:58, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

They should add some more religious portals in there.

Eg: Cao Daism, Mandeanism, etc.

BTW, I would suggest placing Falun Gong into the Buddhism category. I would also suggest adding Zen to the Buddhist category too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.95.63.5 (talk) 19:37, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Atheism/Nontheism

I would !vote for including Portal:Atheism and Portal:Nontheism in this section of the big Portal:Contents/Portals page. I'm sure that's where a reader would look first. -- John of Reading (talk) 20:59, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Both portals resided under Other here for over 2 1/2 years, including years with multiple edits by the person removing it now and claiming a need for consensus to put it back. In fact, this page was created with Atheism portal listed in Other in 2007. Default is clearly to leave them present in that section until there is a full discussion with consensus for why they should be removed. Frankly, I'd put them back there myself pending such a discussion, but I'm not currently of a mood for more editing drama. I'll support anyone who does, though. -- Michael Devore (talk) 21:32, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think usually wherever a clear negation exists for a article, the article usually mentions the negation. Here the negation is Athiesm to religion.Peaceworld111 (talk) 22:09, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have had to revert the blanking of them again for a second time. Y would someone remove them from the section and not even put them somewhere else. Looks a bit fishy to simply remove them altogether and not even try to find a place for them. I personal dont care were they are listed - but will not allow them to simply be blanked off this directory.Moxy (talk) 23:24, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think that they are most suited to religion/belief portal anyway. I don't see any other closer portal to athiesm.Peaceworld111 (talk) 23:46, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I guess your right i also dont see a "Better" place for them. The fact they have been here since the page's inception on December 8, 2007 i would hazard to guess no one else has ever suggested a better place for them that has gained consensus. Regardless we must make sure they are not simply blanked off this directory as it may look like vandalism to some people. I put them under the header "Irreligion" perhaps this will eliminate any confusion - but if all think under "Other " is best pls revert my edit of the header. Moxy (talk) 23:59, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

{{Atheism and Irreligion Sidebar}} As consistently shown at Portal:Contents/Religion and belief systems, these portals belong in this Religion and belief systems section. As stated in the above intro, "A belief system can refer to a religion or a world view." Clearly, Atheism and Nontheism are world views. I also support including them under the Irreligion header. There's absolutely no reason to believe other irreligion portals will not be added here in the future as well. -- RichardF (talk) 01:28, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The "Irreligion" header has been removed and all is how it was...I do wish this person would come to the talk page however. O well its all back to normal.Moxy (talk) 02:51, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Richard, you are really stretching it by claiming non-theism/atheism are belief systems. It may be true in some cases, but in many cases it is a lack of belief about the topic. I still think this is the proper place for them--or perhaps the philosophy section.--Dchmelik (talk) 02:58, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dharmic vs. Indian religions

Please note that within Universities throughout the world and within normal scholarly discourse there is no such thing as 'Dharmic Religions' as a category. The scholarly term is 'Indian Religions'. Somebody keeps reverting from Indian Religions to Dharmic Religions and this term has no currency within academic circles. Thankyou for understanding and please spread the word - as it were! 81.107.150.246 (talk) 19:38, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All the Indian religions listed have the word 'Dharma' in their name. Also, Buddha Dharma ('Buddhism') was almost eradicated from India, and mostly developed in other countries.--Dchmelik (talk) 02:41, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Paganism

Why isn't it on the list? It's most definitely a religion Agentgdward (talk) 17:46, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]