Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Religion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Religion (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject icon This page is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.

Proposal to exclude wp:fringe for religious subjects[edit]

See Wikipedia:Fringe_theories/Noticeboard#When_is_a_subject_non-religious_and_when_is_it_religious.3F. I think the demarcation line between science editing and religion editing policies should be mentioned here, because it is pertinent to this wikiproject. Andries (talk) 22:05, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

This should be seen in the context of a supporter of Sai Baba wanting to portray the conjuring tricks which were his hallmark as "miracles". That would be a gross violation of WP:NPOV. It's as inappropriate as allowing articles on fundamental Baptism to pretend that the flood was literal or that the earth is 6,000 years old. Guy (Help!) 09:09, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
Correct. And a pointless proposal as a decision here would have no force. Dougweller (talk) 13:18, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

The discussion was archived here Wikipedia:Fringe_theories/Noticeboard/Archive_41#When_is_a_subject_non-religious_and_when_is_it_religious.3F. JzG/Guy is totally wrong about my background and my motivation. Andries (talk) 21:58, 8 June 2014 (UTC)


I'd like to encourage a project aimed at revising (and simplifying) the categorisation. For example, I found "religious occupations" -> "religious workers" -> "clergy" as categories. But they all three contained a lot of clergy. Why not merge the three categories? Marcocapelle (talk) 08:57, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Salvation sect[edit]

Anyone interested in working on an article for the Salvation sect? The prior version was deleted because it had some issues with tone and sourcing, so it came across like an attack page. I don't think that this was necessarily their intent, but I can see where it was tagged and deleted as such. There is merit in having an article for the page and we do have a new editor that is interested in creating the page, User:PeterDaley72. However as this will be a fairly sensitive subject and he is a new user, I would recommend that he have someone help him create the article to ensure that all of the CYA stuff is met for the most part. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 10:08, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks you TokyoGirl. Just for some background, the sect is linked to the owner of the Sewol ferry that sank last month. The owner, Yoo Byueng-eun, is now a fugitive: Perhaps I'm not totally impartial as I have operated a site regarding Korea cults for the past ten years:, but I have been collecting articles on the Salvation Sect and its leader for the past month here: There are certainly no shortages of articles recently and more are expected. PeterDaley72 (talk) 10:17, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

  • Comment - I'm partially available, though title probably can't be "sect" nor Salvation Sect despite ko:구원파 ja:救援派 having technically that title. In English "Sect" is a term of religious abuse ... on the other hand 기독교복음침례회(基督敎福音浸禮會) Christian Gospel Baptist Church is probably anodyne and ambiguous. Also imho will need WP:BLP caution re Yoo Byeong-eun and should be kept stub-short until books catch up with newspapers. None of those cult-buster sites will be usable, and the Korean press isn't always renowned for Washington Post or Financial Times level objectivity. In ictu oculi (talk) 10:26, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
PS. The BLP is up at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ahae. In ictu oculi (talk) 10:58, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
WP:COMMONNAME would be relevant, particularly regarding the common name in English, considering that is the language of this wiki. Also, I do note that the Washington Post itself isn't always renowned for Washington Post level objectivity. I can't tell how old this group might be, or how much attention in general it may have received, but we would be obliged to keep the main article as neutral as possible, meaning its content would probably have to be roughly analogous to that of similar bodies here. At present, any article on the founder should also probably be as generic and bland as possible: where he was born, where he went to school, family details, generic business activities, that sort of thing, with only a little information about the existing warrant and his having not yet turned himself in. Also, WP:1E might qualify regarding a separate biography if the incident is the only thing about him which has been the central topic of independent news sources not of a particularly local nature, as that is one of the factors in notability. Maybe, at present, the best way to go would be for someone to start a user space page with draft article(s), which could then be reviewed and checked for any problems before being moved into mainspace?
P.S.: For the "breaking news" aspects of this topic, it would certainly be possible to write up a story on recent events in wikinews's domain. Stories of this type are more or less the primary reason that entity exists anyway. John Carter (talk) 20:18, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
Yes, thanks John. Amusingly true about Wash P. In ictu oculi (talk) 17:01, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
I suppose we might as well move on this now that the initial hysteria has died down and the BLP AFD has been concluded as keep. I've started Salvation Sect (Korea) as a stub ... though don't think that is an acceptable title for the article. In ictu oculi (talk) 06:33, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Leaflet For Wikiproject Religion At Wikimania 2014[edit]

Are you looking to recruit more contributors to your project?
We are offering to design and print physical paper leaflets to be distributed at Wikimania 2014 for all projects that apply.
For more information, click the link below.
Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (talk) 14:33, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Possible wikisource documents?[edit]

