Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Christian history

This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject Christian history and anything related to its purposes and tasks.

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

Archives: 1

Template and list of project pages

There is an incomplete template that needs to get items. If we figure out what goes in there, then we can add the template to those pages. History2007 (talk) 14:08, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like we can only go up to 5 items... is there a way to do more? I was thinking we could have one section for each major period in Christian History. After what we already have we could have "Medieval Christian History in the West" "Medieval Christian History in the East (or a better title for the same period)" "Protestant Reformation and Roman Catholic Counter Reformation (or we could separate this into two separate sections)"... etc — Preceding unsigned comment added by ReformedArsenal (talk • contribs) 16:24, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There should be no 5 item limit. I will add some more to see. History2007 (talk) 21:06, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It was the List Names... When I added a 6th and 7th they didn't show up. I must have just done something wrong.

Here are image alternatives to try. History2007 (talk) 09:05, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I like those, but they are all basically Bible related images. I would like to go with something from early Christian history rather than the Biblical period (just to differentiate).

Something like those would work well I think. Particularly the Nicaea one.

Look at Good shepherd, there are better images and the better one at the Catacomb of Priscilla may be the one to use. The problem with the Nicaea is hat we are getting complaints (see the Jesus page) of ignoring the non-trinitarians. So Nicaea would build on that, although I do like it. History2007 (talk) 13:51, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Use Attention

Let's try to make sure we're adding the template ({{WikiProject Christian History|class=|importance=|attention=}}) to applicable pages. And lets mark with "attention=yes" on things we want to work on... then we can add them to this list.ReformedArsenal (talk) 16:38, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please hold on placement of the new project template

I'm working on integrating the Christian history group into Template:WikiProject Christianity. Honestly, I think it would actually probably work better there. Give me a bit longer to get everything together. It should be able to provide everything a more specific template could, while also, potentially, reducing the amount of banner clutter. John Carter (talk) 21:42, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok with me. But we can build the template in the meantime anyway. History2007 (talk) 22:14, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify... when we say template, are we talking about the "Part of a Series on..." thing above, or the

WikiProject Christian History

one that I put together?ReformedArsenal (talk) 02:44, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I meant the part of a series. That is the one that will go on many pages and gives the overview of the field. History2007 (talk) 07:21, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The sidebar template currently in use might better function as a collapsible template to be added to the bottom of articles. That seems to be the preferred format currently. For that template, I might also perhaps list, if possible, the various definied and partially defined eras in Christian history, like early Christianity, the Reformation, and the like, as well as perhaps any specific articles relating to, for instance, First-century Christianity, Second-century Christianity, and the like. Such articles, if they exist, would also be very important to this subject, as they are effectively the main "overview" articles on individual eras and centuries. John Carter (talk) 18:01, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The sidebar can be collapsed, and so it would just show the section titles in most cases. History2007 (talk) 18:10, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Project banner

I have created a new copy of the project banner at User:John Carter/Christianity banner. It can be seen in use at User talk:John Carter/Christianity banner. I think it might be best if this banner is used for the Christianity project. Opinions? John Carter (talk) 18:03, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. History2007 (talk) 18:52, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fine with that. Are you going to make "Christian History" a sub tag like "Theology" or "Calvinism" is on that banner? I added |history=yes|history-importance=top to the John Calvin {{WikiProject Christianity}} tag on the John Calvin Article but it didn't seem to add anything to the rendered template when I saved it. Did you make the change to the official template yet?ReformedArsenal (talk) 19:10, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't actually moved it into place yet. There are still a few minor details I want to work on regarding some other groups before I go ahead with a full change. John Carter (talk) 19:30, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Any ideas on when that might happen? ReformedArsenal (talk) 15:05, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway, in parallel, can we get the sidebar items finalized. I added a few, but nothing beyond Chalcedon yet. And I think as John said, a lower navbar may also be a good idea, so I think we might as well do both (same items), so they can get used as appropriate. History2007 (talk) 15:11, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is a limit to 6 headings on the side banner... so we need to decide what six to use. I have a history series that breaks it up into "Late Ancient" "Byzantine" "Medieval" "Reformation" "Modern" and "Global" We could just use that?ReformedArsenal (talk) 02:05, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I showed how to add more than 6 before. I will add some more to the top one. You can have 12 if you want. I made the first template have 9 items. History2007 (talk) 08:18, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Scope of project

