This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Anyone have any thoughts as to what exactly we should clean up here? -- MessengerAtLWU ( talk | contribs) 01:36, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
Why are there links directly into Ray Comfort's online store? The links are not necessary and should be removed. First of all, Ray Comfort is not the standard of Gospel Tracts, nor is Bill Bright or Jack Chick. Gospel tracts go back much further than these contemporary writers. It seems that the intent of the article is to sell tracts for Ray Comfort, quite honestly, and this should be disdained. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.168.40.4 ( talk • contribs) 20:16, 12 July 2006
This section has no business being here. It may be an interesting news story related to tracts, but it is best served exactly where it is, in the article about The Great News Network. It is not a current event related to tracts themselves, and if it were, it would need to have a current event tag. The whole thing consists of block quotes from and links to The Great News Network website.
This article, or any other Wikipedia article, should not be an excuse for promoting Ray Comfort or anyone else. A review of edits by MessengerAtLWU seems to indicate this mistaken understanding of the purpose of Wikipedia. The re-adding of this material is indicative POV persistence. There is nothing particularly unique, notable, or particularly encyclopedic about the Ray Comfort tracts. That they are even mentioned amongst "Notable modern authors and publishers" is questionable, but by some measure reasonable.
The Etymology section has nothing whatsoever to do with etymology. If someone were to re-write this as a History section, that would be helpful and just a bit more relevant for a Wikipedia article.
Ideally this article needs a complete overhaul to bring it up to Wikipedia standards. Holford 18:44, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
Is it possible to have more information about other forms - Samisdat (sp?) for example? Discussion of it as a form of literature? Links to on line collections of everything written? Are all tracts available on internet? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.13.155.21 ( talk) 09:12, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
This article still needs more content, but I have reformatted it to reflect discussion so far. I expanded to a small extent on the history of tracts. I removed the notables list and placed most of the information within the narrative of the article. Comments? Holford 01:09, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
It seems to me that "tract" today also means a political text irrespective of the medium by which it is published, so that a newspaper article may be properly called a tract if its content conforms to the religious or political requirements thereof. -- Ludvikus 12:50, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
I think that the one image this article has of a tract is a poor image and there needs to be at least one more image of a tract. I think an image of a Chick tract (if one can be found that isn't copyrighted) would be very useful. -- PaladinWriter ( talk) 21:50, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
I added a statement about the word "tracting". It's an extremely common word use by Latter-day saints to refer to proselytizing that stems from the days when LDS missionaries focused on passing out tracts extensively. -- User:Pinto24601 4 August 2011 —Preceding undated comment added 04:20, 5 August 2011 (UTC).
Tracting have been of immerse good in spreading the word of Jesus Christ our Lord Maamefransema ( talk) 22:55, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Tract (literature). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:21, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Anyone have any thoughts as to what exactly we should clean up here? -- MessengerAtLWU ( talk | contribs) 01:36, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
Why are there links directly into Ray Comfort's online store? The links are not necessary and should be removed. First of all, Ray Comfort is not the standard of Gospel Tracts, nor is Bill Bright or Jack Chick. Gospel tracts go back much further than these contemporary writers. It seems that the intent of the article is to sell tracts for Ray Comfort, quite honestly, and this should be disdained. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.168.40.4 ( talk • contribs) 20:16, 12 July 2006
This section has no business being here. It may be an interesting news story related to tracts, but it is best served exactly where it is, in the article about The Great News Network. It is not a current event related to tracts themselves, and if it were, it would need to have a current event tag. The whole thing consists of block quotes from and links to The Great News Network website.
This article, or any other Wikipedia article, should not be an excuse for promoting Ray Comfort or anyone else. A review of edits by MessengerAtLWU seems to indicate this mistaken understanding of the purpose of Wikipedia. The re-adding of this material is indicative POV persistence. There is nothing particularly unique, notable, or particularly encyclopedic about the Ray Comfort tracts. That they are even mentioned amongst "Notable modern authors and publishers" is questionable, but by some measure reasonable.
The Etymology section has nothing whatsoever to do with etymology. If someone were to re-write this as a History section, that would be helpful and just a bit more relevant for a Wikipedia article.
Ideally this article needs a complete overhaul to bring it up to Wikipedia standards. Holford 18:44, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
Is it possible to have more information about other forms - Samisdat (sp?) for example? Discussion of it as a form of literature? Links to on line collections of everything written? Are all tracts available on internet? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.13.155.21 ( talk) 09:12, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
This article still needs more content, but I have reformatted it to reflect discussion so far. I expanded to a small extent on the history of tracts. I removed the notables list and placed most of the information within the narrative of the article. Comments? Holford 01:09, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
It seems to me that "tract" today also means a political text irrespective of the medium by which it is published, so that a newspaper article may be properly called a tract if its content conforms to the religious or political requirements thereof. -- Ludvikus 12:50, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
I think that the one image this article has of a tract is a poor image and there needs to be at least one more image of a tract. I think an image of a Chick tract (if one can be found that isn't copyrighted) would be very useful. -- PaladinWriter ( talk) 21:50, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
I added a statement about the word "tracting". It's an extremely common word use by Latter-day saints to refer to proselytizing that stems from the days when LDS missionaries focused on passing out tracts extensively. -- User:Pinto24601 4 August 2011 —Preceding undated comment added 04:20, 5 August 2011 (UTC).
Tracting have been of immerse good in spreading the word of Jesus Christ our Lord Maamefransema ( talk) 22:55, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Tract (literature). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:21, 13 January 2018 (UTC)