Template talk:Tanakh OT

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Bible (Rated NA-class)
WikiProject icon This template 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.
 NA  This template does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 

foreground color[edit]

Some texts, which is a wikilink, have blue foreground colour, other have black one. --79.31.140.33 (talk) 10:23, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

D/c[edit]

This needs to have the deuterocanonical books in it, or we need to restore a separate OT navbar, as 4 of the 7 were written in Hebrew or Aramaic, and we have Dead Sea Scrolls for Sirach and Tobit. They're an integral part of the OT for over 60% of Christendom... I'll come back and try later, I've messed up on two edits, I'm tired and no web programmer... If no one takes up the challenge, I'll be back to muddle through it myself tomorrow. St John Chrysostom Δόξατω Θεώ 06:15, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

There is a separate template for the Christian Bible called {{Books of the Bible}} which has a more comprehensive treatment of the apocrypha/deuterocanon including books of the Eastern canons. --Shibo77 (talk) 00:11, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Collapsible lists[edit]

Thanks, Sardanaphalus, for the new version of the collapsible lists. Can you adjust it further so that both the Tanakh and OT can have an expanded section simultaneously? – Fayenatic London 10:05, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

  • If you mean having two sections visible rather than just one, none or all, then I don't think so – at least, not with the "Sidebar with collapsible lists" template as it currently works. What could work, though, is to make this template the combination of two separate Tanakh and OT Sidebar-with-collapsible-lists templates that are each given a section to display (e.g. {{Tanakh OT |[name of Tanakh section to be shown] |[name of OT section to be shown]}}. This might be worth doing anyway and I'd be happy to try to fulfil. What do you/anyone else think? Sardanaphalus (talk) 10:24, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
    • Yes, that sounds good to me. – Fayenatic London 10:59, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
      • Okay, I'll give it a try. A postscript question I meant to add previously: When you've been notified that someone's thanked you for an edit, is there a straightforward to acknowledge them? Sardanaphalus (talk) 12:08, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
        • IMHO there is generally no need to do so, but to privately acknowledge public thanks you could thank them back for the edit, using the "thank" link in the edit history. To go public, with more effort, you could of course post "you're welcome" or a {{smiley}} on a talk page. Ah! I just discovered that there is also {{yw}}. – Fayenatic London 13:04, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
          • Thanks for the above – and so, thanks for your thanks the other day re {{Prophets of the Tanakh}}. A new version of {{Tanakh OT}} is now in place, although it hasn't been tested "to destruction". Does it provide what you're after but/or fall over too easily..? Sardanaphalus (talk) 08:45, 13 May 2014 (UTC)