Talk page |
ICHTHUS |
Welcome to the Talk page of Ichthus. Use this page for general or technical issues, praise, queries, or complaints. You can also use this page to submit articles for publication. Submitted stories are published subject to the approval of the editor-in-chief. For comments about an article appearing in a specific issue of the newsletter, please post them here with a link to the newsletter.
|
|
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.
(Added the quote in dispute to be clear what is under discussion. Jbh Talk 21:57, 4 April 2018 (UTC))The death of Billy Graham on February 21 was a profound loss. For the Wikipedia reaction see this discussion. Graham received a blurb.
The inclusion of the claim that the death of Billy Graham was a "profound loss" is clearly controversial and divisive. This statement is effectively being made i Wikipedia's voice, and should not be included. Graham was a polarising figure, and while his death will undoubtedly be mourned by Southern fundamentalists, many more moderate Christians are likely to believe that his influence was much less positive, especially given his antisemitism, homophobia and misogyny. This newsletter is not, I think, targeted specifically at fundamentalists, it is an outreach newsletter, and it should not be promoting the worldview of a specific sect of Christians. Guy ( Help!) 21:27, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
@ Ian.thomson: In the interest of global Wikipedia community harmony I have no objection to "for many." – Lionel( talk) 22:15, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
I submit, based on the participation to date of WikiProject Christianity members, that we have consensus for "profound loss for many." I base this on established policies and guidelines. Therefore I request that page protection be removed @ Kelapstick:. In the interest of providing satisfaction for the minority dissenters, Guy and Innisfree987, I will address the issues raised. 1. It is permissible to editorialize and add humor in newsletters since they are not encyclopedic.
The Content Guideline for The Signpost states: "The Signpost does not specifically maintain a commitment to neutrality... [Signpost] is not an encyclopedia itself, and so allows many things—editorializing, narrative, original research—that would be blasphemy in the article space." [1] Signpost was founded in 2005 and its guidelines are the product of a "long and continual process" and have consensus. Opinions are also allowed as we see at the Policy, What Wikipedia is Not, where it states "Talk pages, user space pages and essays are venues where you can advocate your opinions." [2] The destination of Ichthus is user talk pages. Thus we see strong support in policy for "profound loss for many" in the April issue of Ichthus.
Humor is integral to The Signpost: "A wish to entertain provides the impetus behind some of the publication's lighter-hearted features." [1] The mention of Black Christmas is humorous because Black Christmas is a slasher film that has nothing to do with Christianity. It only falls within the scope of WikiProject Christianity because the murders take place during Christmas. I seriously doubt if Drown Soda would be offended.
2. Opinions expressed in a newsletter are those of the writer and not Wikipedia nor the Wikiproject
The Signpost About says: "The Signpost is ... independent of the Wikimedia Foundation and other Wikimedia organizations" [3]
3. The audience for Ichthus newsletter are the members of WikiProject Christianity.
If a member of the Project objects to something in the newsletter they have numerous avenues for recourse. Some of them are:
4. Yes, a WikiProject is a social club.
The WikiProject Guideline states: "A WikiProject may also be a focal point for building ties between Wikipedians interested in a certain topic area" and "A WikiProject is fundamentally a social construct." [4] In response to Innisfree987's assertion that "as a matter of policy, is not to be hosted on Wikipedia" the policy they cited states "You can chat with people about Wikipedia-related topics on their user talk pages. (ital. mine)" [5] Again, since the destination of the newsletter is the user's Talk page, NOTFORUM doesn't apply.
– Lionel( talk) 11:09, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
@ Lionelt: Might I suggest, for future issues, something on the order of:
May 2018 |
The current, larger version seems a bit gaudy (pun intentional ). — Godsy ( TALK CONT) 09:26, 7 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi @ Lionelt: I removed some non-existent users from this list. Please note, capitalization of usernames (except the first letter) matter, so you may want to check the recent entries that were remove if they can be corrected. Best regarsd, — xaosflux Talk 12:03, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
I would like ask if I am able to propose that we could cover Sun of Unclouded Righteousness in the next issue of Ichthus? I ask as it was a recent DYK and also because it would be interesting due to the fact that it is probably the most politically incorrect hymn ever written! The C of E God Save the Queen! ( talk) 20:12, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
Sorry everyone, the newsletter was duplicated. I'm trying to figure out what happened. – Lionel( talk) 06:54, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
[Biblical criticism] has recently received a GA rating. I would like to suggest it for inclusion here. Jenhawk777 ( talk) 16:01, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
I've noticed in the logs that this month's Ichthus failed to get sent to people on the mailing list because it was "readonly". Does anyone know why that might be? The C of E God Save the Queen! ( talk) 05:19, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
I would sign back up to receive this if it was around half of the size it was. As is it can demolish my page. This is what The Signpost looks like: User talk:Jerodlycett/Signpost, far smaller, around the size of your banner itself. That and I can send it to a separate page and not get it mixed into my normal talk page archives. Jerod Lycett ( talk) 08:37, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
I found many articles which are specifically on christian topics, i think there should not be view or reference from other religion, in fact can have different article then by that religion...
