The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:merge. –
FayenaticLondon 07:36, 6 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:Merge duplicate categories. I'm suggesting merging the newer and smaller category but the reverse merge would be as acceptable.
Tassedethe (
talk) 14:16, 23 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Support I prefer the proposed method, as the reverse would potentially exclude composers and the like.
SFB 13:28, 25 May 2014 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Branches of Christianity
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:merge. –
FayenaticLondon 08:00, 6 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Comment The only use that their separate existances served was to give a fig leaf to the Catholic Church, whose position it is that it is not a denomination of Christianity. Calling it a "branch" allowed it to be seen in the overall context while preserving their sensibilities.
Laurel Lodged (
talk) 19:00, 27 May 2014 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category: Shabbat
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale:Merge. The category is redundant. Only one of the two is needed.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 13:35, 23 May 2014 (UTC)reply
In retrospect I understand.
Category:Shabbat refers to the Jewish tradition, while
Category:Sabbath refers to the Christian tradition. Still, it's very confusing!
Oppose both proposals. The first one merges the Jewish and Christian traditions, and the second tries to label the Christian one in Jewish terms. --
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs) 22:01, 23 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Dear BrownHairedGirl, how do you mean the latter? Proposal is just to make clear that the word is used in Christian sense, so to add this in brackets.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 22:25, 23 May 2014 (UTC)reply
BrownHairedGirl's point is that "Shabbat" is a Jewish term unfamiliar to most Christians.
Category:Sabbath could be renamed to
Category:Christian Sabbath but I do not see way that improves on things. It seems better to make Shabbat a sub-cat of Sabbath, and consider Sabbath for all types there-of. tahcchat 19:20, 24 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Oppose all of the above. I would only support Tahc's suggestion if the main category was
Category:Days of rest.
SFB 13:25, 25 May 2014 (UTC)reply
SFB, you seem to be asking for vagueness.
Do you want
Category:Sabbath to be about Christian sabbath only, but just not call it that? tahcchat 17:04, 25 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Sabbath does not exclusively refer to the Christian Sabbath. The article
Sabbath is even broader and actually covers all days of rest. I advocate changing
Category:Sabbath to
Category:Days of rest – a category covering articles that exclusively cover the Christian Sabbath and not days of rest more broadly would be a small one indeed.
SFB 20:47, 26 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Nearly everything that is directly in
Category:Sabbath is about the Christian Sabbath-- it would not be "a small one indeed."
Of the eleven items currently in the category, only five are specifically describing just the Christian Sabbath.
SFB 17:39, 27 May 2014 (UTC)reply
I see you are correct. All the more reason to keep the
Category:Sabbath about Sabbath in general. tahcchat 22:30, 27 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep -- Shabbat is a Hebrew word for a period from Friday sunset to Saturday sunset. Sabbath is an English word derived from it, which is sometimes (perhaps incorrectly) applied to Sunday. The Seventh Day Adventists worship on Saturdays. I would support (at least in gental terms) the line being taken by BHG and Tahc, of having Sabbath as the parent and the differnet interpretations of that (by Jews and various kinds of Christians) as subcats.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 20:36, 25 May 2014 (UTC)reply
There's a lot of distracting discussions going on now. My main point was, we seem to forget that a naive reader won't know the difference between Sabbath and Shabbat. If we would add Sabbath (Christian) and possibly even Shabbat (Jewish), things would be much clearer.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 21:10, 26 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Oppose MergeCategory:Shabbat corresponds directly to its parent article
Shabbat, contains articles related to the Jewish Sabbath and the mixing of the two is inappropriate.
Alansohn (
talk) 03:12, 29 May 2014 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category: Judeo-Christian topics
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:keep. –
FayenaticLondon 14:37, 6 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Although the original intention of
Category:Judeo-Christian topics may have been different, in practice there are mainly separate Jewish articles and separate Christian articles categorized here. So then practically speaking the category no longer serves it purpose.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 06:21, 29 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Oppose The Judeo-Christian tradition is not just a mashup of Christianity and Judaism. Has a notice of this proposal been posted at WikiProjects of Judaism, Christianity and History of Christianity?
