Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Lutheranism/Archive 2
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Wikipedia:WikiProject Lutheranism. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
Hello, I am the creator of the above page. All Saints' Church, also known as Schlosskirche, is the place where Lutheranism, and all of Protestantism began. It's also the place where Luther and Melanchthon are buried. It's history is intimately tied with Lutheranism, since it is the place where the 95 theses were posted. I need some help on it, however: first of all, I need a rating from your project, and most likely from several others. Secondly, the article could be extremely improved if someone manages to translate the German version of the page, found at "Schlosskirche, Wittenberg" on the German Wikipedia. Perhaps, if that page is translated and a good deal of information added, then All Saints' might be able to become a GA or FA! There are plenty of pictures, and I will begin moving those from the German page now, but if you could help me by assessing the page and searching for someone to translate the German, I would be eternally grateful. Thanks, Benjamin Scrīptum est - Fecī 18:45, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
FA Candidate Notice
Liturgical calendar (Lutheran), an article within the scope of our project, is now a Featured Articel Candidate. Please express your opinion. -- jackturner3 (talk) 19:46, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Regarding project banner
I have noted how several articles relevant to Christianity have only the banner of more focused projects, several Christianity banners, or no banners at all on the talk pages. This makes it rather difficult for the Christianity WikiProject to keep track of all articles, as well as potentially reducing the number of editors who might be willing to work on the article, if only the more focused banner is in place. If I were to adjust the existing {{ChristianityWikiProject}} to include separate individual assessment information for each relevant Christianity project, and display the projects which deal with it, like perhaps the {{WikiProject Australia}} does, would the members of this project object to having that banner ulimately used in place of this project's one? It might help reduce the banner clutter, as well. John Carter (talk) 18:16, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose I would like to keep our seperate project banner. Ultimately, every artcile in our project could be described as a part of Wikiproject:Christianity, thus necessitating the removal of all of our project banners. In short, that would mean we would be reduced to little more than a task force of project Chrisitanity. Additionally, I don't think clutter is much of a problem anymore now that we are supposed to be nesting project banners for articles that fall in the scope of multiple projects. I would rather keep the seperate project and simply add the Christianity banner ahead of the Lutheranism banner to the most important articles on the project. How do other related Wikiprojects feel about this idea? -- jackturner3 (talk) 18:44, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose - in agreement with Jackturner3 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thright (talk • contribs) 23:16, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
This needs more editors. The theological sections are descending into a state incomprehensible to the general reader. 86.142.255.208 (talk) 00:59, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
ELCIC
Can I get a hand over at Talk:Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada? Two accounts created today, apparently by the same person, have started a crusade to eliminate any reference to controversy over the blessing of same-sex unions on the grounds that is in inherently "biased" since the church has "made up its mind" about the issue. I have placed a sockpuppet suspicion template on one of the user pages, which s/he/it keeps removing. The user(s) is/are quite prepared to make vandalising, POV, and soapbox edits, while nailing me for the very same offences when I try to counteract them. Carolynparrishfan (talk) 23:35, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
- this is simply not true. Please see the ELCIC talk page. Also see Carolyn's talk page as she has had this problem with MANY users.Thright (talk) 23:38, 7 March 2008 (UTC)thright
- By "many users", Thright means that there is one exchange on my talk page relating to a minor disagreement about how to address the question of same-sex unions (also from an editor who thought it "inappropriate" to mention the issue at all). I hardly cherry-pick. Indeed, most of my edits deal with liturgical matters. (I was the original author of Evangelical Lutheran Worship, for example). Carolynparrishfan (talk) 23:50, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
- can you please stop this childish debateThright (talk) 23:51, 7 March 2008 (UTC)thright
- By "many users", Thright means that there is one exchange on my talk page relating to a minor disagreement about how to address the question of same-sex unions (also from an editor who thought it "inappropriate" to mention the issue at all). I hardly cherry-pick. Indeed, most of my edits deal with liturgical matters. (I was the original author of Evangelical Lutheran Worship, for example). Carolynparrishfan (talk) 23:50, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Well, since no one's bothered to intervene here, I've started a request for comment. Carolynparrishfan (talk) 01:07, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Coordinators for the Christianity projects
I have recently started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Christianity#Coordinators? regarding the possibility of the various Christianity projects somewhat integrating, in the style of the Military history project, for the purposes of providing better coordination of project activities. Any parties interested in the idea, or perhaps willing to offer their services as one of the potential coordinators, is more than welcome to make any comments there. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 20:58, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Coordinator?
