This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity 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.
This article 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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Saints, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Saints and other individuals commemorated in Christianliturgical calendars 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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles 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.
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
Saint Joanna → Joanna, wife of Chuza – Mainly for WP:COMMONNAME since the sources discussing the New Testament character do all call her plain "Joanna" or more usually "Joanna, wife of Chuza" Article was originally at Joanna (disciple) which is another possibility but that is already a redirect, and she is not called "Joanna the disciple" in sources. Notability as a saint is there but not strongly supported/sourced in article which is mainly about Joanna's brief mentions in the NT. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:26, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Oppose As far as I can make out, looking at the external links and what I can make of the other sources, Saint Joanna is her common name. If many sources call her plain Joanna this proves nothing in relation to this debate. She does appear to be recognised as a saint by the majority of Christians. All things being equal Saint X is a more natural way of referring to someone than X, wife of Y. PatGallacher (talk) 21:02, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
clarification: we don't normally follow external links. 2 of 3 of external links are to saints websites, yes, but reference to saint Joanna is totally unsourced in the article. Google book hits for "Saint Joanna" (after taking out Wikipedia mirrors) seem to be entirely mis-hits for Saint Joans of Toulouse, ..Castille, ..Portugal, St Joanna a misname for Anjouan island, and a obscure mention in Thomas Moore's Canonization of St Butterworth poem. etc. Searching ["saint joanna" chuza -wikipedia] gives only one 2005 reference to Joanna wife of Chuza as "saint Joanna", whereas searching [Joanna Chuza], allowing various combinations gets about 11,900 results.In ictu oculi (talk) 22:59, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
There are some curious arguments. Saint Joanna sounds Catholic? Greek Orthodox Christians and most Protestants refer to saints as well. This is perfectly consistent with how we deal with other NT figures e.g. Saint Peter. My own search for "Joanna wife of Chuza" throws up a pretty mixed ba'g of results, some call her Saint Joanna, others Joanna Chuza, etc.. St. Joanna Madagascar looks like an obscure figure, she does not have a Wikipedia article, if she does get one I suggest we cross that bridge when we come to it. This is the first time I have seen it suggested that we don't normally follow external links. There are a few Saint Joans, but we already have adequate disambiguation. PatGallacher (talk) 09:58, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
Peter founded the church in Rome, so that's not quite the same thing. We did this before with the Talk:Penitent_thief#Requested_move. "Wife of Chuza" is a disambiguator. Her common name is "Joanna," but she is not primary for that. The issue is not whether "Saint Joanna" or "Joanna, wife of Chuza" is more common. Kauffner (talk) 11:29, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
Eh? Surely that is exactly the issue, whether "Saint Joanna" or "Joanna, wife of Chuza" is more common, the mover put it that way. The penitent thief looks different for a whole series of reasons. It escapes me why Saint Peter founding the church in Rome makes any difference. Do I detect a peculiar POV which I have seen pushed before, that we should refrain from using "saint" in article titles under virtually any circumstances? PatGallacher (talk) 13:22, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
It is a guideline, not a "peculiar POV". "Saint" is an honorific prefix and drops off, per WP:HONORIFIC. Columbia, Browning's A Dictionary of the Bible, and Zondervan all have entries entitled "Joanna", and say nothing about her being a saint. Kauffner (talk) 14:18, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
Support I think St. Peter is so common that needs to be that way. But this case is not a widely celebrated saint, but has a well known biblical reference. Not a big encyclopedic issue in any case. But I do agree PatGallacher that the mass purging of the saints should not take place. History2007 (talk) 09:26, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
Support move - This particular subject seems best known for her status in the Bible, not specifically for her status as a saint. That being the case, and considering that the inclusion of "Saint" in an article name is at least a little POV, I think it makes sense to move this article to a title which is probably more familiar to those who might be seeking information on the subject. John Carter (talk) 17:46, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
Support. The common name is just Joanna, even within the Catholic tradition many would not recognise her as a Saint. The case of Saint Peter is significantly different. Andrewa (talk) 17:44, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
No trace of "Saint" or "Saint's day" in RC tradition
This article references Romans 16:7 for the proposition that Joanna later became an apostle. This is incorrect, as that text indicates that Junia is the apostle. They are not the same women, it is two different names. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 21:24, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
"She is also one of the apostles mentioned in Acts 1:2-3 that Jesus chose."
I checked several versions of Acts 1:2-3 and none of them mention Joanna.
Acts 1:2-3 does refer to "apostles" but it does not name them, you are correct, I don't know why the it is stated that Joanna was one of them, can anybody help?Smeat75 (talk) 02:36, 19 March 2014 (UTC)