This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Christianity in the ante-Nicene period article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Material from History of early Christianity was split to Ante-Nicene Period on 15:57, 11 May 2009. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted so long as the latter page exists. Please leave this template in place to link the article histories and preserve this attribution. The former page's talk page can be accessed at Talk:History of early Christianity. |
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Ante-Nicene Period's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "ReferenceA":
Reference named "Harris":
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:13, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Merge Christianity in the 2nd century and Christianity in the 3rd century into Ante-Nicene period; same topic, no need to have three pages on the same topic. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 07:01, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Since the topic was raised above, for the record, Historiography of early Christianity has a ton of historiography coverage for this period. -- Beland ( talk) 02:13, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
I was planning to do the merge-down from Early Christianity (basically splitting that too-long article in half) and looking at the resulting length and overlap before revisiting the question of merge up from 2nd and 3rd century articles. -- Beland ( talk) 02:13, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: page moved, uncontroversial. -- Beland ( talk) 23:55, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
Ante-Nicene period →
Christianity in the ante-Nicene period – Rename to match form of other Christianity history articles.
tahc
chat
17:33, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
After looking at Christianity in the 2nd century and Christianity in the 3rd century and this article after its other merge, I think those two other articles should be merged into this one. The readable prose length here is 34.8k, which is below the threshold at which WP:SIZE recommends even starting to think about splitting up on length alone (40k). Most of the content of those articles is more or less a word-for-word copy of this article. This would not be a problem if the subarticles followed Wikipedia:Summary style and the intro of each subarticle was a copy of a paragraph in this article that summarizes the subtopic. Instead, the copied prose is from all the sections of this article. This article doesn't try to break down the ante-Nicene period cleanly in half into the 2nd and 3rd centuries; it breaks the topic down into subtopics like Church Fathers, scriptures, practices, spread, diversity of beliefs, etc. Breakdown by subtopic makes more sense to me, given that we have detail articles on topics which do follow summary style, and are also somewhat less directly redundant because they cover a subtopic across a broader span of time. The 2nd and 3rd century articles are broken down in the same way, and are sometimes summarizing the same subarticles in similar ways. It's a bit harder to read about the trends of the period if half the explanation has to be in 2nd century and half has to be in 3rd century, or alternatively the same explanation needs to be repeated in both places.
The main non-redundant material are timelines from both the 2nd and 3rd century. Those aren't prose, so I'm not sure how they should count against length here, but if we want to make the post-merge article shorter, I think it would be better to move some details to topic subarticles, in particular Church Fathers. -- Beland ( talk) 00:45, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
stop letting people duplicate everything"Christianity in the 2nd century" et cetera is a duplicate of existing articles; so, if you want to be consistent, you should support merging those duplicate articles back to the original articles. Also, I don't see History of Christianity use a century-by-century approach, do you? If you want to change it, start with the basics, and propose a century-by-century approach there. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 09:21, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
@
Tahc: regarding
this revert by you, edit-summary No WP:Consensus. Please to do NOT circumvent the discussion process to make a controversial merge
: adding sourced info which improves the article should not be removed. If that info duplicates another article, it only illustrates the redundancy of having multiple articles on the same topic. I see a stubborn unwillingness on your part to reach consensus, or give way to proposals with which you disagree, despite defending a minority position.
Joshua Jonathan -
Let's talk!
04:34, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
After well over a month of the discussion thread being open, one editor opposes and three editors support the merge; there seems to be ample consensus to do the merge. -- Beland ( talk) 00:50, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Christianity in the ante-Nicene period article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Material from History of early Christianity was split to Ante-Nicene Period on 15:57, 11 May 2009. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted so long as the latter page exists. Please leave this template in place to link the article histories and preserve this attribution. The former page's talk page can be accessed at Talk:History of early Christianity. |
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Ante-Nicene Period's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "ReferenceA":
Reference named "Harris":
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 10:13, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Merge Christianity in the 2nd century and Christianity in the 3rd century into Ante-Nicene period; same topic, no need to have three pages on the same topic. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 07:01, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Since the topic was raised above, for the record, Historiography of early Christianity has a ton of historiography coverage for this period. -- Beland ( talk) 02:13, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
I was planning to do the merge-down from Early Christianity (basically splitting that too-long article in half) and looking at the resulting length and overlap before revisiting the question of merge up from 2nd and 3rd century articles. -- Beland ( talk) 02:13, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: page moved, uncontroversial. -- Beland ( talk) 23:55, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
Ante-Nicene period →
Christianity in the ante-Nicene period – Rename to match form of other Christianity history articles.
tahc
chat
17:33, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
After looking at Christianity in the 2nd century and Christianity in the 3rd century and this article after its other merge, I think those two other articles should be merged into this one. The readable prose length here is 34.8k, which is below the threshold at which WP:SIZE recommends even starting to think about splitting up on length alone (40k). Most of the content of those articles is more or less a word-for-word copy of this article. This would not be a problem if the subarticles followed Wikipedia:Summary style and the intro of each subarticle was a copy of a paragraph in this article that summarizes the subtopic. Instead, the copied prose is from all the sections of this article. This article doesn't try to break down the ante-Nicene period cleanly in half into the 2nd and 3rd centuries; it breaks the topic down into subtopics like Church Fathers, scriptures, practices, spread, diversity of beliefs, etc. Breakdown by subtopic makes more sense to me, given that we have detail articles on topics which do follow summary style, and are also somewhat less directly redundant because they cover a subtopic across a broader span of time. The 2nd and 3rd century articles are broken down in the same way, and are sometimes summarizing the same subarticles in similar ways. It's a bit harder to read about the trends of the period if half the explanation has to be in 2nd century and half has to be in 3rd century, or alternatively the same explanation needs to be repeated in both places.
The main non-redundant material are timelines from both the 2nd and 3rd century. Those aren't prose, so I'm not sure how they should count against length here, but if we want to make the post-merge article shorter, I think it would be better to move some details to topic subarticles, in particular Church Fathers. -- Beland ( talk) 00:45, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
stop letting people duplicate everything"Christianity in the 2nd century" et cetera is a duplicate of existing articles; so, if you want to be consistent, you should support merging those duplicate articles back to the original articles. Also, I don't see History of Christianity use a century-by-century approach, do you? If you want to change it, start with the basics, and propose a century-by-century approach there. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 09:21, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
@
Tahc: regarding
this revert by you, edit-summary No WP:Consensus. Please to do NOT circumvent the discussion process to make a controversial merge
: adding sourced info which improves the article should not be removed. If that info duplicates another article, it only illustrates the redundancy of having multiple articles on the same topic. I see a stubborn unwillingness on your part to reach consensus, or give way to proposals with which you disagree, despite defending a minority position.
Joshua Jonathan -
Let's talk!
04:34, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
After well over a month of the discussion thread being open, one editor opposes and three editors support the merge; there seems to be ample consensus to do the merge. -- Beland ( talk) 00:50, 9 April 2020 (UTC)