This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Why? They are completely distinct topics. And it's not really fair absorb the Christology of one faith tradition into another. If one is to say that these are not explaining faith traditions and we already have pages for this (i.e. Oriental Orthodoxy), then I would have to say that there should neither be an article titled "Chalcedonian" and rather both of these articles should be sections of the "Council of Chalcedon" article. Deusveritasest ( talk) 07:49, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
A registered editor delinked my link to Indian (Malankara) Orthodox Church.I was wondering why. Student7 ( talk) 11:51, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
I notice that some articles link "non-Chalcedonian" to this page whereas others link to Oriental Orthodoxy. But I'm wondering if those two are different enough to be separate articles? If they are significantly different, what criteria could we develop to determine when to link to each? Case in point: I created a redirect page for "non-Chalcedonian Christianity" and linked it towards "Oriental Orthodoxy" only because that's where "non-Chalcedonian Churches" links--but I wondered if both those should be redirected to here instead. Or if the two existing articles should be merged. Help, please? Thanks, Aristophanes68 ( talk) 20:39, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
This is just another definition for Oriental Churches. This should be merged with the larger article: Oriental Church All4peace ( talk) 16:37, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
First and foremost: we cannot mix a theology, anti-Chalcedonianism, with a set of denominational institutions, the Oriental Orthodox Churches, extended to more denominations or not. Apples and oranges. Two different categories. Keep the articles linked to each other, for sure, but don't mix together distinct categories. Arminden ( talk) 22:00, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
Two autodirects leading to Oriental Orthodox Churches, anti-Chalcedonian and Anti-Chalcedonian, are inaccurate. The two autodirects should be leading here, not there. This article makes it clear enough that "The most substantial non-Chalcedonian tradition is known as Oriental Orthodoxy" (which is linked to Oriental Orthodox Churches). As things are standing now, we have a theology, anti-Chalcedonianism, automatically linked to a set of denominational institutions, the Oriental Orthodox Churches. Apples and oranges. Two different categories. Whereas anti-Chalcedonian and non-Chalcedonian are pretty much synonymous, no logical conflict in linking them through an autodirect. Please do the right thing, now users who are looking up a concept, possibly in a 5th-6th-century context, end up on a page dealing mainly with a set of modern Church denominations. Cheers, Arminden ( talk) 21:52, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Unopposed move b uidh e 20:54, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Non-Chalcedonianism →
Non-Chalcedonian Christianity –
WP:PRECISION, per
WP:CONSISTENCY with
Chalcedonian Christianity and
Nicene Christianity. Mirroring reasoning emphasised twice at
Talk:Chalcedonian Christianity.
PPEMES (
talk) 08:33, 16 April 2020 (UTC) —Relisting.
b
uidh
e
05:09, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Lead currently reads:
This is written as though all non-Chalcedonian churches agree on doctrine. Shouldn't it be more like:
or
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Why? They are completely distinct topics. And it's not really fair absorb the Christology of one faith tradition into another. If one is to say that these are not explaining faith traditions and we already have pages for this (i.e. Oriental Orthodoxy), then I would have to say that there should neither be an article titled "Chalcedonian" and rather both of these articles should be sections of the "Council of Chalcedon" article. Deusveritasest ( talk) 07:49, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
A registered editor delinked my link to Indian (Malankara) Orthodox Church.I was wondering why. Student7 ( talk) 11:51, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
I notice that some articles link "non-Chalcedonian" to this page whereas others link to Oriental Orthodoxy. But I'm wondering if those two are different enough to be separate articles? If they are significantly different, what criteria could we develop to determine when to link to each? Case in point: I created a redirect page for "non-Chalcedonian Christianity" and linked it towards "Oriental Orthodoxy" only because that's where "non-Chalcedonian Churches" links--but I wondered if both those should be redirected to here instead. Or if the two existing articles should be merged. Help, please? Thanks, Aristophanes68 ( talk) 20:39, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
This is just another definition for Oriental Churches. This should be merged with the larger article: Oriental Church All4peace ( talk) 16:37, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
First and foremost: we cannot mix a theology, anti-Chalcedonianism, with a set of denominational institutions, the Oriental Orthodox Churches, extended to more denominations or not. Apples and oranges. Two different categories. Keep the articles linked to each other, for sure, but don't mix together distinct categories. Arminden ( talk) 22:00, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
Two autodirects leading to Oriental Orthodox Churches, anti-Chalcedonian and Anti-Chalcedonian, are inaccurate. The two autodirects should be leading here, not there. This article makes it clear enough that "The most substantial non-Chalcedonian tradition is known as Oriental Orthodoxy" (which is linked to Oriental Orthodox Churches). As things are standing now, we have a theology, anti-Chalcedonianism, automatically linked to a set of denominational institutions, the Oriental Orthodox Churches. Apples and oranges. Two different categories. Whereas anti-Chalcedonian and non-Chalcedonian are pretty much synonymous, no logical conflict in linking them through an autodirect. Please do the right thing, now users who are looking up a concept, possibly in a 5th-6th-century context, end up on a page dealing mainly with a set of modern Church denominations. Cheers, Arminden ( talk) 21:52, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Unopposed move b uidh e 20:54, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Non-Chalcedonianism →
Non-Chalcedonian Christianity –
WP:PRECISION, per
WP:CONSISTENCY with
Chalcedonian Christianity and
Nicene Christianity. Mirroring reasoning emphasised twice at
Talk:Chalcedonian Christianity.
PPEMES (
talk) 08:33, 16 April 2020 (UTC) —Relisting.
b
uidh
e
05:09, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Lead currently reads:
This is written as though all non-Chalcedonian churches agree on doctrine. Shouldn't it be more like:
or