Talk:General epistles

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Christianity (Rated Stub-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Bible (Rated Stub-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bible, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Bible on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 05:17, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

General epistlesCatholic epistles — Relisted. Ucucha 14:48, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

The biblical scholars prefer term Catholic epistles (e. g. Metzger, Rhodes, Ehrman). General epistles is used by popular authors Leszek Jańczuk (talk) 19:57, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

  • Then shouldn't the current title stand per WP:UCN (Use Common Names) and WP:NOT PAPER #5 (Wikipedia is not a work of scholarly research)? — AjaxSmack 03:15, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Oppose To most people nowadays the primary meaning of the term "catholic" is pertaining to the Roman Catholic Church, to use this term with any other meaning, particularly in a religious context, is likely to cause confusion. "General" is a perfectly reasonable term in this context. PatGallacher (talk) 19:29, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Oppose. As far as usage goes, there's not much to split it, so I'd opt for the term used in more popular works. It's not just preferred by popular authors, but also by scholars writing popular works - e.g. Dictionary of the Later New Testament & Its Developments. StAnselm (talk) 02:17, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.