Talk:Stop the Church: Difference between revisions
Line 34: | Line 34: | ||
:::{{u|Contaldo80}}, I am not "hiding" behind anything. Please review [[WP:CONSENSUS]], one of the [[WP:Five pillars]]. --[[User:Slugger O'Toole|Slugger O'Toole]] ([[User talk:Slugger O'Toole|talk]]) 15:03, 15 April 2020 (UTC) |
:::{{u|Contaldo80}}, I am not "hiding" behind anything. Please review [[WP:CONSENSUS]], one of the [[WP:Five pillars]]. --[[User:Slugger O'Toole|Slugger O'Toole]] ([[User talk:Slugger O'Toole|talk]]) 15:03, 15 April 2020 (UTC) |
||
::::Can you please state why you think the word Eucharist should be used? It's a simple question. Apart from "it should be used because it's consensus" even though you're the only editor in the history of wikipedia to argue for the inclusion of this specific word. Thank you in advance for your response. In any case to try and move this forward I have requested a third opinion from other editors and invite them to look at the source and help us work out the correct terminology so we don't risk violating NPOV rules.[[User:Contaldo80|Contaldo80]] ([[User talk:Contaldo80|talk]]) 04:34, 17 April 2020 (UTC) |
::::Can you please state why you think the word Eucharist should be used? It's a simple question. Apart from "it should be used because it's consensus" even though you're the only editor in the history of wikipedia to argue for the inclusion of this specific word. Thank you in advance for your response. In any case to try and move this forward I have requested a third opinion from other editors and invite them to look at the source and help us work out the correct terminology so we don't risk violating NPOV rules.[[User:Contaldo80|Contaldo80]] ([[User talk:Contaldo80|talk]]) 04:34, 17 April 2020 (UTC) |
||
:::::{{u|Contaldo80}}, My position has not changed since the last time we had this discussion. I will repeat it here for you again: |
|||
:::::<blockquote>I explained my rational in the edit summary you cited. By saying "communion wafer," it is unclear if you are referring to the wafer before or after consecration. If it was before consecration, no one would take offense. The reason Catholics consider the action to be a sacrilege is because it took place after consecration. Saying Eucharist over communion wafer eliminates the ambiguity. All of that said, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dissent_from_Catholic_teaching_on_homosexuality&diff=849931596&oldid=849930880 it was you] who first added this material to the article, and you used the word Eucharist. There was consensus for it, and the terminology stayed Eucharist for some time. It is now you who is making a contested edit by trying to change it without first changing the consensus, and without taking it to talk."</blockquote> |
|||
:::::I hope this clears things up for you. --[[User:Slugger O'Toole|Slugger O'Toole]] ([[User talk:Slugger O'Toole|talk]]) 18:44, 18 April 2020 (UTC) |
|||
* "Desecrating the eucharist" is POV. What they did was to spit out a communion wafer. How that was ''interpreted'' by catholics is a different matter. We should not confuse the two. '''[[user:JzG|Guy]]''' <small>([[user talk:JzG|help!]])</small> 08:15, 17 April 2020 (UTC) |
* "Desecrating the eucharist" is POV. What they did was to spit out a communion wafer. How that was ''interpreted'' by catholics is a different matter. We should not confuse the two. '''[[user:JzG|Guy]]''' <small>([[user talk:JzG|help!]])</small> 08:15, 17 April 2020 (UTC) |
||
{{3ORshort|As {{u|Slugger O'Toole}} has said repeatedly that there is a consensus for use of "eucharist", it would be helpful to point out the discussion where such a consensus was established. If what is meant is just the principle of [[WP:SILENT|consensus through silence]], that type of consensus ends as soon as the silence does—once someone objects, as here someone has, there no longer exists a consensus by that means. Without knowing where or how the consensus on the matter was established, it is essentially impossible to give an informed opinion as to its relevance. [[User:Seraphimblade|Seraphimblade]] <small><sup>[[User talk:Seraphimblade|Talk to me]]</sup></small> 15:37, 17 April 2020 (UTC) }} |
{{3ORshort|As {{u|Slugger O'Toole}} has said repeatedly that there is a consensus for use of "eucharist", it would be helpful to point out the discussion where such a consensus was established. If what is meant is just the principle of [[WP:SILENT|consensus through silence]], that type of consensus ends as soon as the silence does—once someone objects, as here someone has, there no longer exists a consensus by that means. Without knowing where or how the consensus on the matter was established, it is essentially impossible to give an informed opinion as to its relevance. [[User:Seraphimblade|Seraphimblade]] <small><sup>[[User talk:Seraphimblade|Talk to me]]</sup></small> 15:37, 17 April 2020 (UTC) }} |
Revision as of 18:44, 18 April 2020
![]() | This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
Wafer versus eucharist
The bulk - if not all of the sources - say that a wafer was crumbled. Yet the article talks about "desecrating the eucharist". I would like the article to align as strongly as possible with the sources please. Contaldo80 (talk) 04:42, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
- When we had this discussion before, you yourself noted that a majority of editors preferred Eucharist. I haven't seen that consensus change. --Slugger O'Toole (talk) 14:24, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
