Misplaced Pages

:Requests for comment/Religion and philosophy: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 20:27, 25 January 2007 editSmee (talk | contribs)28,728 edits Divisions are appropriate. Too often individuals comment in wrong place.← Previous edit Latest revision as of 19:01, 3 January 2025 edit undoLegobot (talk | contribs)Bots1,670,611 edits Added: Misplaced Pages talk:What Misplaced Pages is not. 
Line 1: Line 1:
<noinclude>
{{shortcut|]<br>]}}
{{rfclistintro}}
{{RFCheader|Religion and philosophy}}
</noinclude>
<!--<nowiki>Add new items here at the TOP. Use ~~~~~ (five tildes) to sign </nowiki>-->
''']'''
{{rfcquote|text=
This RfC concerns the ] and ] policies.


Presently, there are numerous WP articles of religious calendars that list the full list of celebrations, feast day of saints, etc., without those articles being ].
*] - Is there supporting evidence in reputable sources to classify the term "cult apologist" as inherently pejorative, or simply descriptive? 20:11, 25 January 2007 (UTC).


The pages concerned, from what I have found, are: ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ] (and ).
*]: - Should material that is sourced from a peer-reviewed study in a respectable journal be deleted on the basis of ]? 21:20, 19 January 2007 (UTC)


My question for which I request comments is: is putting these long lists of religious feasts in those articles a violation of ] or ], and if it so happens that they are a violation then what should be done with these lists? ] (]) 18:25, 3 January 2025 (UTC)}}
*] - I have started an ] on the usage of the term ] at wikipedia . - ] 19:30, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
''']'''
{{rfcquote|text=
There have been several discussions opened in the past regarding this article's content and overall scope. Several wars have a list of military engagements and battles. Examples include: ], ], ], ].


The ] is no different with this article. However, unlike all the other list of military engagement articles, this article has a ton of clean-up templates including lack of sourcing, MOS, and scope issues.
*] Current dispute over inclusion of some quotes sourced to various sources. 22:50, 16 January 2007 (UTC)


So, with all that background, let's have a discussion on what the '''''scope''''' of this article should include, or more specifically, '''what is a "]" during the Israel-Hamas war?''' Are ''"Battle of ...."'' engagements? Are airstrikes engagements? Should the article's scope be redefined away from "military engagements" to just "engagements"? Ect... '''The ]''' (] 17:45, 2 January 2025 (UTC)}}
*] Dispute over inclusion of a quote from Watt about sincerety of Muhammad. --09:41, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
{{RFC list footer|reli|hide_instructions={{{hide_instructions}}} }}

*] This is a dispute about whether all the OED definitions -- including "courtesan" -- should be listed on this page. 02:22, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

*] Should anti-Judaism be characterized in the lead as another word for "religious antisemitism," or should a distinction be recognized? 17:50, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

*] There are disputes concerning the introduction of this article, especially the role of rationality, the East, and proper sourcing. All sections from this past December onward are relevant. 18:14, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

*] Should the article be focused toward Christianity or should the focus be different (is there a fundamental POV issue)? Seeking input through a straw poll in the discussion page. 03:36, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

*]Single editor insisting on reverting or rewritng the same information into the intro regardless of input from other editors.18:29, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
:*Someone please comment so I don't have to rfd to get attention20:13, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
*] Ongoing dispute among pro-Naik and anti-Naik POV-pushers. Article has been multi-tagged for a long time with few secondary reliable sources and is essentially a triumphantly pro-Naik and religiously extremist POV article. Many well-intentioned editors have given and left due to frustration regarding the POV-pushers in this article.05:45, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
*] Changing of 'persons to 'people' and 'personhood' to 'being a person' throughout, making the article all but useless. ] 11:18, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
*] Should the article on Ancient Ebionites include a short, explanatory sentence clearly describing their angelology according to the fullest primary source, Epiphanius' account in ''Panarion''? Or, should this account of their angelology "not be discussed" at all in the article other than the briefest mention, since modern-day "revivalist Ebionite" groups and authors dispute Epiphanius' reliability on this question? 09:07, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

:Also see ], ], and ] to understand the full context of the dispute. ] 16:22, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

*] Is Ayn Rand a philosopher? This affect many entries on wikipedia and is endlessly debated on many discussion pages. THis may be the first movement towards a general policy on her. 07:51, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

*] Should the view that JfJ is "incompatible with Judaism" (with which JfJ disagrees) be presented as factually true or a majority opinion? ] 01:40, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

*]: How should the article on ] properly cite an essay that includes feminism and "PCism" as pseudoreligions? 13:34, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

*]: Should a list of purported cults published by the ], be placed in that article, in the article ], or in both locations? 23:42, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

<!--<nowiki>Add new items at the TOP, NOT HERE. Use ~~~~~ (five tildes) to sign </nowiki>-->
]

Latest revision as of 19:01, 3 January 2025

The following discussions are requested to have community-wide attention:

Misplaced Pages talk:What Misplaced Pages is not

This RfC concerns the WP:NOTDIRECTORY and WP:NOTGUIDE policies.

Presently, there are numerous WP articles of religious calendars that list the full list of celebrations, feast day of saints, etc., without those articles being WP:Stand-alone lists.

The pages concerned, from what I have found, are: Tridentine calendar, General Roman Calendar, General Roman Calendar of 1954, General Roman Calendar of 1960, Institutional and societal calendars of the Roman Rite, National calendars of the Roman Rite, Personal jurisdiction calendars of the Roman Rite, Calendar of saints (Lutheran), Calendar of saints (Episcopal Anglican Church of Brazil), Calendar of saints (Anglican Church of Australia), Calendar of saints (Anglican Church of Canada), Calendar of saints (Church in Wales), Calendar of saints (Scottish Episcopal Church), Calendar of saints (Armenian Apostolic Church), Calendar of saints (Hong Kong Sheng Kung Hui) (and previously Mysterii Paschalis).

My question for which I request comments is: is putting these long lists of religious feasts in those articles a violation of WP:NOTDIRECTORY or WP:NOTGUIDE, and if it so happens that they are a violation then what should be done with these lists? Veverve (talk) 18:25, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Talk:List of military engagements during the Israel–Hamas war

There have been several discussions opened in the past regarding this article's content and overall scope. Several wars have a list of military engagements and battles. Examples include: World War I ("Military engagements"), World War II ("Battles"), Russian invasion of Ukraine ("Military engagements"), Sudanese civil war ("Engagements").

The Israel–Hamas war is no different with this article. However, unlike all the other list of military engagement articles, this article has a ton of clean-up templates including lack of sourcing, MOS, and scope issues.

So, with all that background, let's have a discussion on what the scope of this article should include, or more specifically, what is a "military engagement" during the Israel-Hamas war? Are "Battle of ...." engagements? Are airstrikes engagements? Should the article's scope be redefined away from "military engagements" to just "engagements"? Ect... The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 17:45, 2 January 2025 (UTC)


Requests for comment (All)
Articles (All)
Non-articles (All)
InstructionsTo add a discussion to this list:
  • Add the tag {{rfc|xxx}} at the top of a talk page section, where "xxx" is the category abbreviation. The different category abbreviations that should be used with {{rfc}} are listed above in parenthesis. Multiple categories are separated by a vertical pipe. For example, {{rfc|xxx|yyy}}, where "xxx" is the first category and "yyy" is the second category.
For more information, see Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment. Report problems to Misplaced Pages talk:Requests for comment. Lists are updated every hour by Legobot.