LizRead!Talk! 21:55, 29 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Comment I'm not suggesting that the Judeo-Christian tradition is just a mashup of Christianity and Judaism. I'm just referring to the fact that there's currently many articles in this category that are written either from a Christian or a Jewish point of view, e.g.
Christian views on the Old Covenant or
Holy Spirit (Judaism). Alternatively, there are articles with a separate Christian chapter and Jewish chapter, e.g.
Idolatry, which isn't any better. And there's also articles which have nothing to do with beliefs and ethics, e.g.
Alba Bible and
Fiscus Judaicus. The whole point is, the purpose of the category is apparently not clear to people who are (have been) categorizing these articles.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 14:37, 30 May 2014 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category: Christian terms
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale:Delete. It is an extremely vague category. Almost everything that refers to Christianity can be put in this category.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 20:01, 23 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Repeat my call for deletion but I'll phrase my motivation better. A 'term' or 'terminology' is a non-defining characteristic.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 06:45, 29 May 2014 (UTC)reply
What would be a better category for articles like
Moh,
Gursikh or
Infaq? It would be a bit much to upmerge such articles to the parent religion category.
SFB 08:37, 31 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Moh and Gursikh: Sikh beliefs or Sikh philosophy or Sikh practices (I'm not really sure which of the three, you will probably know better). Btw, it's striking that there is currently so little classified in Sikh beliefs.
Infaq: Islamic ethics and Quaranic words and phrases.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 10:00, 31 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Just to avoid any misunderstandings: this proposal refers to Christianity only. The large amount of articles in Christianity already has an additional subcategory within Christianity (next to Christian terms), so there is little upmerging to the parent religion category needed.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 10:07, 31 May 2014 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Religious freedom
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:speedy redirect. The additions to the category by the user who created it were highly tangential, so I've simply removed them. Graham87 04:46, 23 May 2014 (UTC)reply
"Freedom of religion" is a ponderous, overly wordy way of saying "religious freedom", which is what most people say, rather than what academics say when they want to stuff their sentences with extra syllables. Can the category have both names? It should.
Cliffswallow-vaulting (
talk) 01:30, 23 May 2014 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:merge. –
FayenaticLondon 07:36, 6 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Nominator's rationale:Merge duplicate categories. I'm suggesting merging the newer and smaller category but the reverse merge would be as acceptable.
Tassedethe (
talk) 14:16, 23 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Support I prefer the proposed method, as the reverse would potentially exclude composers and the like.
SFB 13:28, 25 May 2014 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Branches of Christianity
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:merge. –
FayenaticLondon 08:00, 6 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Comment The only use that their separate existances served was to give a fig leaf to the Catholic Church, whose position it is that it is not a denomination of Christianity. Calling it a "branch" allowed it to be seen in the overall context while preserving their sensibilities.
Laurel Lodged (
talk) 19:00, 27 May 2014 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category: Shabbat
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale:Merge. The category is redundant. Only one of the two is needed.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 13:35, 23 May 2014 (UTC)reply
In retrospect I understand.
Category:Shabbat refers to the Jewish tradition, while
Category:Sabbath refers to the Christian tradition. Still, it's very confusing!
Oppose both proposals. The first one merges the Jewish and Christian traditions, and the second tries to label the Christian one in Jewish terms. --
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs) 22:01, 23 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Dear BrownHairedGirl, how do you mean the latter? Proposal is just to make clear that the word is used in Christian sense, so to add this in brackets.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 22:25, 23 May 2014 (UTC)reply
BrownHairedGirl's point is that "Shabbat" is a Jewish term unfamiliar to most Christians.
Category:Sabbath could be renamed to
Category:Christian Sabbath but I do not see way that improves on things. It seems better to make Shabbat a sub-cat of Sabbath, and consider Sabbath for all types there-of. tahcchat 19:20, 24 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Oppose all of the above. I would only support Tahc's suggestion if the main category was
Category:Days of rest.
SFB 13:25, 25 May 2014 (UTC)reply
SFB, you seem to be asking for vagueness.
Do you want
Category:Sabbath to be about Christian sabbath only, but just not call it that? tahcchat 17:04, 25 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Sabbath does not exclusively refer to the Christian Sabbath. The article
Sabbath is even broader and actually covers all days of rest. I advocate changing
Category:Sabbath to
Category:Days of rest – a category covering articles that exclusively cover the Christian Sabbath and not days of rest more broadly would be a small one indeed.