There has been a bit of a recent ruckus about how to deal with articles about groups which have been counted by the Catholic Church as "heresies." Personally, I think that a lot of those articles might not really comfortably fit with any other groups. Would there be any objection to adding defunct Christian denominations to the scope of this project, which might hopefully give those articles, which often don't get that much attention, a bit more attention and, maybe, help in development? John Carter (talk) 20:40, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not open that Pandoras's box John. The last thing we need is the type of infighting which that heresies template prompted. Anyway, this was Arsenal's idea and he has not worked on it for a while, so as usual, we are shorthanded. I think everyone the Christianity project should be required to read John 13:34-35 every day before they can log in. History2007 (talk) 21:10, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've been adding the tag to projects here and there, but I've been at a conference and have a class this week. I agree with History in saying that those heresies templates are awful (despite the fact that I would count them as heresies) and only serve to promote a Catholic supremacy (which is exemplified with the fact that Protestantism is included as one of the heresies). I don't have a problem with working on them from a historical point of view, but I want to stay away from the theology of them as much as possible.ReformedArsenal (talk) 21:33, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't disagree that the templates are appalling. My only point was that it does seem to me that the articles on the defunct Christian movements will often get little if any attention from other projects, even if they are within their scope. Maybe, just maybe, a different template, maybe something like Template:Defunct Christian denominations, or maybe, for some of the early ones, Template:Early Christian heresies, might be useful to bring them together. The former template I think would be useful for any number of groups. The latter might or might not be, but in any case I think it might make sense to make sure the articles on those subjects fall within the clear scope of some project. John Carter (talk) 21:46, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, whichever way you go, let us do it smoothly not to walk over John 13:34-35 in the process. History2007 (talk) 00:04, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

One point. ABC-Clio, a reputable academic publisher did publish an "Encyclopedia of Heresies and Heretics" back in the 1990s. I do think that there is basis for use of the term, and even the existence of the Christian heresy article, although I admit it could use a lot of clean-up. By the way, I think List of heresies in Catholicism, the article related to the problematic template, could use maybe a name and scope change back to List of Christian heresies. Anyone who might want to discuss that on the article talk page is free to do so. John Carter (talk) 18:30, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

June 2012 newsletter piece?

Anyone feel up to writing a short section for Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity/Outreach/June 2012 regarding this group? Also, if anyone wanted to, it could probably be indicated on the Community portal as a new group as well. John Carter (talk) 18:22, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fine with me. Let us see if Arsenal will do it, given that the group was his idea. History2007 (talk) 18:56, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

When would I need to have this done? I have a sermon this Sunday am in an intensive Systematics course this week.ReformedArsenal (talk) 20:28, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Basically, just maybe a short paragraph about the group, the fact that it has just been started, its goals, stuff like that. A short, quick ad to draw new members, basically. I probably could do it myself, but it helps to have more than one person's signature on the newsletter. John Carter (talk) 20:36, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll write a quick one up tomorrow and post it here.ReformedArsenal (talk) 22:31, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, and how about a self-imposed 3 month project plan? Let us give ourselves 3 months to get the project, overview situation, templates, etc. in reasonable shape. That way, it might even be better to include it in the July newsletter because by then we have some of our act together. History2007 (talk) 06:45, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I like the idea, although it might work best if we also had more people involved from the beginning to do so. In general, I personally might like it if the group were to have a few navbox templates for the main topics, which would assist in importance assessment, which I've always found one of the biggest difficulties myself. Also, we might work on Outline of Christianity#History of Christianity and ensure the more important material is included there. Timeline of Christianity might be relevant too. I would myself prefer it if we focused most attention on articles which were specifically relevant to either more than one or, possibly, maybe none of the extant other Christianity groups and projects, but would welcome any other ideas. But if we are to have it for this month's newsletter, the sooner the better. I would like to have it out on Sunday, if possible. John Carter (talk) 18:09, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How about not rushing and doing it "right" for the July newsletter. History2007 (talk) 18:11, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No objections. But it might help if we had something else to put in the June edition. John Carter (talk) 18:15, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a June draft so we can see what else to suggest. Is there a feast of some type in June? History2007 (talk) 18:46, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've started a little work on the June draft at the link at the top of this section. There's more to be done, of course, and I'll try to do that today or tomorrow, but if anyone wants to revise it at this time they should feel free to do so. John Carter (talk) 20:21, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Gregory of Nazianzus FARC

I have nominated Gregory of Nazianzus for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.--Redtigerxyz ^Talk 13:29, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]