User talk:Lebaronmatthew

Welcome

Hello, Lebaronmatthew, and Welcome to Wikipedia! Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! 78.26 (I'm no IP, talk to me!) 17:23, 21 January 2014 (UTC) Getting started Introduction The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Intuitive guide to Wikipedia Finding your way around Table of contents Department directory Editing articles How to develop an article Simplified Manual of Style Getting help Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Where to ask a question Help pages New contributors' help page Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles How you can help Contributing to Wikipedia Community Portal Join a WikiProject Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility

Keystone

Welcome, editor. I noticed your edit on the religious symbolism of the "keystone" concept. I think this is an interesting idea for a separate article, which you could create. You could then add a link to the "See also" section in the article. I don't think, however, that your contribution belongs in Keystone (architecture). Notice the first line of the article: "This article is about the architectural element. For other uses, see Keystone (disambiguation)." WCCasey (talk) 05:05, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

I think this is a great idea WCCasey. I have created a new page to disambiguate the two ideas. Do you think it would be appropriate for me to delete the entire "figurative use" section from the main Keystone page since all figurative examples are covered in the disambiguation page? Lebaronmatthew (talk) 22:35, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

I think the section heading is OK, although I think the section wording contradicts the lede and needs to be improved. Also, in your disambig link, I think "other figurative uses" would be better than "other figurative examples". WCCasey (talk) 02:31, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello again! I'm hoping to add considerably to the Keystone article, both to clarify the absence of structural significance, and to expand on the various figurative uses. Meanwhile, I feel that this separate article on Keystone symbol in Mormonism is too small and isolated to be useful. If such an important concept in Mormonism, it should surely be mentioned on the Mormonism page. I started to put a Merger proposal on Mormons, then realised this is the wrong place, being "Mormon people". But I am not sure whether to suggest the Mormonism article, or Book of Mormon, so I am asking for your advice. Of course I realise you perhaps think it *should* be separate, but you will be very welcome to add the first "Oppose" in that case. Please reply after this post... Thanks! Imaginatorium (talk) 20:18, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

WP:WEIGHT

Sorry but removed this since we don't give specific churches/movements more than 10% of space in general Christianity sections like this. The LDS content is already overweight for this article, please add to specific LDS heaven article and link from this to that. Thanks. In ictu oculi (talk) 15:29, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your thoughts, In ictu oculi. In general the 10% principle sounds like a good guideline, but is there a way to make it more clear that the Latter-day Saint perspective is very different from that of other Christian churches? I suppose readers could go to the specific LDS heaven article, but it just seems worth calling out when "Third Heaven" is a much more discussed concept in LDS doctrine and is one of their main teachings; there could be as much detail in the LDS section as there is in the Judaism section. I'll go with whatever you decide from your more objective viewpoint, but just wanted to highlight those distinctions. Thanks! Lebaronmatthew (talk) 11:28, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Sure, just state the main difference in the generic article, and then bluelink to the section on Third Heaven in the LDS Heaven article. Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 11:32, 22 May 2014 (UTC)