Talk:Practical charismatic theology

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Practical charismatic theology article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Christianity: Theology / Charismatic Low‑importance

	Christianity portal 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.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by theology work group (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Charismatic Christianity (assessed as Low-importance).

Text and/or other creative content from this version of Practical Charismatic Theology was copied or moved into Practical theology with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Sock puppetry

There was a bit of sock puppetry over the past few days that has led to the recreation of the Practical theology article (the original version of this current one) that sat untouched as a stub for close to a year. It apears the newly created account of Pastor rfg along with what is likey his IP address (116.48.61.74) engaged in this activity to build fake consensus. Both articles now exist and I hope both of them can turn into something great. Edit warring is silly, let's have conversations and build real consensus people! Doctor^G (talk) 14:23, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've responded to your accusation on the Practical theology page, if you're interested. In any event, our interaction ends here, and I'm happy that an article for an important topic (pastoral theology) has been saved. PastorRFG (talk) 15:24, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pastoral theology and practical theology are probably two different things, yet I am also happy that you are able to work on something that will be valuable to Wikipedia. Though, as I stated on the Practical theology talk page, you have a brand new account that was created today, and you clearly have a great knowledge of Wikipedia standards, so you have obviously have had an account before. I don't think my conclusions are that far off. Again, I wish you luck with your article. Doctor^G (talk) 15:52, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

I undid two major changes from an IP user (116.48.61.74) because they appeared to be vandalism and the reason for their change was to remove 'all the "Charistmatic Theology" nonsense'. If any other editor would like to add/edit this page to help with NPOV, please do so, but let's not just delete everything becuase you don't agree with it. Add your content, cite your good sources, and let's make it an even better article. Doctor^G (talk) 13:52, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Creating this as a stub

I have moved this article to a new name (was practical theology) and I am expanding it into an article on how good charismatic theology is positively impacting the world through an everyday practical application of the thelogical viewpoints. The original artie was a stub for a long time and this expansion should make for a good article when finished.Callsignpink (talk) 12:29, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why was this article moved

I see that this article was moved and then reworked to become a very different article starting about a month ago. Why has this happened? There was no move discussion. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:41, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Walter Görlitz:The previous article was a stub class and hadn’t been edited for close to a year. It was expanded on without any complaints and then moved to more appropriately match the content of the article. The moving a page article allows for a move if "the scope of the article has been reduced, extended or otherwise changed" and only requires a move discussion if the user is unable to move it, it is protected, or it might be controversial. Since it hadn't been edited in close to a year and many of the users who had previously worked on it were no longer active on Wikipedia, it made sense to make the move; no controversy was expected. The requested moves article also states "if you have no reason to expect a dispute concerning a move, be bold and move the page." The page has continued to be edited since that time with no disputes, for approximately a month, until (as stated at the top of this talk page) an IP user reverted all the changes, then a new account (Pastor rfg) was created to bring back the old content into a new article. Not the most eloquent methodology, but it seems the dispute was resolved yesterday and now two seperate articles exist. Doctor^G (talk) 21:41, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, but the topic is also very different. Practical theology is a term that is used outside of Charismatic theology while this article's topic seems to be a neologism that has no supported use. What's the actual term used by Osmer?

It's also incorrectly capitalized here. At the very least it should be at "Practical Charismatic theology" although I could see arguments for "Practical charismatic theology". Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:32, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Walter Görlitz: I agree it should be renamed, the capitalization was an oversight, Practical charismatic theology should be good. As for being a neologism, PEW research has shown that charismatic Christianity is one of the fastest growing movements within Christianity (http://www.pewforum.org/files/2011/12/Christianity-fullreport-web.pdf) and I have come across the practical charismatic theology term in published books on charismatic theology, Catholic literature, and in peer reviewed journals, so there's definitely supported use. I'm working on developing out the content to include these references. Doctor^G (talk) 02:48, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]