SFB 20:47, 26 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Nearly everything that is directly in
Category:Sabbath is about the Christian Sabbath-- it would not be "a small one indeed."
Of the eleven items currently in the category, only five are specifically describing just the Christian Sabbath.
SFB 17:39, 27 May 2014 (UTC)reply
I see you are correct. All the more reason to keep the
Category:Sabbath about Sabbath in general. tahcchat 22:30, 27 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep -- Shabbat is a Hebrew word for a period from Friday sunset to Saturday sunset. Sabbath is an English word derived from it, which is sometimes (perhaps incorrectly) applied to Sunday. The Seventh Day Adventists worship on Saturdays. I would support (at least in gental terms) the line being taken by BHG and Tahc, of having Sabbath as the parent and the differnet interpretations of that (by Jews and various kinds of Christians) as subcats.
Peterkingiron (
talk) 20:36, 25 May 2014 (UTC)reply
There's a lot of distracting discussions going on now. My main point was, we seem to forget that a naive reader won't know the difference between Sabbath and Shabbat. If we would add Sabbath (Christian) and possibly even Shabbat (Jewish), things would be much clearer.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 21:10, 26 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Oppose MergeCategory:Shabbat corresponds directly to its parent article
Shabbat, contains articles related to the Jewish Sabbath and the mixing of the two is inappropriate.
Alansohn (
talk) 03:12, 29 May 2014 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category: Judeo-Christian topics
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:keep. –
FayenaticLondon 14:37, 6 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Although the original intention of
Category:Judeo-Christian topics may have been different, in practice there are mainly separate Jewish articles and separate Christian articles categorized here. So then practically speaking the category no longer serves it purpose.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 06:21, 29 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Oppose The Judeo-Christian tradition is not just a mashup of Christianity and Judaism. Has a notice of this proposal been posted at WikiProjects of Judaism, Christianity and History of Christianity?
LizRead!Talk! 21:55, 29 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Comment I'm not suggesting that the Judeo-Christian tradition is just a mashup of Christianity and Judaism. I'm just referring to the fact that there's currently many articles in this category that are written either from a Christian or a Jewish point of view, e.g.
Christian views on the Old Covenant or
Holy Spirit (Judaism). Alternatively, there are articles with a separate Christian chapter and Jewish chapter, e.g.
Idolatry, which isn't any better. And there's also articles which have nothing to do with beliefs and ethics, e.g.
Alba Bible and
Fiscus Judaicus. The whole point is, the purpose of the category is apparently not clear to people who are (have been) categorizing these articles.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 14:37, 30 May 2014 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category: Christian terms
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Nominator's rationale:Delete. It is an extremely vague category. Almost everything that refers to Christianity can be put in this category.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 20:01, 23 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Repeat my call for deletion but I'll phrase my motivation better. A 'term' or 'terminology' is a non-defining characteristic.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 06:45, 29 May 2014 (UTC)reply
What would be a better category for articles like
Moh,
Gursikh or
Infaq? It would be a bit much to upmerge such articles to the parent religion category.
SFB 08:37, 31 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Moh and Gursikh: Sikh beliefs or Sikh philosophy or Sikh practices (I'm not really sure which of the three, you will probably know better). Btw, it's striking that there is currently so little classified in Sikh beliefs.
Infaq: Islamic ethics and Quaranic words and phrases.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 10:00, 31 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Just to avoid any misunderstandings: this proposal refers to Christianity only. The large amount of articles in Christianity already has an additional subcategory within Christianity (next to Christian terms), so there is little upmerging to the parent religion category needed.
Marcocapelle (
talk) 10:07, 31 May 2014 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Category:Religious freedom
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:speedy redirect. The additions to the category by the user who created it were highly tangential, so I've simply removed them. Graham87 04:46, 23 May 2014 (UTC)reply
"Freedom of religion" is a ponderous, overly wordy way of saying "religious freedom", which is what most people say, rather than what academics say when they want to stuff their sentences with extra syllables. Can the category have both names? It should.
Cliffswallow-vaulting (
talk) 01:30, 23 May 2014 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.