Jump to content

Talk:Apollos: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Jwberean (talk | contribs)
Jwberean (talk | contribs)
Line 18: Line 18:
The Apostle section does not seem to be about Apollos at all, it doesnt even appear to phrased in such a way to be supporting information about Apollos...but instead about Priscilla. Move the information to the Priscilla and Aquila page, re-write removing or acknowledging the bias theological statements. [[User:Jwberean|Jwberean]] ([[User talk:Jwberean|talk]]) 05:51, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
The Apostle section does not seem to be about Apollos at all, it doesnt even appear to phrased in such a way to be supporting information about Apollos...but instead about Priscilla. Move the information to the Priscilla and Aquila page, re-write removing or acknowledging the bias theological statements. [[User:Jwberean|Jwberean]] ([[User talk:Jwberean|talk]]) 05:51, 6 November 2011 (UTC)


*NOTE The entire APOSTLE Section is WORD for WORD from the Priscilla and Aquila page. This is now also redundant. [[User:Jwberean|Jwberean]] ([[User talk:Jwberean|talk]]) 06:02, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
*NOTE The entire APOSTLE Section is WORD for WORD from the Priscilla and Aquila page. This is now also redundant. Ive removed the section as it is already noted in the link above. There is some relevant information in the section, and am blending the information into the article as no attempt was made by the contributor (Apollos123) to do so, but merely copied and pasted from another page [[User:Jwberean|Jwberean]] ([[User talk:Jwberean|talk]]) 06:53, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 06:53, 6 November 2011

"...Priscilla therefore taught an apostle..."

Summary Content seems heavily biased and off topic. Jwberean (talk) 05:51, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Major Point of Dispute: The entire section entitled "Apostle" seems to be heavily biased and belongs either here on the talk page to be used as discussion or rephrased and placed in footnotes, or more to the point - on a page about Priscilla and Aquilla. Whether "Priscilla therefore taught an apostle." is not really relevant on an article about Apollos except in a cursory comment on (again) Priscilla's page...and even then as a "view" - not a fact. The entrie section entitled "Apostle" seems to be geared toward establishing the legacy of Priscilla, not revealing information about Apollos. In short, this yeilds very little understanding about Apollos and because of the bias, leaves the reader to believe this is a fact, when it is merely the opinion of one of the contributors. Jwberean (talk) 05:51, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion: The Apostle section does not seem to be about Apollos at all, it doesnt even appear to phrased in such a way to be supporting information about Apollos...but instead about Priscilla. Move the information to the Priscilla and Aquila page, re-write removing or acknowledging the bias theological statements. Jwberean (talk) 05:51, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • NOTE The entire APOSTLE Section is WORD for WORD from the Priscilla and Aquila page. This is now also redundant. Ive removed the section as it is already noted in the link above. There is some relevant information in the section, and am blending the information into the article as no attempt was made by the contributor (Apollos123) to do so, but merely copied and pasted from another page Jwberean (talk) 06:53, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]