Many christian articles now has small paragraph from muslim view, which is not required.. marshmir ( talk) 03:44, 5 January 2020 (UTC)
Talk page |
ICHTHUS |
Welcome to the Talk page of Ichthus. Use this page for general or technical issues, praise, queries, or complaints. You can also use this page to submit articles for publication. Submitted stories are published subject to the approval of the editor-in-chief. For comments about an article appearing in a specific issue of the newsletter, please post them here with a link to the newsletter.
|
|
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.
(Added the quote in dispute to be clear what is under discussion. Jbh Talk 21:57, 4 April 2018 (UTC))The death of Billy Graham on February 21 was a profound loss. For the Wikipedia reaction see this discussion. Graham received a blurb.
The inclusion of the claim that the death of Billy Graham was a "profound loss" is clearly controversial and divisive. This statement is effectively being made i Wikipedia's voice, and should not be included. Graham was a polarising figure, and while his death will undoubtedly be mourned by Southern fundamentalists, many more moderate Christians are likely to believe that his influence was much less positive, especially given his antisemitism, homophobia and misogyny. This newsletter is not, I think, targeted specifically at fundamentalists, it is an outreach newsletter, and it should not be promoting the worldview of a specific sect of Christians. Guy ( Help!) 21:27, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
@ Ian.thomson: In the interest of global Wikipedia community harmony I have no objection to "for many." – Lionel( talk) 22:15, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
I submit, based on the participation to date of WikiProject Christianity members, that we have consensus for "profound loss for many." I base this on established policies and guidelines. Therefore I request that page protection be removed @ Kelapstick:. In the interest of providing satisfaction for the minority dissenters, Guy and Innisfree987, I will address the issues raised. 1. It is permissible to editorialize and add humor in newsletters since they are not encyclopedic.
The Content Guideline for The Signpost states: "The Signpost does not specifically maintain a commitment to neutrality... [Signpost] is not an encyclopedia itself, and so allows many things—editorializing, narrative, original research—that would be blasphemy in the article space." [1] Signpost was founded in 2005 and its guidelines are the product of a "long and continual process" and have consensus. Opinions are also allowed as we see at the Policy, What Wikipedia is Not, where it states "Talk pages, user space pages and essays are venues where you can advocate your opinions." [2] The destination of Ichthus is user talk pages. Thus we see strong support in policy for "profound loss for many" in the April issue of Ichthus.
Humor is integral to The Signpost: "A wish to entertain provides the impetus behind some of the publication's lighter-hearted features." [1] The mention of Black Christmas is humorous because Black Christmas is a slasher film that has nothing to do with Christianity. It only falls within the scope of WikiProject Christianity because the murders take place during Christmas. I seriously doubt if Drown Soda would be offended.
2. Opinions expressed in a newsletter are those of the writer and not Wikipedia nor the Wikiproject
The Signpost About says: "The Signpost is ... independent of the Wikimedia Foundation and other Wikimedia organizations" [3]
3. The audience for Ichthus newsletter are the members of WikiProject Christianity.
If a member of the Project objects to something in the newsletter they have numerous avenues for recourse. Some of them are:
4. Yes, a WikiProject is a social club.
The WikiProject Guideline states: "A WikiProject may also be a focal point for building ties between Wikipedians interested in a certain topic area" and "A WikiProject is fundamentally a social construct." [4] In response to Innisfree987's assertion that "as a matter of policy, is not to be hosted on Wikipedia" the policy they cited states "You can chat with people about Wikipedia-related topics on their user talk pages. (ital. mine)" [5] Again, since the destination of the newsletter is the user's Talk page, NOTFORUM doesn't apply.
– Lionel( talk) 11:09, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
@ Lionelt: Might I suggest, for future issues, something on the order of:
May 2018 |
The current, larger version seems a bit gaudy (pun intentional ). — Godsy ( TALK CONT) 09:26, 7 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi @ Lionelt: I removed some non-existent users from this list. Please note, capitalization of usernames (except the first letter) matter, so you may want to check the recent entries that were remove if they can be corrected. Best regarsd, — xaosflux Talk 12:03, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
I would like ask if I am able to propose that we could cover Sun of Unclouded Righteousness in the next issue of Ichthus? I ask as it was a recent DYK and also because it would be interesting due to the fact that it is probably the most politically incorrect hymn ever written! The C of E God Save the Queen! ( talk) 20:12, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
Sorry everyone, the newsletter was duplicated. I'm trying to figure out what happened. – Lionel( talk) 06:54, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
[Biblical criticism] has recently received a GA rating. I would like to suggest it for inclusion here. Jenhawk777 ( talk) 16:01, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
I've noticed in the logs that this month's Ichthus failed to get sent to people on the mailing list because it was "readonly". Does anyone know why that might be? The C of E God Save the Queen! ( talk) 05:19, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
I would sign back up to receive this if it was around half of the size it was. As is it can demolish my page. This is what The Signpost looks like: User talk:Jerodlycett/Signpost, far smaller, around the size of your banner itself. That and I can send it to a separate page and not get it mixed into my normal talk page archives. Jerod Lycett ( talk) 08:37, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
I found many articles which are specifically on christian topics, i think there should not be view or reference from other religion, in fact can have different article then by that religion...
Many christian articles now has small paragraph from muslim view, which is not required.. marshmir ( talk) 03:44, 5 January 2020 (UTC)