It has probably been noticed by most of the editors who frequent this page that there is often a pronounced degree of overlap between the various projects relating to Christianity. Given that overlap, and the rather large amount of content we have related to the subject of Christianity, it has been proposed that the various Christianity projects select a group of coordinators who would help ensure the cooperation of the various projects as well as help manage some project related activities, such as review, assessment, portal management, and the like. Preferably, we would like to consider the possibility of having one party from each of the major Christianity projects included, given the degree of specialization which some of the articles contain. We now are accepting nominations for the coordinators positions at Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity/Coordinators/Election 1. Any parties interested in helping performing some of the management duties of the various Christianity projects is encouraged to nominate themselves there. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 17:33, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
- Much to my surprise, the period for the factual elections of the new coordinators has started a bit earlier than I expected. For what it's worth, as the "instigator" of the proposed coordinators, the purpose of having them is not to try to impose any sort of "discipline" on the various projects relating to Christianity, but just to ensure that things like assessment, peer review, portal maintainance, and other similar directly project-related functions get peformed for all the various projects relating to Christianity. If there are any individuals with this project who are already doing such activities for the project, and who want to take on the role more formally, I think nominations are being held open until the end of the elections themselves. And, for the purposes of this election, any member in good standing of any of the Christianity projects can either be nominated or express their votes at Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity/Coordinators/Election 1. Thank you for your attention. John Carter (talk) 00:38, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Christian debate on persecution and toleration and related topics
Two days ago I had added a short paragraph to the article Christianity giving an overview about the Christian debate on persecution and toleration, the article on which I am currently working. This was removed by another editor, who was of the opinion that one should describe the actions of the Inquisition as "Prosecution" instead of "Persecution" and that I would need a source for a new paragraph. Well, I really hope that we don't need to resort to heated debates about wp:NPOV and wp:verifiability here; It is only fair to debate the topic and it doesn't really hurt: If happened some hundred years ago and is nowadays totally rejected by all Christians (according to the historian Coffey, whom I have quoted in the article). And if no one works on the topic from an enlightened Christian perspective, the Neopagans will just continue working on it from their perspective; since the details here are really difficult, this might result in somehow biased articles, even with good-faith-editing. So, if you have the time check out articles like Persecution of religion in ancient Rome and see if you can help there. Regards, Zara1709 (talk) 22:22, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- As the editor in question, I thought I would provide a response to this comment. I admit that I didn't take a close look at the edits that were made, and I thus apologize for my reaction. The paragraph in question seems sound, though I find that the last sentence makes too far a leap into the future to be totally congruous with that section of the article. I would also note that even something that is considered "prominent" or "well-known" historically needs to be referenced, especially if there is any controversy concerning the subject-matter. Nautical Mongoose (talk) 00:51, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Needs serious work. Neddyseagoon - talk 11:20, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
THeology workgroup
The proposed theology workgroup of Wikiproject Christianity is now online, here. Any suggestions, improvements, and ideas are more than welcome - as are interested editors. Pastordavid (talk) 19:13, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Standards for inclusion in this project
I am questioning some of the articles that are being included in this project. Example David Hasselhoff which states Although Hasselhoff was raised Roman Catholic, he and his family attended non-denominational church services. Where is the Lutheran connection? I deleted the project tag from the article. Dbiel (Talk) 19:18, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Should artilces like Dick Bremer be part of this project? Dbiel (Talk) 19:33, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Even articles like Dr. Seuss I am finding it difficult to locate any Lutheran connection in the article other that the project tag. Dbiel (Talk) 19:41, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme
As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.
- The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
- The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
- A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.
Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.
Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 20:54, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
I realize that it might not have ever been specifically asked for, but here it is. If the members of the project think it is less than productive, it could probably be deleted fairly easily, but it occurred to me that some of you might want it. It could still use additional work however. John Carter (talk) 17:53, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
- I didn't even know it existed. I think it should be deleted, as it is not kept up properly.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 01:56, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Susan Johnson
New article at Susan Johnson (bishop). Please help improve! Carolynparrishfan (talk) 16:06, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Articles flagged for cleanup
Currently, 1085 articles are assigned to this project, of which 232, or 21.4%, are flagged for cleanup of some sort. (Data as of 14 July 2008.) Are you interested in finding out more? I am offering to generate cleanup to-do lists on a project or work group level. See User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings for details. More than 150 projects and work groups have already subscribed, and adding a subscription for yours is easy - just place a template on your project page.
If you want to respond to this canned message, please do so at my user talk page; I'm not watching this page. --B. Wolterding (talk) 17:36, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Evangelical Lutheran Church of Canada
I have created a stub page at Evangelical Lutheran Church of Canada. Information on this body does not appear to be readily available online. If anyone knows anything, and especially if anyone has access to print resources, I'd be most grateful. Carolynparrishfan (talk) 22:25, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Lutheranism
Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.
We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.
A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.
We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 23:23, 15 September 2008 (UTC)