- I was wrong in that instance. The majority of editors did not argue for eucharist. Only you did. So the onus is on you to clarify why despite the fact all the sources say something other than eucharist, we are obliged to use the word "eucharist"?Contaldo80 (talk) 03:54, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
- Contaldo80, That is incorrect. There was a consensus for Eucharist. If you wish to change the text, you must first change the consensus. -- Slugger O'Toole (talk) 04:31, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
- I was wrong in that instance. The majority of editors did not argue for eucharist. Only you did. So the onus is on you to clarify why despite the fact all the sources say something other than eucharist, we are obliged to use the word "eucharist"?Contaldo80 (talk) 03:54, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
There was no consensus for Eucharist slugger. Can you stop pretending something that is not true. You want Eucharist, I don’t want Eucharist. No one else apart from you has said they want Eucharist. This is not “consensus” - this is you being uncooperative. The sources do not say Eucharist - they say wafer. Take it to an administrators board if you believe there is genuine consensus and argue your case there. 23:44, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
Slugger you took out my words which spoke about women’s rights (women’s “autonomy”) and replaced with your own words and the term “prolife” - which is a non neutral term to reflect those that oppose abortion rights. Either restore my source or find a more neutral way to describe the issue. Catholic’s aren’t “pro” life, they just block secular authorities form allowing birth control and family planning. 23:47, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
- Contaldo, as another editor pointed out to you just 48 hours ago, you have been editing long enough to know the rules. You can't just ignore them because you don't like the outcome. There is a consensus for Eucharist. It's not even a WP:SILENT consensus either, although after months of stability using the word "Eucharist" that certainly applies. In this case, you yourself agreed to use the word. If you have now changed your mind, as you apparently have, then you are welcome to try and change the consensus. Until you do, however, the text remains the same. I also explained my edit about using the word "rights." The source makes clear that the protesters were upset about abortion, not suffrage or the right to drive an automobile or some other right. Using an abortion related term clarifies the motivation for the protest. --Slugger O'Toole (talk) 01:05, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
- Can you tell me which sentence in the Brown source supports that statement " WHAM! opposed the public positions of the Church which they felt were hurtful to people with AIDS, such as O'Connor's statement that "Good morality is good medicine"and its prolife stance?" Are you actually telling me that the women of WHAM believed the catholic church was in favour (Pro) life and that they were against life? You know full well that "pro-life" is a weighted term - fine if those against abortion rights want to use it about themselves but please show some respect to other people - if these women were in favour of abortion rights then they were in favour of abortion rights - and they were not angry that someone else was "pro-life". I'm going to keep rejecting this change until we find a form of wording that aligns with the source. You moving anti-abortion to another part of the paragraph is bizarre. Secondly how dare you go following me around to other discussions that I might be having (and in which you have not been engaged) to try to embarass me? Finally there is no consensus for eucharist - only you want to use a religious term that is not used in the sources. Tell us why you think eucharist is correct - stop trying to hide behind "consensus". This just obfuscates. Be transparent. Contaldo80 (talk) 04:30, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
- Contaldo80, I am not "hiding" behind anything. Please review WP:CONSENSUS, one of the WP:Five pillars. --Slugger O'Toole (talk) 15:03, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
- Can you please state why you think the word Eucharist should be used? It's a simple question. Apart from "it should be used because it's consensus" even though you're the only editor in the history of wikipedia to argue for the inclusion of this specific word. Thank you in advance for your response. In any case to try and move this forward I have requested a third opinion from other editors and invite them to look at the source and help us work out the correct terminology so we don't risk violating NPOV rules.Contaldo80 (talk) 04:34, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
- Contaldo80, My position has not changed since the last time we had this discussion. I will repeat it here for you again:
- Can you please state why you think the word Eucharist should be used? It's a simple question. Apart from "it should be used because it's consensus" even though you're the only editor in the history of wikipedia to argue for the inclusion of this specific word. Thank you in advance for your response. In any case to try and move this forward I have requested a third opinion from other editors and invite them to look at the source and help us work out the correct terminology so we don't risk violating NPOV rules.Contaldo80 (talk) 04:34, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