I'm just curious if anyone would be interested in maybe adding some public domain documents to wikisource? And, if so, which would be most useful? I know that there are a lot of public domain sources on religion out there, including I think all of the Sacred Books of the East, for instance, as well as some admittedly older reference books and other sources. Which if any do you all think would be most useful to the editors and readers here, and why? It would of course be great if you were also willing to help work on the material there, which I can say from experience generally isn't that difficult, although some diacritical marks not commonly used in English, and often not with specific keyboard keys for them, appear rather frequently in some texts. John Carter (talk) 21:48, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Freedom of Worship (painting)/archive1[edit]

Feel free to participate at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Freedom of Worship (painting)/archive1.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:53, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Relevant RfC[edit]

Please feel free to take part in the current RfC at Talk:Dorje Shugden controversy#RfC on restoring last stable version of this article. John Carter (talk) 18:21, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

WP:BISHOP revision[edit]

Hi. I've started a discussion about revising the WP:BISHOP guidelines HERE. Please add your comments and invite everyone you think would be interested. Thanks! Dan BD 16:13, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

One of your project's articles has been featured[edit]

Today's Article For Improvement star.svg

Please note that Anubis, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of Today's articles for improvement. The article was scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Today's articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing!
Delivered by Theo's Little Bot at 01:00, 23 June 2014 (UTC) on behalf of the TAFI team

More eyes needed[edit]

Dorje Shugden controversy and related pages would very much benefit from more impartial eyes. John Carter (talk) 00:30, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Leaflet for Wikiproject Religion at Wikimania 2014(updated version)[edit]

Please note: This is an updated version of a previous post that I made.

Project Leaflet WikiProject Medicine back and front v1.png

Hi all,

My name is Adi Khajuria and I am helping out with Wikimania 2014 in London.

One of our initiatives is to create leaflets to increase the discoverability of various wikimedia projects, and showcase the breadth of activity within wikimedia. Any kind of project can have a physical paper leaflet designed - for free - as a tool to help recruit new contributors. These leaflets will be printed at Wikimania 2014, and the designs can be re-used in the future at other events and locations.

This is particularly aimed at highlighting less discoverable but successful projects, e.g:

• Active Wikiprojects: Wikiproject Medicine, WikiProject Video Games, Wikiproject Film

• Tech projects/Tools, which may be looking for either users or developers.

• Less known major projects: Wikinews, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, etc.

• Wiki Loves Parliaments, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiki Loves ____

• Wikimedia thematic organisations, Wikiwomen’s Collaborative, The Signpost

The deadline for submissions is 1st July 2014

For more information or to sign up for one for your project, go to:

Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (talk) 12:24, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Messy Christian saints category[edit]

Hello everyone, I would like to draw your attention to the following CfD discussions:

  1. Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2014_June_28#Category:2nd-century_Christian_saints about Category:2nd-century_Christian_saints and all similar XXth-century Christian saints categories
  2. Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2014_June_28#Category:Christian_saints_by_century about Category:Christian_saints_by_century versus Category:Christian_saints_by_period


  • The biggest problem here is the gender classification. The general saints categories mainly contain males as single articles - while female saints are put in a separate subcategory beneath it, which is certainly not correct. But the discussion is confounded by children saints and married couple saints.
  • A lesser problem is that there is a duplicate classification in time, the original classification was by century, while the new classification is by period and makes use of the old century subcategories. However, this problem not only occurs for the main saints categories but also in each of the respective female saints subcategories that I mentioned in the point before.

In the CfD discussion I made some proposals but it was suggested that people have a look at this category structure more thoroughly. Are you willing to do that here? Thanks in advance for your answer. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:23, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Members of this project...[edit]

...might be interested in this discussoion. BMK (talk) 07:17, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Possible wikisource religion project?[edit]

There are already several works of a religious nature available at wikisource, including sacred texts, reference works on religious topics, general reference works with a substantial amount of content on religious topics, etc. Several of these works could be directly used in developing content here. Many others exist as well. And, with the comparatively recent page-by-page indexing, most of the are already broken up into fairly easily accomplished units. Would there be any editors interested in helping to basically proofread those texts? John Carter (talk) 21:50, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

School prayer by Muslims in the United States[edit]

Should we add information about Islamic school prayer in the United States into this article? Articles, like this, discuss it. --George Ho (talk) 21:26, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

It looks like the article doesn't really discuss voluntary student-led prayer at the moment. It would be inappropriate to add a minor story on voluntary Muslim prayer when the big story, at least in the US, is voluntary Christian prayer. If you were interested in expanding the article, the possibility of inclusion might open up, but even so, being able to dismiss students to go to voluntary religious activities is such a minor issue that I think some huge expansion would need to take place in order to justify it. –Roscelese (talkcontribs) 22:50, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Hmm... I guess this article doesn't mention voluntary Islamic prayer, just hall-pass prayer. --George Ho (talk) 22:55, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
I'm not sure what distinction you're trying to draw. The prayer is not mandated or led by school officials, and it's also not student-led in a way that becomes coercive through the school's imprimatur (like the student-led prayer over the loudspeaker or at a graduation ceremony). Students are being allowed to leave class because they want to pray. –Roscelese (talkcontribs) 23:21, 15 July 2014 (UTC)