- Contaldo80, I am not "hiding" behind anything. Please review WP:CONSENSUS, one of the WP:Five pillars. --Slugger O'Toole (talk) 15:03, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
- Can you tell me which sentence in the Brown source supports that statement " WHAM! opposed the public positions of the Church which they felt were hurtful to people with AIDS, such as O'Connor's statement that "Good morality is good medicine"and its prolife stance?" Are you actually telling me that the women of WHAM believed the catholic church was in favour (Pro) life and that they were against life? You know full well that "pro-life" is a weighted term - fine if those against abortion rights want to use it about themselves but please show some respect to other people - if these women were in favour of abortion rights then they were in favour of abortion rights - and they were not angry that someone else was "pro-life". I'm going to keep rejecting this change until we find a form of wording that aligns with the source. You moving anti-abortion to another part of the paragraph is bizarre. Secondly how dare you go following me around to other discussions that I might be having (and in which you have not been engaged) to try to embarass me? Finally there is no consensus for eucharist - only you want to use a religious term that is not used in the sources. Tell us why you think eucharist is correct - stop trying to hide behind "consensus". This just obfuscates. Be transparent. Contaldo80 (talk) 04:30, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
I explained my rational in the edit summary you cited. By saying "communion wafer," it is unclear if you are referring to the wafer before or after consecration. If it was before consecration, no one would take offense. The reason Catholics consider the action to be a sacrilege is because it took place after consecration. Saying Eucharist over communion wafer eliminates the ambiguity. All of that said, it was you who first added this material to the article, and you used the word Eucharist. There was consensus for it, and the terminology stayed Eucharist for some time. It is now you who is making a contested edit by trying to change it without first changing the consensus, and without taking it to talk."
- I hope this clears things up for you. --Slugger O'Toole (talk) 18:44, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
- "Desecrating the eucharist" is POV. What they did was to spit out a communion wafer. How that was interpreted by catholics is a different matter. We should not confuse the two. Guy (help!) 08:15, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
This template must be substituted.
- This article was spun of from Dissent from Catholic teaching on homosexuality. We had the exact same discussion there. In that discussion, Contaldo stated that "As a compromise I will leave in Eucharist too as long as I hope other editors note that this is a compromise and the view of a majority of editors." You are also correct that a silent consensus ends when someone complains, but the status quo remains until a new consensus forms. As I've said repeatedly, if one does form, I will abide by it. --Slugger O'Toole (talk) 01:09, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
O'Connor role
Is there any other source that can back up the claim that "After the protest, in an effort to better understand the needs and concerns of the gay community, O'Connor began ministering to those dying of AIDS. He also supported others who did so." I note the source used is a publication of the Roman Catholic Church and may not meet tests around independent verification. If we can find an additional source then I would be happy to retain it but I am somewhat suspect that this is the reality of what happened. Thanks. Contaldo80 (talk) 04:40, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
- Contaldo80, I found solid evidence (in the NYT) that this predates the protest. I think all that happened was that the church made it public, in an attempt to try to neutralise criticism of hisa obvious animosity towards the gay community. Guy (help!) 08:17, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
- C-Class LGBT articles
- WikiProject LGBT studies articles
- C-Class history articles
- Low-importance history articles
- WikiProject History articles
- C-Class United States History articles
- Low-importance United States History articles
- WikiProject United States History articles
- C-Class United States articles
- Low-importance United States articles
- C-Class United States articles of Low-importance
- WikiProject United States articles
- C-Class Christianity articles
- Low-importance Christianity articles
- WikiProject Christianity articles
- C-Class Catholicism articles
- Low-importance Catholicism articles
- WikiProject Catholicism articles
- C-Class Religion articles
- Low-importance Religion articles
- WikiProject Religion articles
- C-Class Sexology and sexuality articles
- Low-importance Sexology and sexuality articles
- WikiProject Sexology and sexuality articles
- C-Class women's health articles
- Low-importance women's health articles
- WikiProject Women's Health articles
- C-Class politics articles
- Low-importance politics articles
- WikiProject Politics articles